Agenda, third session — San Bruno City Council, May 12, 2026 (part 1 of 3)

"The City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Vice Mayor
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3
Marty Medina, Councilmember, District 4
AGENDA
SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Agenda Amended on 05/11/2026 to update Item 6f, add Staff Report and attachments May 12, 2026
7:00 PM
IN PERSON* MEETING LOCATION
San Bruno Recreation and Aquatic Center, Community Room 251 City Park Way
San Bruno, CA 94066
*Please turn off all electronic devices before the start of the meeting to prevent disruptions*
**Zoom Link
https://sanbrunocagov.zoom.us/j/82394951629?
pwd=AkrZbvDyd5C9caTOU7rNJliH0iJcma.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 823 9495 1629
Webinar Password: 652438
*Broadcast of the meeting is offered via Zoom as a
courtesy to the public.
**No public comment accepted via Zoom.

PUBLIC COMMENT: In person attendees who want to provide public comment, will be asked to fill out a speaker card and turn it into the City Clerk. Public comment may also be emailed to [email protected] . Comments received via email will not be read
aloud during the meeting.

ACCESSIBILITY: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals requiring special accommodations or modifications to participate in this meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Office 48 hours prior to the meeting at (650) 6167061 or [email protected] .
*Any disclosable public writings related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the City to at least a majority of the City Council less than 72 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at the City Clerk's Office at City Hall located at 567 El Camino Real, San Bruno, California during normal business hours. In addition, the City may also post such documents on the City’s Website at sanbruno.ca.gov/AgendaCenter .

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Individuals allowed up to three minutes, subject to the Mayor’s discretion based on the anticipated length in the meeting. It is the Council’s policy to refer matters raised in this forum to staff for investigation and/or action where appropriate. The Brown Act prohibits the Council from discussing or acting upon any matter not agendized pursuant to State Law.

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
There is a single public comment period for all items in this section a. As of May 4, 2026, City Hall and all public service counters are open Monday through Thursday from 7:30 am to 5:00 pm, and are closed on Fridays b. Join us for Police Day at Tanforan Mall on May 16, 2026 from 10:00 am to 2:00 pm in front of JCPenney parking lot. Come celebrate with multiple agency officers, community organizations, and even meet our K9 partners. For additional information please reach out to [email protected]
c. Proclamation Recognizing May 1117, 2026 as National Police Week d. Proclamation Recognizing May 2026 as Building Safety Month e. Receive Presentation from San Mateo County Transit Authority (SMCTA) on their Active 101 Plan
f. Receive Presentation from City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) on San Bruno/South San Francisco Community Based Transportation Plan

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items are considered routine or implement an earlier Council action and may be enacted by one motion; there will be no separate discussion, unless requested. There will be a single public comment period for all items in this section unless a Councilmember requests to pull an item for a separate vote. a. Approve the Draft Special Meeting Minutes for April 28, 2026 and Regular Meeting Minutes for April 22, 2025 and April 28, 2026
b. Approve Accounts Payable for April 28, 2026 and May 4, 2026 c. Accept Payroll for April 19, 2026
d. Approve Investment Report Dated April 30, 2026
e. Approve Reconciliation of General Ledger to Bank Report Dated March 31, 2026 f. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Tentative Agreement Between the City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT Local 856 Police Unit for the Term January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029, and Authorizing Execution by the City Manager
g. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Supporting the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County’s (C/CAG’s) 2026 San Bruno/South San Francisco CommunityBased Transportation Plan and Determining the Action is Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act
h. Consider the Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Memorial Program Policy with Implementation to Take Effect in Fiscal Year 202627 in Conjunction with the Master Fee Schedule
i. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement with the County of San Mateo for Continued Provision of Animal Control, Shelter Services, and Animal Licensing, Extending the Term Through June 30, 2029 j. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Administrative Services Director to Execute a OneYear Agreement with Abnormal Security Corporation, Via Reseller Ally Technologies, for Advanced Email Security Services (Abnormal AI) in an Amount Not to Exceed $29,431.69 for a OneYear Term

7. CONDUCT OF BUSINESS
Public comment will be requested after each topic in this section a. 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 Adding Chapter 3.41 to Article III (Fees) of Title 3 (Revenue and Finance) of the San Bruno Municipal Code, Relating to Driving Under the Influence (DUI) Emergency Response Cost Recovery and Finding Such Action to be Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT OUT

9. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS

10. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on May 26, 2026 at 7:00 pm
POSTING: I declare a copy of this agenda was posted at City Hall, 567 El Camino Real, San Bruno, among other locations in the city limits of San Bruno, on May 7, 2026, by 8:00 pm. 1 of 537
"The City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Vice Mayor
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3
Marty Medina, Councilmember, District 4
AGENDA
SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Agenda Amended on 05/11/2026 to update Item 6f, add Staff Report and attachments May 12, 2026
7:00 PM
IN PERSON* MEETING LOCATION
San Bruno Recreation and Aquatic Center, Community Room 251 City Park Way
San Bruno, CA 94066
*Please turn off all electronic devices before the start of the meeting to prevent disruptions*
**Zoom Link
https://sanbrunocagov.zoom.us/j/82394951629?
pwd=AkrZbvDyd5C9caTOU7rNJliH0iJcma.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 823 9495 1629
Webinar Password: 652438
*Broadcast of the meeting is offered via Zoom as a
courtesy to the public.
**No public comment accepted via Zoom.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT OUT

9. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS

10. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on May 26, 2026 at 7:00 pm
POSTING: I declare a copy of this agenda was posted at City Hall, 567 El Camino Real, San Bruno, among other locations in the city limits of San Bruno, on May 7, 2026, by 8:00 pm. 2 of 537
"The City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Vice Mayor
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3
Marty Medina, Councilmember, District 4
AGENDA
SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Agenda Amended on 05/11/2026 to update Item 6f, add Staff Report and attachments May 12, 2026
7:00 PM
IN PERSON* MEETING LOCATION
San Bruno Recreation and Aquatic Center, Community Room 251 City Park Way
San Bruno, CA 94066
*Please turn off all electronic devices before the start of the meeting to prevent disruptions*
**Zoom Link
https://sanbrunocagov.zoom.us/j/82394951629?
pwd=AkrZbvDyd5C9caTOU7rNJliH0iJcma.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 823 9495 1629
Webinar Password: 652438
*Broadcast of the meeting is offered via Zoom as a
courtesy to the public.
**No public comment accepted via Zoom.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT OUT

9. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS

"Th e City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Vice Mayor
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3
Marty Medina, Councilmember, District 4

MINUTES

SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
April 28, 2026
5:30 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm.

2. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Hamilton, M. Medina, Salazar, Vice Mayor Alvarez, and Mayor R.

Medina were all present.

3. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: City Manager
Employee Organizations: Teamsters Local 856, IBT Police; Teamsters Local 856, IBT Public Safety Mid-Management
b. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Name of Case: In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation c. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Existing Litigation
(paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of Case: City of San Bruno and Walmart.com USA, LLC, v Californi a
D
epartment of Tax and Fee Administration (San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 23CIV05021)
No members of the public wished to speak under Item c.

City Council went into closed session for Item c. at 5:31 pm and returned to open session at 5:56 pm.

N
o reportable action was taken.

4. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget Preview and Forecast Administrative Services Director & CFO Nick Pegueros presented the item to the City Council and answered questions
City Manager Alex McIntyre answered questions
No members of the public wished to speak under this item 4 of 537
Item 6a.

City Council – Minutes
April 28, 2026

Page 2 of 2 ends

No reportable action was taken.

City Council recessed the Special Meeting at 6:57 pm to reconvene Closed Session Items a and b after the regular meeting.

City Council moved to closed session at 7:37 pm and returned to open session at 8:50 pm.

No members of the public wished to speak under these items No reportable action was taken.

4. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting adjourned at 8:51 pm to the next regular City Council Meeting on May 12, 2026 at 7:00 pm.

These meeting minutes were prepared by Lupita Huerta, City Clerk, and presented to the City Council for approval at the regular meeting of May 12, 2026.

______________________________        ______________________________ Lupita Huerta
City Clerk
Rico E. Medina
Mayor

5 of 537

"The City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Marty Medina, Vice Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Councilmember, District 1
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3

MINUTES

SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
April 22, 2025
7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 pm.

2. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Alvarez, Hamilton, Salazar, Vice Mayor M. Medina and Mayor R.

Medina were all present.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Peter Carey led the pledge.

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The following member(s) of the public provided comment(s):
• Tommy Ledesma

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
a. The Spring Community Clean-Up Event with Recology is happening on Saturday, April 26, 2025 from 8:00-11:00 am at 975 Sneath Lane. San Bruno residents are invited to bring unwanted bulk items to this self-service drop-off event. Each household may dispose of up to 3 cubic yards of materials.
b. The Spring Compost Giveaway with Recology is happening on Saturday, April 26t, 2025 and Sunday, April 27, 2025 from 8:00-11:00 am at Lions Field. Residents are welcome to take home a free bucket of compost to help enrich their gardens. This is a self-service event please bring your own bucket. One 5gallon bucket per resident. c. California State Assemblymember Diane Papan will be holding a Town Hall at the San Bruno Recreation and Aquatic Center on April 26, 2025 from 10:00 am to 12:00 pm. d. Proclamation Recognizing May 2025 as Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month
e. Proclamation Recognizing May 2025 as Mental Health Month Star Vista Crisis Center Director Taylor Coutts accepted the proclamation.

No members of the public wished to speak under Announcements

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Approve the Draft Special Meeting Minutes for April 8, 2025

6 of 537

City Council – Minutes
April 22, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

b. Approve Accounts Payable for April 7, 2025 and April 14, 2025 c. Accept Payroll for April 6, 2025
d. Approve Investment Report Dated March 31, 2025
e.

Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with IROL for Third-Party Records Reporting Software for the Fire Department Pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 19, Division 1, §904.2(j) and San Bruno Municipal Code 11.24
f. Consider Adoption of a Resolution:
• Accepting the Downtown Trash Receptacles & Newspaper Racks & Enclosures Project as Complete (CIP#60027); and
• Authorizing the Filing of Notice of Completion with the San Mateo Recorder’s Office
g. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Sole Source Contract for the Posy Park Fountain Restoration in an amount not to exceed $504,375; and Approving a Project Contingency of $50,000; Determining the Project is Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act No items were pulled for a separate vote.

No items were pulled for comments/questions.

No members of the public wished to speak under Consent Calendar.

M/S Salazar/Hamilton to approve consent. Motion passed unanimously.

7. PUBLIC HEARING(S)
a. Hold Public Hearing and Consider Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule Effective July 1, 2025
Assistant to the City Manager Brian Adam presented the item to the City Council and answered questions.

City Manager Alex McIntyre answered questions.

Public Works Director Matt Lee answered questions.

CFO Nick Pegueros answered questions.

City Attorney Trisha Ortiz answered questions.

No members of the public wished to speak under this item.

M/S Hamilton/Salazar to close public hearing. Motion passed unanimously.

M/S Hamilton/M. Medina to adopt resolution as read by the City Clerk. Motion passed unanimously.

8. CONDUCT OF BUSINESS
a. Respond to the Request from the County of San Mateo to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate a Reimbursement Agreement with the County for Unreimbursed Bridge Funding for the Purchase and Installation of 13 Fare Gates at the San Bruno BART Station in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,636,364
City Manager Alex McIntyre presented the item to the City Council.

7 of 537

City Council – Minutes
April 22, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

Interim Police Chief Susan Manheimer answered questions.

No members of the public wished to speak under this item.

M/S R. Medina/Alvarez for City Manager or designee to get MOU from the County of San Mateo and wait and see what other jurisdictions are doing and how the grant process is evolving and then bring that back to us for a vote. Motion failed with Councilmember Alvarez and Mayor R. Medina voting yes; and Councilmembers Hamilton, M. Medina and Salazar voting no.

9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT OUT
The following member(s) of the City Council provided comment(s):
• Mayor R. Medina

10. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
The following member(s) of the City Council provided comment(s):
• Councilmember Hamilton
• Vice Mayor M. Medina
• Mayor R. Medina

11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:33 pm to the next Regular City Council Meeting on May 13, 2025 at 7:00 pm
These City Council meeting minutes were prepared by Lupita Huerta, City Clerk, and presented to the City Council for approval at the regular meeting of May 12, 2026.

______________________________   ______________________________ Lupita Huerta
City Clerk
Rico E. Medina
Mayor

8 of 537

"The City With a Heart"
Rico E. Medina, Mayor
Sandy Alvarez, Vice Mayor
Tom Hamilton, Councilmember, District 2
Michael Salazar, Councilmember, District 3
Marty Medina, Councilmember, District 4

MINUTES

SAN BRUNO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
April 28, 2026
7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:04 pm.

2. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Hamilton, M. Medina, Salazar, Vice Mayor Alvarez, and Mayor R.

Medina were all present.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor R. Medina led the pledge.

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The following member(s) of the public provided comment(s):
• Chris

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
a. Starting May 4, 2026 City Hall and public counters will be open Monday – Thursday, 7:30 am-5:00 pm and closed Fridays
b. Proclamation Recognizing May 2026 as Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month
c. Proclamation Recognizing May 2026 as Jewish American Heritage Month d. Proclamation Recognizing May 2026 as Mental Health Month Peninsula Suicide Prevention Director Taylor Coutts accepted the proclamation e. Proclamation Recognizing May 2026 as Wildfire Awareness Month Fire Chief Miachel Ku accepted the proclamation
f. Receive Presentation from SamTrans
Michaela Wright-Petrik from SamTrans presented the item to the City Council.

No members of the public wished to speak under Announcements/Presentations.

9 of 537

City Council – Minutes
April 28, 2026

Page 2 of 2 ends

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Approve the Draft Special and Regular Meeting Minutes for the Meetings of April 14, 2026
b. Approve Accounts Payable for April 13, 2026 and April 20, 2026 c. Accept Payroll for April 5, 2026
d. Consider Adoption of a Resolution:
e. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Completion of the Downtown Beautification Phase II Project; Authorizing the Filing of Notice of Completion with the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office; and Authorizing the Release of Construction Contract Retention in the Amount of $25,097 No items were pulled for a separate vote
Item d – Councilmember M. Medina pulled item for comments.

Item e – Councilmember M. Medina pulled item for comments.

No members of the public wished to speak under Consent Calendar M/S Hamilton/ Salazar to approve consent. Motion passed unanimously.

7. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT OUT
The following member(s) of City Council provided comment(s):
• Councilmember Hamilton

8. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
The following member(s) of the City Council provided comment(s):
• Councilmember Hamilton
• Councilmember M. Medina
• Mayor R. Medina

9. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned in memory of Nancy Magee and Tom Ricci at 7:37 pm to the next regular City Council Meeting on May 12, 2026 at 7:00 pm.

These meeting minutes were prepared by Lupita Huerta, City Clerk, and presented to the City Council for approval at the regular meeting of May 12, 2026.

______________________________        ______________________________ Lupita Huerta
City Clerk
Rico E. Medina
Mayor

10 of 537

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 12, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Nick Pegueros, Chief Financial Officer
Kathleen O’Malley, Accounting & Customer Service Representative SUBJECT: Accounts Payable Warrant Register
This is to certify that the claims listed on page 1 to 2 inclusive for checks dated April 28, 2026, and/or claims numbered from 223299 through 223367 inclusive, totaling $220,498.10, have been checked in detail and approved by the proper officials, and in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the City in accordance with their respective amounts. The table below summarizes the total paid by Fund.

Fund Fund Name Amount
001 General Fund $108,138.35
003 One-Time Revenue $13,222.45
005 Measure G District Sales Tax $8,438.43
121 Federal/State Grants $2,801.40
132 Agency On Aging $408.50
133 Restricted Revenues $476.85
141 Community Development $28,524.12
142 Recreation & Aquatics Center (RAC) $33.63
201 Parks and Facilities Capital $37,500.00
302 Lease Debt Service $1,458.35
611 Water Fund $6,349.62
621 Stormwater Fund $461.48
631 Wastewater Fund $4,455.88
641 CityNet Services Fund $24.10
701 Central Garage $5,111.51
702 Facility Maintenance Fund $2,766.93
707 Technology Development $76.50
711 Self-Insurance $250.00
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $220,498.10
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Chief Financial Officer Date
Docusign Envelope ID: E0FF47BA-9B9B-88C1-8262-124EF71E86C6 4/28/2026
11 of 537
Item 6b.
4/28/2026 11:18:35AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of San Bruno
apPosPay Page: 1
Bank: apbank 432000438Document group: komalley
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
0110783 ALEX MCINTYRE 223336 404.444/28/2026
0017459 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SVC.INC. 223299 3,883.734/28/2026 0018953 ALLIANT INSURANCE SVC. INC. 223300 38.004/28/2026 0111159 ASHLEY CROCIANI 223312 500.004/28/2026
0016123 AT&T 223302 458.484/28/2026
0018465 AT&T MOBILITY 223303 43.744/28/2026
0110591 BAVCO 223304 62.644/28/2026
0100526 BAY ALARM COMPANY 223305 227.614/28/2026
0109646 BIO CAR CARE 223306 575.004/28/2026
0000378 BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 223307 461.484/28/2026 0016324 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 223308 71.464/28/2026 0000386 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 223309 4,655.784/28/2026 0015857 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 223311 164.514/28/2026
0013926 DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 223313 10,668.184/28/2026 0111921 DEVIL MOUNTAIN WHOLESALE NURSERY, LLC 223365 476.854/28/2026 0106004 ED MAXION 223334 1,247.124/28/2026
0107927 ELIZABETH RUIZ 223351 473.004/28/2026
0000046 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS INC 223314 2,756.564/28/2026 0109510 FIRST ALARM 223315 270.284/28/2026
0109400 FLEETROCK, LLC 223316 500.004/28/2026
0001782 FLOWERS ELECTRIC & SVC.CO.INC. 223317 8,240.964/28/2026 0018117 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC 223318 12,616.474/28/2026
0109776 FRESH LINE PRODUCE 223319 143.004/28/2026
0110539 GARRISON SEXSON 223355 200.004/28/2026
0000162 GRAINGER 223323 606.704/28/2026
0000541 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 223324 758.804/28/2026
0000385 HACH COMPANY 223326 503.514/28/2026
0017020 INDUSTRIAL EMERGENCY COUNCIL 223327 11,000.004/28/2026 0018970 JAM SERVICES INC. 223328 18,041.484/28/2026
0112387 JANELLA MARGARITA PECSON JUAN 223329 2,801.404/28/2026 0116384 JASON GALLUCCI 223321 78.504/28/2026
0105961 JEFF FYFE 223320 130.004/28/2026
0114681 KATRINA MANALASTAS 223333 1,000.004/28/2026
0116380 KESSEM YIFRAH 223366 8.954/28/2026
0116377 LAU ALVIN 223301 1,869.004/28/2026
0111713 LAURA RAQUEL PULIDO 223347 500.004/28/2026
0014262 LC ACTION POLICE SUPPLY 223330 13,222.454/28/2026 0017570 LEHR UPFITTERS OPCO LLC 223332 693.714/28/2026 0110362 MATT LEE 223331 2,000.004/28/2026
0116332 MAXWELL EMCAYS 223335 37,500.004/28/2026
0016041 METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS 223337 2,256.834/28/2026 0017906 MICHAEL BLUNDELL 223338 500.004/28/2026
0116381 NINJA SUSHI 223340 5.654/28/2026
0112042 NORTHERN TOOL COMMERCIAL ACCT. 223341 89.454/28/2026 0111055 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 223344 283.144/28/2026
0110243 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC 223342 274.854/28/2026 0097567 ONE HOUR DRY CLEANING 223343 904.654/28/2026
0000012 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 223345 12,168.694/28/2026 0111229 PINPOINT TALENT, LLC 223346 1,530.004/28/2026 0013981 QUILL CORPORATION 223348 170.484/28/2026
0107432 RED WING BRANDS OF AMERICA,INC 223349 440.874/28/2026 0116329 SAMUEL VILLAZANA-PRICE 223364 3,500.004/28/2026 0017145 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP 223352 2,280.014/28/2026 Page: 1
Docusign Envelope ID: E0FF47BA-9B9B-88C1-8262-124EF71E86C6

12 of 537

4/28/2026 11:18:35AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of San Bruno
apPosPay Page: 2
Bank: apbank 432000438Document group: komalley
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
0116288 SANASIGHT TECHNOLOGIES LLC 223353 2,599.004/28/2026 0110939 SEAN MORRIS 223339 1,345.184/28/2026
0018461 SERRAMONTE FORD, INC. 223354 2,213.564/28/2026 0106034 SHAWN GREATHOUSE 223325 500.004/28/2026
0016458 SIADAT ENTERPRISES INC. 223356 408.014/28/2026 0116382 SPIRAL JAPANESE RESTAURANT 223357 53.004/28/2026 0109977 STEVE BLANC INVESTIGATIONS 223358 3,800.004/28/2026 0105796 SUNRISE FOOD DISTRIBUTOR INC. 223359 265.504/28/2026 0097449 TK ELEVATOR CORPORATION 223360 1,876.794/28/2026 0109115 TONY GARCIA 223322 1,250.584/28/2026
0116378 UCS AUTO REPAIR 223361 500.004/28/2026
0110714 UNDERGROUND REPUBLIC WATER WORKS, INC. 223350 2,450.204/28/2026 0106439 URBAN FUTURES, INC. 223362 8,750.004/28/2026
0095749 VERIZON WIRELESS 223363 288.624/28/2026
0105955 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS, INC. 223310 28,024.124/28/2026 0103399 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES, INC. 223367 1,915.134/28/2026 Total count: 69
GrandTotal: 220,498.10
Page: 2
Docusign Envelope ID: E0FF47BA-9B9B-88C1-8262-124EF71E86C6

13 of 537

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO

DATE: May 12, 2026

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager

PREPARED BY: Nick Pegueros, Chief Financial Officer
Kathleen O’Malley, Accounting & Customer Service Representative

SUBJECT: Accounts Payable Warrant Register

This is to certify that the claims listed on page 1 to 3 inclusive for checks dated May 4, 2026, and/or claims numbered from 223368 through 223504 inclusive, totaling $3,005,564.63, have been checked in detail and approved by the proper officials, and in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the City in accordance with their respective amounts. The table below summarizes the total paid by Fund.

Fund Fund Name Amount
001 General Fund $261,266.94
003 One-Time Revenue $13,229.53
121 Federal/State Grants $2,802.80
122 Solid Waste/Recycle $37,731.48
133 Restricted Revenues $12,412.49
137 Developer Project Contributions $63,577.72
141 Community Development $26,851.52
142 Recreation & Aquatics Center (RAC) $4,010.35
201 Parks and Facilities Capital $47,042.67
207 Technology Capital $2,417.79
611 Water Fund $248,490.26
621 Stormwater Fund $80,844.38
631 Wastewater Fund $2,131,209.64
641 CityNet Services Fund $4,951.22
701 Central Garage $489.19
702 Facility Maintenance Fund $5,548.79
703 General Equipment Revolving $22,682.38
707 Technology Development $10,502.35
711 Self-Insurance $29,503.13
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $3,005,564.63

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________
Chief Financial Officer Date
Docusign Envelope ID: 221E5AF8-8EFE-80D6-8210-E4E8F44751A5 5/6/2026

14 of 537

5/4/2026 11:46:09AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of San Bruno
apPosPay Page: 1
Bank: apbank 432000438Document group: komalley
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
0000908 A-1 FENCE AND DECK, INC 223368 2,150.005/4/2026 0017770 A-A LOCK & ALARM INC 223369 445.875/4/2026
0112098 ACOM BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC 223370 294.005/4/2026 0099633 ALBERTO ALFARO 223371 5,000.005/4/2026
0017459 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SVC.INC. 223372 1,885.035/4/2026 0017298 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 223373 3,096.715/4/2026 0110209 AMPED SOFTWARE USA INC. 223374 3,500.005/4/2026 0116386 ANA RUAN 223471 14.805/4/2026
0106225 ARIES INDUSTRIES, INC. 223375 1,623.105/4/2026 0016123 AT&T 223376 980.875/4/2026
0098916 AT&T 223377 88.175/4/2026
0015110 AT&T MOBILITY 223378 101.985/4/2026
0018465 AT&T MOBILITY 223379 91.885/4/2026
0018020 BARKER BLUE DIGITAL IMAGING 223380 55.005/4/2026 0001849 BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY & CONSERVATION AGENCY 223487 13,868.255/4/2026 0109613 BAYSPORT PREVENTIVE MEDICAL GROUP 223461 10,315.005/4/2026 0108691 BEARCLOUD 223381 5,373.335/4/2026
0108182 C2R ENGINEERING, INC. 223384 68,305.005/4/2026 0107369 CALIFORNIA BANK OF COMMERCE 223385 108,475.785/4/2026 0109223 CAN DO FLOORING LLC 223386 585.005/4/2026
0110323 CAPF 223387 855.005/4/2026
0013965 CH BULL CO. 223388 885.595/4/2026
0116351 CHATHAN YARLAGADDA 223503 263.315/4/2026
0116388 CINDY TAYLOR 223488 250.005/4/2026
0016324 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 223389 648.215/4/2026 0091701 CITY OF BELMONT 223390 65.005/4/2026
0098588 CITY OF BURLINGAME 223391 500.005/4/2026
0097202 CITY OF SAN MATEO 223392 1,822.505/4/2026
0000386 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 223393 2,123,390.535/4/2026 0000508 CLEARLITE TROPHIES 223394 58.235/4/2026
0112426 COMCAST 223396 300.335/4/2026
0110941 CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT, INC. 223467 277.485/4/2026 0105811 CSAC EXCESS INSURANCE AUTHORITY 223404 14,948.665/4/2026 0110590 DENISE ZERON 223504 286.475/4/2026
0093479 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 223399 675.005/4/2026
0103088 DUNN-EDWARDS CORP. 223401 398.835/4/2026
0110123 DUNNIGAN PSYCHOLOGICAL& THREAT ASSESSMENTS, LLC 223492 650.005/4/2026 0018799 ECONOMIC&PLANNING SYSTEMS INC. 223402 4,470.005/4/2026 0013683 F. FERRANDO & CO. 223405 24,921.315/4/2026
0000944 FEDEX 223406 14.755/4/2026
0107401 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,LLC#686 223407 233.055/4/2026 0109510 FIRST ALARM 223408 233.255/4/2026
0001782 FLOWERS ELECTRIC & SVC.CO.INC. 223409 720.305/4/2026 0018117 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC 223410 7,625.185/4/2026
0014910 G & M AUTO BODY 223411 19,585.675/4/2026
0018807 GALLS, LLC 223412 935.155/4/2026
0110185 GBL INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS 223414 5,867.335/4/2026 0111210 GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, INC. 223415 42,108.725/4/2026 0108415 GOLDEN BAY CONSTRUCTION, INC. 223416 170,485.715/4/2026 0108425 GOOD CITY COMPANY 223418 8,357.505/4/2026
0000162 GRAINGER 223419 727.425/4/2026
0000541 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 223420 757.075/4/2026
0095966 GREAT AMERICA FINANCIAL SVC. 223421 294.765/4/2026 Page: 1
Docusign Envelope ID: 221E5AF8-8EFE-80D6-8210-E4E8F44751A5

15 of 537

5/4/2026 11:46:09AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of San Bruno
apPosPay Page: 2
Bank: apbank 432000438Document group: komalley
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
0017900 GREAT LAKES DATA SYSTEMS INC 223422 4,951.225/4/2026 0000385 HACH COMPANY 223424 5,566.325/4/2026
0095351 HAVE A PARTY PROS 223425 3,700.005/4/2026
0111486 HD SUPPLY, INC. 223426 2,103.195/4/2026
0108221 HDL COREN & CONE 223427 3,556.255/4/2026
0110056 HH ASSOCIATES US, INC. 223428 515.205/4/2026
0112186 INGRAM LIBRARY SERVICES, LLC 223429 3,601.285/4/2026 0018553 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTROL PRODUCTS 223494 929.255/4/2026 0000581 IRVINE & JACHENS INC. 223430 421.755/4/2026
0112387 JANELLA MARGARITA PECSON JUAN 223433 2,802.805/4/2026 0112017 JERRY CURIANO 223398 525.005/4/2026
0111776 JOY GAYLE 223413 477.005/4/2026
0000771 JT2 INTEGRATED RESOURCES 223431 22,449.655/4/2026 0018376 JT2 INTEGRATED RESOURCES 223432 7,053.485/4/2026 0017661 KATHY M SCHMIDT 223477 4,590.005/4/2026
0014262 LC ACTION POLICE SUPPLY 223434 13,229.535/4/2026 0103799 LDVALI LLC 223435 374.405/4/2026
0105822 LEE & RO, INC. 223436 1,406.005/4/2026
0106692 LETICIA SOTO 223483 473.005/4/2026
0110309 LOOKINGPOINT, INC. 223438 4,285.935/4/2026
0018177 LOWE'S 223439 1,433.815/4/2026
0111799 MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC 223440 1,717.195/4/2026 0112309 MATT LETHIN 223437 170.005/4/2026
0111960 MES SERVICE COMPANY, LLC 223442 624.745/4/2026 0092285 MICROMARKETING LLC 223443 123.605/4/2026
0016863 MIDWEST TAPE, LLC 223444 16.905/4/2026
0107119 MILLBRAE NURSERY SCHOOL 223445 500.005/4/2026 0014878 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC. 223446 11,543.675/4/2026 0108117 NETFILE, INC. 223447 1,800.005/4/2026
0112042 NORTHERN TOOL COMMERCIAL ACCT. 223448 4,495.645/4/2026 0111055 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 223453 268.645/4/2026
0110243 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC 223449 505.585/4/2026 0097567 ONE HOUR DRY CLEANING 223451 804.855/4/2026
0116372 OPTONY INC. 223452 10,485.005/4/2026
0109702 OUTDOOR SUPPLY HARDWARE 223454 87.475/4/2026
0104416 OVERDRIVE, INC. 223455 4,976.225/4/2026
0000012 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 223456 9,129.465/4/2026 0106829 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION INC. 223457 548.335/4/2026 0095210 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC. 223458 13,204.005/4/2026 0111229 PINPOINT TALENT, LLC 223459 918.005/4/2026
0105947 PLACEWORKS 223460 26,694.625/4/2026
0018801 PROFORCE LAW ENFORCEMENT 223462 77.725/4/2026 0013981 QUILL CORPORATION 223463 21.975/4/2026
0108301 R3 CONSULTING GROUP 223464 37,280.005/4/2026
0106206 RAINBOW BOOK COMPANY 223465 18.955/4/2026
0000175 RECOLOGY SAN BRUNO 223466 1.705/4/2026
0095269 REDWOOD VETERINARY CLINIC 223468 974.865/4/2026 0103705 RICH BURMAN 223383 1,481.205/4/2026
0111968 ROBERT GUTIERREZ 223423 3,960.005/4/2026
0111969 ROBERT L. MATEO 223441 400.005/4/2026
0116385 ROBERT ROHLFES 223470 249.605/4/2026
0111990 RONALD A. BORELLI 223382 1,100.005/4/2026
0108539 ROSALIE L. STEINWAY 223484 220.505/4/2026
0116392 ROWENA GOMEZ 223417 500.005/4/2026
Page: 2
Docusign Envelope ID: 221E5AF8-8EFE-80D6-8210-E4E8F44751A5

16 of 537

5/4/2026 11:46:09AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of San Bruno
apPosPay Page: 3
Bank: apbank 432000438Document group: komalley
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
0108012 SALAS O'BRIEN 223472 1,575.005/4/2026
0111961 SAN FRANCISCO TYEE CLUB 223474 178.005/4/2026 0099047 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 223397 1,720.005/4/2026 0018597 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL 223475 720.005/4/2026 0105552 SCHAAF & WHEELER 223476 5,940.005/4/2026
0111549 SCP DISTRIBUTORS LLC 223478 3,691.405/4/2026
0102917 SFPUC FINANCIAL SERVICES 223479 1,350.005/4/2026 0018962 SHOE DEPOT INC. 223481 954.265/4/2026
0109953 SHRED CITY 223482 127.445/4/2026
0111327 SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING& DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION(SCPDC) 223400 2,417.795/4/2026 0102991 STEVE SALAZAR 223473 90.005/4/2026
0111232 STRATEGIC CULTURE 223485 30,719.605/4/2026
0017016 SUPERCO SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 223486 631.615/4/2026 0018073 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 350 223489 3,621.005/4/2026
0015691 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 223490 12,317.005/4/2026
0002025 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES 223403 548.005/4/2026 0000241 THE ADAM-HILL COMPANY 223491 23.955/4/2026
0018275 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CA 223450 699.675/4/2026 0097149 THE SAN FRANCISCO SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL 223480 1,275.005/4/2026 0110351 TRI VALLEY TIRE, INC. 223495 2,049.665/4/2026 0018944 ULINE, INC. 223496 1,626.185/4/2026
0105490 ULTRA CONSTRUCTION 223497 3,500.005/4/2026
0110714 UNDERGROUND REPUBLIC WATER WORKS, INC. 223469 3,319.965/4/2026 0102744 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 223498 897.005/4/2026 0102963 UNLIMITED TOOL & EQUIPMENT REPAIR, INC. 223493 386.955/4/2026 0096844 USA BLUE BOOK 223499 4,328.095/4/2026
0108652 WATER WORKS ENGINEERS, LLC 223500 3,082.795/4/2026 0105955 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS, INC. 223395 7,007.105/4/2026 0096893 WILSEY HAM 223501 25,014.005/4/2026
0109109 WRECO 223502 6,545.635/4/2026
Total count: 137
GrandTotal: 3,005,564.63
Page: 3
Docusign Envelope ID: 221E5AF8-8EFE-80D6-8210-E4E8F44751A5

17 of 537

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 12, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: John Mercado, Accountant
SUBJECT: Payroll Acceptance
City Council acceptance of the City payroll distributed on April 24, 2026 is recommended. The Labor Summary report reflecting the total payroll amount of $2,145,433.75 for bi-weekly pay period ending April 19, 2026, by funds are shown below:

Fund Amount
Fund: 001 - GENERAL FUND 1,547,630.62
Fund: 005 - MEASURE G 4,790.93
Fund: 121 - FEDERAL/ STATE GRANTS 5,422.83
Fund: 122 - SOLID WASTE/RECYCLE 4,733.89
Fund: 132 - AGENCY ON AGING 10,148.06
Fund: 133 - RESTRICTED REVENUES 8,351.33
Fund: 137 - DEVELOPER PROJECT CONTRIBUTIONS 4,825.03
Fund: 141 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 82,047.07
Fund: 142 - RECREATION AND AQUATICS CENTER 69,993.55
Fund: 201 - PARKS AND FACILITIES CAPITAL 1,813.66
Fund: 203 - STREET IMPROVE. PROJECTS 10,830.51
Fund: 207 - TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL 4,855.74
Fund: 611 - WATER FUND 123,255.02
Fund: 621 - STORMWATER FUND 43,288.24
Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER FUND 90,669.51
Fund: 701 - CENTRAL GARAGE 19,950.97
Fund: 702 - FACILITY MAINT.FUND 63,643.86
Fund: 707 - TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 42,054.09
Fund: 711 - SELF INSURANCE 7,128.84
Total: 2,145,433.75
________________________________________________ ____ ________ Nick Pegueros, CFO / Administrative Services Director Date Docusign Envelope ID: 050095AA-2174-8F63-81B1-3CD8C303AFC8 4/23/2026
18 of 537
Item 6c.

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 12, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director & CFO PREPARED BY: Esther Garibay, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Month End Investment Report – April 2026
The table below summarizes the investment portfolio’s total book value by Investment type.

Investment Type Total Book Value
TriCounties Bank $13,041,252
Wells Fargo Bank /Sweep Money Market 40,459,634
CalTrust Liquid Money Market Fund 18,842,058
CalTrust Medium Term Fund 21,588,631
Local Agency Investment Fund 69,309,821
Government Agency Investments 45,933,729
Municipal Bonds 16,332,916
Money Market Investments 47,437,676
Total Investments $272,945,717
All securities held by the City of San Bruno as of April 2026 are in compliance with the City’s Investment Policy adopted on April 8, 2025.

Respectfully submitted,
_____ __________
Administrative Services Director & CFO Date
Docusign Envelope ID: 3ECCCD40-48D5-8FE9-80FB-D7787AB6F767 5/6/2026
19 of 537
Item 6d.

City of San Bruno
567 El Camino Real
San Bruno, CA 94066
Investments
Coupon
Rate CUSIP Book Value Market Value YTM Maturity Date
% of
Portfolio
Short Term Investments
TriCounties Bank Cash Balance 13,041,252 13,041,252 3.35% N/A 5% Wells Fargo General Acct /Sweep Money Market 40,459,634 40,459,634 3.53% N/A 15% CalTrust Liquidity Money Market Fund 18,842,058 18,842,058 3.76% N/A 7% CalTrust Medium Term Fund 21,588,631 21,588,631 3.88% N/A 8% Total CalTrust 40,430,688 40,430,688 15% Pooled Investments
Local Agency Investment Fund 65,512,547 65,512,547 3.81% NA 24% Glenview Fire Local Agency Investment Fund 3,797,274 3,797,274 3.81% NA 1% Total LAIF 69,309,821 69,309,821 25% US Bank Portfolio/Securities
Money Market Investments
U.S. Government Money Market 31846V567 47,437,675.58 47,437,676 3.54% NA 17% Total Money Market and US Treas. Bills Investments 47,437,676 47,437,676 17% Total Short Term Investments 210,679,071 210,679,071 Municipal Bonds
Pasadena USD non-callable GOB 2.07% 702282QD9 1,043,920 1,000,000 1.09% May 1, 2026 0% Los Angeles Unified SD non-callable 1.46% 544547FC9 2,009,340 1,991,620 1.35% July 1, 2026 1% Southern California St Public Pwer Auth 1.26% 842475P82 1,555,751 1,582,925 1.77% July 1, 2026 1% San Jose CA Redev Agy Successor Agy Tax Allocation3.18% 798170AJ5 1,405,984 1,323,560 1.51% August 1, 2026 1% San Jose CA Redev Agy Successor Agy Tax Allocation3.18% 798170AJ5 1,223,083 1,151,381 2.09% August 1, 2026 0% Cupertino UHSD Taxable non-callable GOB 2.15% 231237P28 1,057,240 995,790 0.96% August 1, 2026 0% Santa Monica CCD taxable non-callable GOB 1.04% 802385RR7 755,235 744,735 0.90% August 1, 2026 0% Los Angeles Calif Comm Coll Dist GOB Unlimited Tax1.17% 54438CYL0 998,010 993,130 1.22% August 1, 2026 0% San Dieguito CA Union High Sch Dist 1.86% 797508HF8 987,050 995,180 2.17% August 1, 2026 0% California St Taxable BID non-callable 2.38% 13063DRD2 736,400 697,668 1.28% October 1, 2026 0% California St Taxable BID non-callable 2.38% 13063DRD2 743,022 703,942 1.37% October 1, 2026 0% California St Univ Revenue 1.14% 13077DQE5 949,640 987,020 1.14% November 1, 2026 0% Los Angeles CA Dept of ARPTS ARPT Revenue1.10% 544445TW9 991,001 1,093,286 3.74% May 15, 2027 0% University Calif Rgts Med Center Poold Rev Taxable Srs M2.56% 913366JB7 1,877,240 1,971,420 4.68% May 15, 2027 1% Total Municipal Bonds Investments 16,332,916 16,231,657 6%

Page 1 ends

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
Portfolio Summary
April 30, 2026
Docusign Envelope ID: 3ECCCD40-48D5-8FE9-80FB-D7787AB6F767

20 of 537

City of San Bruno
567 El Camino Real
San Bruno, CA 94066
Investments
Coupon
Rate CUSIP Book Value Market Value YTM Maturity Date
% of
Portfolio
US Treasuries & Agencies
U.S. Treasury Notes 1.63% 912828R36 1,456,000 1,398,866 0.80% May 15, 2026 1% Federal Home Loan Bank 0.88% 3130AN4T4 1,148,747 1,146,205 0.90% June 12, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 0.63% 91282CCP4 992,773 992,420 0.77% July 31, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 0.75% 91282CCW9 1,997,813 1,980,440 0.77% August 31, 2026 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 1.63% 912828YG9 1,034,219 991,320 0.92% September 30, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes (WIT) 0.88% 91282CCZ2 997,227 988,410 0.93% September 30, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.63% 91282CJC6 988,477 1,004,290 5.04% October 15, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes (WIT) 1.13% 91282CDG3 995,391 986,646 1.22% October 31, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes (WIT) 1.13% 91282CDG3 996,367 987,614 1.20% October 31, 2026 0% U.S. Treasury Notes (WIT) 1.25% 91282CDK4 1,501,684 1,478,865 1.23% November 30, 2026 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 1.25% 91282CDQ1 1,647,422 1,623,353 1.28% December 31, 2026 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.00% 91282CJT9 3,968,125 4,007,520 4.34% January 15, 2027 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 1.25% 912828Z78 1,995,685 1,967,080 1.55% January 31, 2027 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.13% 91282CKA8 2,004,260 2,005,620 4.03% February 15, 2027 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 1.88% 91282CEC1 1,982,500 1,969,320 2.06% February 28, 2027 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 2.50% 91282CEF4 1,475,156 1,483,215 2.86% March 31, 2027 1% Federal Hom Loan Bank 4.75% 3130B0TY5 1,014,063 1,008,830 4.07% April 9, 2027 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 0.50% 912828ZN3 1,326,680 1,452,195 2.86% April 30, 2027 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.13% 91282CFM8 2,006,875 2,006,960 4.00% September 30, 2027 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.13% 91282CFU0 999,564 1,003,520 4.14% October 31, 2027 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.00% 91282CGP0 1,998,364 2,003,980 4.03% February 29, 2028 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.38% 91282CHX2 2,033,125 2,020,780 3.91% August 31, 2028 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.63% 91282CJA0 1,014,219 1,016,640 4.20% September 30, 2028 0% Federal Farm Credit Bank 4.63% 3133EPC45 1,294,557 1,319,045 4.72% November 13, 2028 0% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.38% 91282CJN2 1,005,859 1,011,290 4.21% November 30, 2028 0% Federal Home Loan Bank 4.50% 3130AVBD3 1,986,480 2,030,720 4.65% March 29, 2029 1% U.S. Treasury Notes 4.63% 91282CKP5 2,059,531 2,039,540 3.90% April 30, 2029 1% Federal Home Loan Bank 4.20% 3130B3CP6 3,000,000 2,989,140 4.20% October 9, 2029 1% Federal Hom Loan Bank 4.50% 3130ATUT2 1,012,568 1,017,740 4.21% December 14, 2029 0% Total U.S. Treasuries & Agencies 45,933,729 45,931,564 17% TOTAL PORTOFLIO 272,945,717 272,842,292 3.460% 100% There is adequate cash flow and maturity of investments to meet the City's needs for the next six months.

Prepared By:

Reviewed By: Page 2
April 30, 2026

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
Portfolio Summary
Docusign Envelope ID: 3ECCCD40-48D5-8FE9-80FB-D7787AB6F767

21 of 537

Monthly Portfolio Allocation by Investment
Sector ($Millions) Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 Nov-25 Dec-25 Jan-26 Feb-26 Mar-26 Apr-26 TriCounties Bank Interest Bearing $18.8 $17.6 $19.1 $10.2 $13.9 $13.7 $8.1 $16.9 $9.5 $8.1 $14.8 $17.2 $13.0 $13.0 $10.2 $13.9 $17.3 $13.1 $10.3 $14.2 $13.2 $9.6 $18.2 $9.5 $13.0 Wells Fargo Bank/Sweep MM $27.7 $23.9 $26.7 $21.4 $19.3 $19.9 $37.3 $24.3 $25.3 $28.9 $25.3 $27.8 $38.0 $38.0 $43.8 $26.6 $22.5 $23.4 $24.8 $26.3 $43.7 $37.8 $31.3 $33.8 $40.5 CalTrust Liquid MM Fund $22.2 $25.3 $25.4 $15.5 $11.6 $11.6 $11.7 $17.8 $17.8 $17.9 $18.0 $18.0 $18.0 $18.0 $18.2 $18.3 $18.4 $18.4 $18.5 $18.5 $18.6 $18.7 $18.7 $18.8 $18.8 Caltrust Medium Term Fund - - - $20.1 $20.3 $20.4 $20.3 $20.3 $20.4 $20.4 $20.6 $20.7 $20.7 $20.7 $21.0 $21.0 $21.2 $21.3 $21.3 $21.4 $21.5 $21.5 $21.7 $21.5 $21.6 Local Agency Investment Fund 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.7 15.6 15.7 25.9 25.9 41.4 41.7 41.7 41.7 42.1 42.1 42.1 42.6 42.6 52.6 53.1 53.1 53.1 68.7 68.7 68.7 69.3 San Mateo County Pool 32.7 28.7 25.2 22.5 22.6 20.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Government Agency/Treasury Bonds 95.9 98.4 98.4 101.9 99.9 96.9 89.9 95.8 93.7 91.7 94.7 92.7 92.7 92.7 87.8 82.4 82.4 74.5 67.0 65.7 58.8 58.8 55.8 49.9 45.9 Municipal Bond Investments 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 26.5 26.5 26.5 24.9 24.9 24.9 24.9 24.9 22.4 22.4 20.9 20.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.4 16.3 Certificates of Deposit 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - US Bank - Money Market 5.4 7.2 11.7 8.4 11.6 14.9 16.5 12.7 14.9 17.2 14.4 12.7 15.6 15.6 22.6 28.2 30.4 29.0 37.0 30.0 37.3 32.4 35.7 42.0 47.4 Total $246.3 $244.7 $250.2 $243.8 $241.8 $240.1 $236.6 $238.6 $247.9 $250.9 $254.4 $255.7 $262.5 $262.5 $266.6 $253.8 $253.6 $251.1 $250.9 $246.7 $263.6 $264.9 $267.4 $261.5 $272.9 Average Rate of Return 3.40% 3.44% 3.52% 3.52% 3.46% 3.61% 3.45% 3.48% 3.49% 3.48% 3.50% 3.51% 3.56% 3.56% 3.59% 3.56% 3.57% 3.58% 3.55% 3.49% 3.44% 3.41% 3.40% 3.45% 3.46%

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
Portfolio Summary Metrics
April 30, 2026
$0$10$20$30$40$50$60$70$80$90$100Monthly Portfolio Allocation by Investment Sector ($Millions)Government Agency/Treasury BondsTriCounties Bank Interest BearingWells Fargo Bank/Sweep MMCalTrust Liquid MM FundLocal Agency Investment FundMunicipal Bond InvestmentsCaltrust Medium Term Fund3.25%3.30%3.35%3.40%3.45%3.50%3.55%3.60%3.65%Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 Nov-25 Dec-25 Jan-26 Feb-26 Mar-26Investment Portfolio - Average Rate of Return Docusign Envelope ID: 3ECCCD40-48D5-8FE9-80FB-D7787AB6F767

22 of 537

Cash Fund Total
30,209,134.95 30,277,213.86
12,463,308.60 12,463,308.60
8,137,843.74 8,137,843.74
10,839,918.65 10,839,918.65
2,813,461.18 2,813,461.18

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
1,485,166.98 1,485,166.98
2,078,288.65 2,078,288.65
159,333.51 159,333.51
1,540,871.07 1,540,871.07
490,120.76 490,120.76
384,781.34 384,781.34
(435,022.77) (435,022.77)
450,461.98 450,461.98

0.90 0.90
4,062,493.78 4,062,493.78
(850,177.87) (850,177.87)
2,951,892.00 2,951,892.00
253,592.92 253,592.92
643,222.29 643,222.29
10,886,256.60 10,886,256.60

0.00 0.00
5,186,143.90 5,186,143.90
(3,703,919.15) (3,703,919.15)

0.00 0.00
700,648.55 700,648.55
757,627.72 757,632.50
4,302,401.96 4,302,401.96
26,736.97 26,736.97
256,551.39 256,551.39
6,372,879.58 6,372,879.58
391,333.92 391,333.92
5,107,045.76 5,107,045.76
11,055,396.56 11,055,396.56

0.00 0.00
6,489,135.15 6,489,135.15
6,153,449.17 6,153,449.17
1,938,275.41 1,938,275.41
901,517.96 903,494.36
57,674,788.40 57,674,981.51
2,634,074.05 2,634,074.05
49,634,682.69 49,694,398.99
8,829,315.80 8,829,315.80
2,128,837.58 2,128,837.58
362,187.14 362,187.14
1,108,488.10 1,108,488.10
1,409,378.25 1,409,378.25
1,022,201.49 1,022,201.49
203,729.28 294,847.78

0.00 0.00
259,507,856.89 259,728,944.89
* Reconciliation of Pooled Cash & Investments to Portfolio Book Value I
nvestment Portfolio Value 252,001,602.23
Cash on hand - Checking Account 9,454,080.06
Payroll and Accounts Payable Outstanding Checks (1,059,249.92) Deposits in Transit (888,575.48)
General Ledger Cash Balance as of March 31, 2026 259,507,856.89 Prepared By: ____________________________________________________ Reviewed By: ____________________________________________________ Totals are through period: 9
891 RECOLOGY SAN BRUNO 0.00
Grand Total: 221,088.00
707 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 0.00
711 SELF INSURANCE 91,118.50
702 FACILITY MAINT.FUND 0.00
703 GENERAL EQUIPMENT REVOLVING 0.00
651 PARKING FUND 0.00
701 CENTRAL GARAGE 0.00
631 WASTEWATER FUND 59,716.30
641 CITYNET SERVICES FUND 0.00
611 WATER FUND 193.11
621 STORMWATER FUND 0.00
207 TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL 0.00
302 LEASE DEBT SERVICE 1,976.40
201 PARKS AND FACILITIES CAPITAL 0.00
203 STREET IMPROVE. PROJECTS 0.00
166 COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUND 0.00
190 DISASTER RECOVERY FUND 0.00
164 UTILITIES FACILITIES IMPACT FEE 0.00
165 BAYHILL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DEVELOPMENT 0.00
162 GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES IMPACT F 0.00
163 TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IMPACT FEE 0.00
160 COMMUNITY FACILITIES IMPACT FEE 0.00
161 PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES IMPACT FEE 0.00
152 CITY OF SB AS SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY 0.00
153 RDA OBLIGATION RETIREMENT FUND 4.78
142 RECREATION & AQUATICS CENTER (RAC) 0.00
151 SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE SB RDA - OPS 0.00
140 DEVELOPER IN-LIEU UNDERGROUNDING 0.00
141 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0.00
137 DEVELOPER PROJECT CONTRIBUTIONS 0.00
138 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEES 0.00
133 RESTRICTED REVENUES 0.00
136 EMERGENCY DISASTER RESERVE 0.00
131 IN-LIEU FEES 0.00
132 AGENCY ON AGING 0.00
122 SOLID WASTE/RECYCL. 0.00
130 IMPACT FEES 0.00
113 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 0.00
121 FEDERAL/STATE GRANTS 0.00
104 MEASURE W TRANSPORTATION TAX 0.00
111 POLICE ASSET FORFEITURE 0.00
102 MEASURE A TRANSPORTATION TAX 0.00
103 STREET SPECIAL REVENUE 0.00
009 PARKING FUND 0.00
101 GAS TAX 0.00
005 MEASURE G DISTRICT SALES TAX 0.00
006 AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT 0.00
003 ONE-TIME REVENUE 0.00
004 CAP IMPROV/ONE-TIME INITIATIVE RSRV 0.00
Investments
001 GENERAL FUND 68,078.91
002 GENERAL FUND RESERVE 0.00
glCashInv.rpt Cash and Investments Report Page: 1
4/23/2026 2:04:14PM
City of San BrunoThrough period: 9
Through March 2026
Docusign Envelope ID: 7252ECB7-6392-8036-812A-12CD958CCB4D 4/23/2026
4/23/2026
23 of 537 Item 6e.

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 12, 2026
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 the Tentative Agreement Between the City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT Local 856 Police Unit for the Term January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029, and Authorizing Execution by the City Manager
BACKGROUND:

The existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT Police Unit (Police Unit) expired on December 31, 2025. Representatives of both the City of San Bruno and the Police bargaining unit have met and negotiated in good faith several times since August 2025, regarding their respective successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreement.

In January 2026, both parties signed a Tentative Agreement (TA). The Police Unit members did not ratify the TA, which brought both parties back to the negotiating table with the assistant of a California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) mediator. After additional sessions with a mediator, both the City and the Police Unit were able to come to a mutual agreement that the Police Unit sent to its members.

The signed agreement follows a compensation approach generally consistent with agreements reached with other bargaining units during negotiations, including general wage increases of 4%, 4.5%, and 5% over the term. A limited portion of the compensation allocation was redirected to support a retention incentive intended to address ongoing staffing and retention challenges within the Police Department.

In addition, the parties were able to reach agreement in part due to the Police Unit’s agreement to extend the term six months longer than the terms reached with the City’s other bargaining units and the Police Unit’s agreement the City’s desire for administrative changes related to compensation time accruals and acting pay.

DISCUSSION:

The City was notified by the Union on May 8, 2026 that the agreement was ratified by its members, with a positive vote. The highlights of the agreement are as follows:

Term
A three-and-one-half year term beginning January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029. 24 of 537 Item 6f.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 12, 2026

Page 2 of 3 ends

Salaries
A General Wage Increase (GWI) each year of the three-year agreement:
4.0% effective the first full pay period in January 2026 4.5% effective the first full pay period in January 2027 5.0% effective the first full pay period in January 2028 2.75% effective the first full pay period of January 2029 There are also market adjustments effective the first full pay period of each respective calendar year, 2026/2027/2028 in equal parts for the following classifications:
1.59% for sworn Police Officer / Police Corporal / Police Recruit 4.29% for non-sworn Community Services Officer (CSO)
Overtime and Acting Pay
Employees currently have the option of receiving paid overtime or compensatory time off in lieu of paid overtime. The TA reduces the MOU’s maximum compensatory time (comp time) accrual cap from 120 hours to 100 hours. Once an employee reaches the 100-hour maximum accrual, all overtime hours will be compensated in cash in accordance with the overtime provisions of the MOU until the employee’s comp time balance falls below the cap.

When an employee is assigned to substantially perform the duties of a higher class, the MOU provides for acting pay during the performance of those duties. The TA revises the MOU’s acting pay provision from 5-8 hours to seven (7) consecutive days. Employees performing higher-level duties for fewer than seven (7) consecutive days shall not be eligible for acting pay.

Incentives
The TA adds Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) certification pay to the MOU for optional training certificates obtained by dispatch personnel. The certification pay is 2.5% for the POST intermediate certificate OR 5% for the POST intermediate AND advanced certificate.

POST incentive is intended to support recruitment and retention of qualified dispatch personnel, encourage continued professional development, and recognize the increasingly complex and specialized nature of emergency communications work that directly impacts public and first responder safety.

To address the Police Department’s retention challenges, the TA also adds 1% retention to the MOU, effective the first full pay period in January 2027, and another 1% retention effective the first full pay period in January 2028 (total of 2%). The retention incentive is intended to support workforce stability and retain experienced employees whose tenure contributes to operational continuity, institutional knowledge, mentorship, and effective service delivery. The incentive also supports the City’s efforts to remain competitive in retaining skilled employees and reducing turnover-related impacts.

Health plan
Beginning January 1, 2026, the City maintains the current benefit structure where the City shall pay 75% and the employee shall pay 25% of health and welfare benefit premium increase over the prior plan year, for the term of the contract. This is language update and does not impact the current compensation structure offered to employees in the bargaining unit.

25 of 537

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 12, 2026

Page 3 of 3 ends

Non-economic proposals
Language updates were made to the five sections: filling of vacancies; tuition reimbursement program; uniform allowance; safety equipment; and disaster responsibility. These updates do not result in economic change.

In addition to the language changes, the agreement includes removing the code enforcement classifications from the Police Unit as part of the City’s unit designation request due to operational changes. This organizational alignment places Code Enforcement alongside related building, planning, zoning, and housing functions, which supports operational coordination, consistency in enforcement activities, and collaboration across affected City services.

All other terms and provisions of the MOU not adjusted as provided in the attached resolution shall remain unchanged.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The economic impact of the agreement exceeds the City’s original forecast assumption of 4% annual wage growth. Staff previously identified Measure G revenues as a funding source to help offset costs exceeding the forecasted amount during discussions with the Revenue Measure Oversight Committee. The Committee supported the staff recommendation to City Council and the amount is included in the City Manager’s Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27.

At the time of the tentative agreement, the estimated total cost of the agreement was approximately $3.1 million for a 36-month term. With an additional six months to the original 36- month term, the fully burdened cost of the agreement, compounded over the contract term of 42 months, is approximately $4.07 million. Future-year costs will be incorporated through the City’s annual operating budget process
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 Approving the Tentative Agreement Between the City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT Police Unit for the Term January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029 and Authorizing Execution by the City Manager.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Direct staff to continue negotiations with the bargaining group.

2. Request staff to bring back additional information for further consideration.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution with Exhibit A – Red-lined version of the MOU, with changes incorporated.

2. Tentative agreements signed by both parties.

26 of 537

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2026 - ___

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

TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 IBT POLICE UNIT FOR THE TERM JANUARY 1, 2026 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2029 AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY THE CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS, Representatives from both the City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT Local 856 Police Unit have met and negotiated in good faith; and WHEREAS, as a result of those negotiations, an agreement has been reached regarding changes to the terms and conditions of employment for the Police Unit’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the period from January 1, 2026 to June 30, 2029; and WHEREAS, both parties have agreed to amend MOU as listed in Exhibit A that incorporates all of the tentative agreements; and; and
WHEREAS, all other terms and provisions of the MOU not amended by this action shall remain unchanged; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby approves the agreement between the City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT Local 856, Police Unit for the term January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of San Bruno the attached MOU, and any modified and consolidated Memorandum of Understanding prepared incorporating all prior agreed upon terms and conditions of employment approved by the City of San Bruno and the Police Unit.

Exhibit A: Track change (redlined) version of the successor Memorandum of Understanding between: City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT Local 856, Police Unit. ---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2026 - ___ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 12, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
27 of 537
ATTACHMENT 1
2 EXHIBIT A
Track change (redlined) version of the successor Memorandum of Understanding between City of San Bruno
and
Teamsters IBT Local 856, Police Unit
[see attached]

28 of 537

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Teamsters Local 856, IBT POLICE
January 1, 20226 - December 31June 30,
20295
29 of 537
ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A

Page 2 of 51 ends

Police

1. Recognition ……………………………………………………………………….…..…… 4

2. Union Security …………………………………………………………………………..... 4

3. City Rights ………………………………………………………………………………… 6

4. No Discrimination ………………………………………………………………………… 7

5. Union Representatives and Personnel Files ……………………………………..…… 8

6. Filling of Vacancies ………………………………………………………………….…… 9

7. Appointments ……………………………………………………………………………... 10

8. Probationary Period ……………………………………………………………………… 12

9. Promotion, Employment Lists …………………………………………………………… 14

10. Layoff and Re-employment ……………………………………………………………… 15

11. Resignation and Reinstatement …………………………………………………………. 15

12. Salary Plan ………….……………………………………………………………………. 16

13. Call Back Pay …………… ……………………………………………………………… 19

14. Overtime ……………………………………………………………………………….…. 20

15. Acting Pay …………………………………………………………………………….…. 20

16. Special Assignment Pay ……………………………………………………………..….. 21

17. Special Circumstances Pay ……………………………………………………………… 22

18. Incentive Pay Programs …………………………………………………………….….. 22

19. Uniform Allowance ………………………………………………………………….…... 24

20. Permanent Part-Time ………………………………………………………………….… 24

21. Holidays …………………………………………………………………………………. 25

22. Vacation Leave ………………………………………………………………………...… 25

23. Sick Leave ………………………………………………………………………..……… 26

24. Bereavement Leave ………………………………………………………………………28

25. Leave of Absence …………………………………………………………………………28

26. Jury Duty Leave …………………………………………………………………………. 29

27. Leave for Court Appearances ………………………………………………………… 29

28. Military Leave …………………………………………………………………………… 31

29. Pregnancy Condition …………………………………………………………………… 31

30. Industrial Disability Leave ……………………………………………………………… 31

31. State Disability Insurance as an Employee Paid Benefit …………………………… 32

32. Catastrophic Leave ……………………………………………………………………… 32

33. Provision of Long-Term Disability Insurance ……………………………………..…… 32

34. Health and Welfare ……………………………………………………………………… 32

30 of 537

Page 3 of 51 ends

Police

35. Flexible Benefits Program ……………………………………………………………… 33

36. Life Insurance …………………………………………………………………………… 34

37. Retirement and Retirement Related Benefits ……………………………………….. 34

38. Tuition Reimbursement Program ………………………………………………….…. 36

39. Discipline………………………………………………………………………………… 37

40. Suspension……………………………………………………………………………… 38

41. Grievance Procedure ………………………………………………………………….. 39

42. Leaving Work for Personal Business ………………………………………………... 43

43. Safety Equipment ……………………………………………………………………… 43

44. Loss of Driver's License ………………………………………………………………. 44

45. Disaster Responsibility ………………………………………………………………... 45

46. No Strike ……………………………………………………………………………….. 45

47. Patronizing Businesses Subject to Job Actions ………………………………….… 45

48. Attendance……………………………………………………………..………………. 45

49. Past Practices and Existing Memorandum of Understanding……………………… 45

50. Negotiable Benefits……….……………………………………………………………. 46

51. Severability of Provisions………………………………………………………………. 46

52. Lunch Break and Rest Periods and Shift Schedule Changes ……………………. 46

53. Resolution of lmpasses ……………………………………………………………..… 47

54. Term …………………………………………………………………………………….. 47

55. Appendix A Salary Schedule …………………………………………………………. 47

31 of 537

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
January 1, 20226 through December June 310, 20259

The San Bruno Police Bargaining Unit, represented by the Professional and Vocational Employees Division of Teamsters Local 856, IBT, and representatives of the City of San Bruno have met and conferred in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of employees in the classifications set forth in Appendix A and have exchanged freely information, opinions, and proposals and have endeavored to reach agreement on all matters relating to the employment conditions and employer-employee relations of such employees.

This Memorandum of Understanding, (MOU), is entered into pursuant to the Meyers-Milias- Brown Act (Government Code Sections 3500 et seq.) and has been jointly prepared by the parties.

1. Recognition

1.1. Union Recognition. Professional and Vocational Employees Division of Teamsters Local 856, IBT, hereinafter referred to as "Union", is recognized as the majority representative, as provided in the City's Employer-Employee Relations Resolution No. 1970-20, adopted March 23, 1970, for all employees assigned to the classifications set forth in Appendices A and A-1, which is attached and made a part hereof. Following ratification of this Agreement, or on July 1, 2026, the City may modify the bargaining unit to remove the classifications of Code Enforcement Officer I, Code Enforcement Officer II, Senior Code Enforcement Officer, and Code Enforcement Supervisor. In the event the City elects to remove the classifications of Code Enforcement Officer I, Code Enforcement Officer II, Senior Code Enforcement Officer, and Code Enforcement Supervisor from the bargaining unit, they shall be assigned to the bargaining unit represented under the Teamsters Local 856, IBT Miscellaneous.

2. Union Security

2.1. The City shall be governed by applicable state and federal law, as presently worded or subsequently amended, as it pertains to union security.

2.2. New Employee Orientations

2.2.1. The City shall provide the Union written notice of new employee orientations [no matter how few participants, and whether in person or online] at least ten (10) business days prior to the event or when the City is first notified of a new employee's start date.

2.2.2. One (1) representative of the Union shall be permitted to make a presentation of up to thirty (30) minutes, and present written materials, during a portion of the orientation for which attendance is mandatory at a location designated by the City. No representative of management shall be present during the Union's presentation.

32 of 537

2.2.3. If a Union representative is unable to attend, paid release time shall be granted for one (1) steward at each orientation to participate in the new employee orientations. Human Resources will coordinate with the Steward's supervisor to make every reasonable effort to schedule orientations in conjunction with the Department and Steward's availability. Upon request, the Union shall provide a list of stewards designated to conduct Union presentations.

2.2.4. The City will provide the employee with a packet of information supplied by the Union, including the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Union membership form (paper or electronic).

2.2.5. The Union may follow the grievance procedure outlined in relevant Memorandums of Understanding for alleged violations of this agreement.

2.3. Dues Deduction

2.3.1. Any regular full-time or regular part-time employee who is covered by this Memorandum of Understanding may become a member of the Union and may execute a payroll deduction form as furnished by the Union.

2.3.2. The Union shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any cost of liability resulting from any and all claims, demands, suits, or any other action arising from the operation of this provision or from the use of the monies remitted to the Union, including the costs of defending against any such actions or claims. The Union agrees to refund to the City any amounts paid to it in error.

2.3.3. The Union will be custodian of records for such deduction authorization and will provide the City with a certification that it has and will maintain an authorization, signed by the individual from whose salary or wages the deduction or reduction is to be made. The Union shall not be required to provide the City a copy of the employee's authorization unless a dispute arises about the existence or terms of the authorization. However, the Union will provide the City with a certification document for each employee with sufficient information to allow the City to identify the appropriate level of deductions.

2.3.4. The City shall direct employee requests to cancel or change deductions to the Union and shall rely on information provided by the Union regarding whether deductions for an employee organization were properly canceled or changed.

2.3.5. The City shall not be required to collect any special assessments or similar short- time changes in rate. Initiation fees will not be considered a special assessment.

2.4. Communications with Employees

2.4.1. The Union shall be provided suitable space on bulletin boards at the work location for posting notices concerning official Union business, such information shall be in compliance with applicable City and departmental policies.

2.5. Advance Notice

33 of 537

2.5.1. Except in cases of emergency as provided below in this subsection, the union, if affected, shall be given reasonable advance written notice of any ordinance, resolution, rule or regulation directly relating to matters within the scope of representation proposed to be adopted by the City and shall be given the opportunity to meet and confer with the appropriate management representatives prior to adoption. Proper advance notice shall consist of written notice to the designated business agent with a copy to the designated shop steward.

2.5.2. In cases of emergency when the foregoing procedure is not practical or in the best public interest, the City may adopt or put into practice immediately such measures as are required. At the earliest possible date thereafter, the Union shall be provided with the notice described in the preceding paragraph and be given the opportunity to meet and confer with the appropriate management representatives. As used herein, "emergency" shall mean any situation in which proper management of the City requires immediate action, or in which immediate action is necessary for the preservation of life or property.

2.6. List of Unit Employees

2.6.1. The City shall furnish the Union with the names, initial rate of pay, classifications, and dates of hire of employees newly assigned to the unit and employees leaving the unit. The City shall provide the Union with current rates of pay for all employees in the bargaining unit once per year.

3. City Rights

3.1. The City shall retain the full rights of management and the direction of its business and operations, except as expressly limited and set forth in writing in this MOU. Wherein a subject matter is covered by the MOU, the City will act in accordance with those sections.

3.2. Nothing herein shall be construed to require the City to meet and confer on matters which are solely the function of management and which are not otherwise provided in this Memorandum of Understanding or letters of understanding executed by the parties in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding. The rights of the City through its Council and management include, but are not limited to, the following:

• To exclusively determine the mission of its constituent departments, commissions, and boards;
• To set standards of service of the various City departments; • To determine the procedures and standards of selection for employment; • To establish grooming standards;
• To lay off its employees from duty because of lack of work and other legitimate reasons;
• To maintain the efficiency of governmental operations; • To determine the methods, means, and personnel by which governmental operations are to be conducted;
• To determine the content and intent of job classifications;

34 of 537

• To determine the methods of financing of departmental operations; • To determine the style and/or types of City-issued wearing apparel, equipment, or terminology to be used;
• To determine and/or change the facilities, methods, technology, means, organizational structure, and size and composition of the work force, and allocate and assign work by which City operations are to be conducted; • To determine and change the number of locations, relocating, and types of operations, processes, and materials to be used in carrying out all City functions, including, but not limited to, the right to contract or subcontract any work or operations of the City;
• To assign work to and schedule employees in accordance with requirements as determined by the City, and to establish work schedules and assignments; • To establish and modify productivity and performance standards for employees, and to require compliance therewith;
• To discharge, suspend, demote, reprimand, withhold salary increases, or otherwise discipline employees for cause;
• To take all necessary actions to carry out its mission in emergencies.

3.3. It is a major purpose of this section to maximize the flexibility of the City to conduct its day-to-day operations.

3.4. Prior to modification of the following subjects, the City shall meet and confer with the Union:

• Minimum qualifications for classifications represented by the Union; • The content and intent of job classifications; provided, however, that it is understood that job descriptions used to describe the various duties of a classification do not preclude employees from being assigned to work not listed as a specific duty of that classification;
• Licenses and certificates required for such classifications of employees; • Degrees of training required for such employees;
• Grooming standards applicable to such employees;
• Productivity and performance standards of such employees; • Styles and types of wearing apparel to be used on duty; • Size and composition of the work force of the Police Department; • Contracting or subcontracting of operations currently being performed by the Police Department.

3.5. The obligation of the City to meet and confer regarding the foregoing subjects shall not be construed to require that the City and the Union reach agreement prior to the implementation of the types of modifications described in this subsection.

3.6. Nothing in this section shall be construed to excuse the City from the obligation to meet and confer with the Union regarding any subject or matter not set forth in this section where required to do so by statute.

3.7. Neither the Union nor any employee within the bargaining unit shall contest through the grievance procedure the authority of the City under state or federal law to exercise the rights enumerated in Section 3.2. Except as provided therein, the Union may use the courts to contest the exercise of such authority.

35 of 537

4. No Discrimination

4.1. There shall be no discrimination by either Union or City on any basis prohibited by state or federal law or on account of any legitimate union activity.

5. Union Representatives and Personnel Files

5.1. Personnel Files

5.1.1. An employee, or on presentation of written authorization from the employee, an employee's representative, shall have specific access to the employee's personnel file upon request and reasonable convenience of Human Resources.

Documentation in the personnel file relating to the investigation of a possible criminal offense, information obtained from the pre-employment background investigation, and letters of reference may be specifically excluded from the inspection and review of the employee and/or the employee's representative.

5.1.2. Medical records and information which would be privileged under state law pursuant to the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine may also be excluded. Non- privileged medical records involving workers' compensation, disability medical evaluation, and pre-hire medical reports shall be maintained in a separate employee medical file which is not included in the employee's personnel file. Personnel files may only be reviewed in the presence of a designated employee of Human Resources. The City will provide employees with copies of their personnel evaluations and warning letters, if any.

5.1.3. The City will provide employees with copies of performance evaluations, letters of reprimand, if any, and such copies shall be provided to the Union with written authorization of the employee. Upon request the employee may at his/her expense copy these portions of his personnel file not specifically excluded from review by this section.

5.2. Union Representative

5.2.1. Union representatives may receive complaints or grievances of employees at the work location during work hours. They shall not interfere with the normal conduct of work or duties of the employees, as determined by the department head. The department head shall not unreasonably prevent the employee from meeting with union representatives regarding such complaints or grievances.

5.2.2. Activities such as the soliciting of membership, collection of dues, holding membership meetings, campaigning for office, conducting elections, and distributing literature are strictly prohibited during working hours without the prior approval of the City Manager or his/her representative.

5.2.3. In the event the City believes that the union representatives are abusing the provisions of this section, it shall contact the Union in writing to arrange a mutually acceptable time and place to investigate the City's complaint and to

36 of 537

assure full compliance by the union representative.

5.2.4. When any public safety officer is under investigation and subjected to interrogation by his/her commanding officer, or any other member of the police department, which could lead to punitive action, such interrogation shall be conducted in accordance with Section 3303 of the Government Code. The terms used in the preceding section shall be as defined in the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act.

5.2.5. The Union will provide the City with a list of authorized stewards annually.

5.2.6. Upon written prior approval of the Police Chief, authorized union stewards may be afforded reasonable paid time off to attend professional development seminars, attend meetings with management, grievance hearings, and internal investigation interviews.

6. Filling of Vacancies

6.1. Minimum Age

6.1.1. The minimum age of all new employees in the classifications of Police Officer is twenty-one (21) years per California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). The minimum age of all new employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher I/II, Police Clerk I/II, is eighteen (18) years. The City reserves the right to unilaterally change the age limits of department personnel after meeting and conferring with the union.

6.2. Filling Vacancies.

6.2.1. Except as otherwise provided in this Memorandum of Understanding, whenever the City Manager determines that a vacancy in a class described in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding is to be filled, it shall be filled from employment lists established as a result of competitive examination. An exception to this rule is the City's use of the lateral and pre-trained transfer program. In making a determination not to fill a vacancy, safety of the personnel of the police department shall be a governing factor.

6.3. Announcement

6.3.1. All examinations for classes set forth in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be published by posting announcements in the city hall, on official bulletin boardson the City’s website, and in such other places as the Personnel Officer deems advisable., including one newspaper of general circulation circulated in the city. Promotional examinations shall not be advertised by newspaper. Notice of promotional examinations need not be given to persons other than those eligible to take such examinations.

6.3.2. The announcements shall specify the following:

• The title and salary range of the class;
• The nature of the work to be performed;

37 of 537

• Preparation desirable for the performance of the work of the class; • The dates, time, place, and manner of making applications; and • Other pertinent information.

6.4. Application Form

6.4.1. Applications shall be made on forms provided by the Personnel Officer or electronically. Such forms may require information covering training, experience, or other pertinent information. All applications must be signed under penalty of perjury by the person applying.

6.5. Disqualification from Open Competitive Examination

6.5.1. The City Manager as Personnel Officer, or City Manager's designee, may reject the
application of any applicant for a position to be filled by open competitive examination if:

• The application indicates on its face that the applicant does not possess the minimum qualifications required for the position;
• The applicant would not meet the minimum age requirement at the time of appointment to the position classification;
• The applicant does not meet current requirements for employment authorization as outlined by pertinent state and federal laws; • The applicant would be unable to perform the essential job functions after reasonable
• accommodations have been made;
• The applicant has made a false statement of any material fact or has omitted any material fact or has practiced or attempted to practice any deception or fraud in the application.

6.6. Permissive Rejection: Open Competitive Examination

6.6.1. The City Manager as Personnel Officer, or City Manager's designee, may reject any application for a position to be filled by open competitive examination if, in that person's or group's judgment, the number of applicants for the position is so great that it would be unmanageable to interview all applicants possessing the minimum qualifications. In such cases, the applicants selected for interview or further consideration may be limited to those who, in the judgment of the City Manager, or City Manager's designee, possess the qualifications that best fit the needs of the Police Department.

6.7. Notice of Rejection

6.7.1. Whenever an application is rejected, notice of such rejection with a statement of reason may be mailed to the applicant by the City Manager or City Manager's designee.

6.8. Defective Applications

6.8.1. Defective applications may be returned to the applicant with notice to amend the

38 of 537

same, at the discretion of the Personnel Officer.

7. Appointments

7.1. Sources of Appointments to Fill Vacancies

7.1.1. Whenever the City Manager determines that a vacancy in a class described in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding is to be filled, it shall be filled by re- employment, transfer, demotion, or from eligibles certified by the Personnel Officer from an appropriate employment or promotional list, if available. The City's lateral and pre- trained transfer policy is another alternative to filling vacancies.

7.1.2. Whenever the City Manager determines that a vacancy in a class described in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding is to be filled, the City Manager shall determine the availability of employees for re-employment, requests for transfers, or demotion, and of eligibles on employment or promotional lists for the class.

7.1.3. The City Manager shall certify the eligibles available to fill the vacancy by re- employment, transfer or demotion, or from a promotional or employment list.

7.2. Order of Certification

7.2.1. Whenever certification is to be made, the employment lists, if each exists, shall be used in the following order: re-employment list, promotional list, open- competitive list.

Whenever there are fewer than three names on a promotional list or seven names on an open-competitive list, the City Manager may make an appointment from among such eligibles or may establish a new list.

7.3. Appointment

7.3.1. After interview and investigation, the City Manager shall make appointments from among those certified in accordance with Section 9.1.2. The City Manager or designee shall thereupon notify the person appointed. If the applicant accepts the appointment and presents himself/herself for duty within such period of time as the City Manager or designee shall prescribe, s/he shall be deemed to be appointed; otherwise, s/he shall be deemed to have declined the appointment.

7.4. Nepotism

7.4.1. No person shall be appointed to any position described in Appendix "A" if a member of the immediate family, as defined in Section 7.4.5 of such person is employed in the department, if the City Manager determines that (1a) for business reasons of supervision, safety or security, it would be inappropriate to place one such person under the direct supervision of the other; and (1b) the appointment cannot be made so it would not be necessary that one employee be under the supervision of the other; or (2) the placement of both persons in the department involves potential conflicts of interest greater for persons so related

39 of 537

than for non-related persons, and such conflicts cannot be resolved by control of duty assignments.

7.4.2. If such appointment is made, the employees involved shall be assigned, if possible, so that one is not under the direct supervision of the other, or employed to work in conjunction with the other under ordinary circumstances.

7.4.3. If, due to marriage, persons employed in the Police Department become members of an immediate family, the Police Chief shall, to the extent possible, assign such persons to duties in such manner that neither is under the direct supervision of the other, and neither is assigned to work in conjunction with the other under ordinary circumstances.

7.4.4. For purposes of this section, "direct supervision" is not designed to include employees who overlap on a workday, and is defined as having the primary supervisory assignment of the employee, including the preparation of the employee's performance evaluation.

7.4.5. For purposes of this section, "immediate family" includes father, mother, brother, sister, spouse, domestic partner, child, mother-in-law, mother of domestic partner, father-in-law, father of domestic partner, grandparent, grandparent of domestic partner, grandchildren, grandchildren of domestic partner, great grandparents, great grandparents of domestic partner, great-grandchildren of domestic partner, step-children, and step-children of domestic partner.

8. Probationary Period

8.1. Length of Probationary Period

8.1.1. All regular appointments to the classification of police officer shall be tentative and subject to a probationary period of eighteen (18) months from the anniversary date of probationary appointment. All regular appointments to other classifications set forth in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be tentative and subject to a probationary period of one year from the anniversary date of regular appointment.

8.1.2. Due to the extended sensitivity of safety related positions and additional training efforts required for the positions of Public Safety Dispatcher I/II and Police Clerk I/II, there will be a 12 month probationary period after completion of a reasonable and designated training period. A reasonable training period shall not exceed six (6) months. The designated training period shall be identified by the City/department head in the offer letter provided to new employees when they accept employment with the City.

8.2. Objective of Probationary Period

8.2.1. The probationary period shall be regarded as a part of the testing process and shall be utilized for close observation of the employee's work.

8.3. Appointment or Rejection of Probationer

40 of 537

8.3.1. During the probationary period an employee may be rejected at any time by the City Manager without cause, without hearing, and without the right of appeal.

8.3.2. Prior to the scheduled termination of the probationary period, the City Manager or designee shall notify the probationer in writing as to whether the service of the probationer has been satisfactory and his/her retention in City employment is desired. If the City Manager or designee notifies the probationer that the performance of the latter has been satisfactory, the City Manager or designee shall appoint the probationer to his/her position on a regular basis, effective upon the completion of the probationary period. If the City Manager or designee notifies the probationer that the performance of the latter has not been satisfactory, the employment of the employee shall be terminated upon such notice, or the City Manager or designee may extend the probationary period for a specific period of time to allow for further observation and evaluation. If the probationary period is extended, the salary step increase for the employee shall be deferred for the period of time of the extension.

8.3.3. Whenever the City Manager rejects a probationer, the written notice of rejection shall advise the probationer as follows:

8.3.3.1. That if the probationer believes s/he has been rejected because of allegations of misconduct which have been publicly disclosed under such circumstances that the good name, reputation, honor, or integrity of the probationer has been stigmatized, the probationer has the right to a hearing to provide him/her an opportunity to clear his/her name; and

8.3.3.2. That if the probationer believes s/he has been rejected on account of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, physical handicap, participation in the activities of a labor organization, or the exercise of any right guaranteed to the probationer by statute or constitution, the probationer is entitled to a hearing to determine whether such rejection was, in fact, effectuated upon such invalid basis.

8.3.4. The notice shall advise the probationer that the latter may request such hearing by transmitting to the City Manager in writing not later than 15 days from the date of the notice a request for a hearing. Such request shall specify the grounds upon which the hearing is requested, as set forth in Subsections 8.3.3.1 and

8.3.3.2. If the probationer does not request a hearing in the manner prescribed by this section within the period allowed, the probationer shall be deemed to have waived his/her right to such hearing.

8.3.5. The City Manager shall conduct hearings requested pursuant to this section. If the hearing has been requested pursuant to Subsection 8.3.3.2, the probationer shall have the burden of proof that the rejection was effected upon an invalid basis. At the conclusion of such hearing, the City Manager may sustain the rejection, reinstate the probationer to probationary status if the probationary period has been completed, or reinstate the probationer to probationary status and extend the probationary period if otherwise permissible, if justified by the evidence presented at the hearing.

41 of 537

8.3.6. If, prior to the hearing, the employee presents to the City Manager a written request that the City Manager disqualify himself/herself from conducting the hearing, the City Manager shall assign a designee having no supervisory control over the employee to conduct the hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer shall recommend to the City Manager the disciplinary action to be taken, if any, and the City Manager shall make a determination and promptly notify the employee in writing of such decision.

8.4. Promotional Probation

8.4.1. An employee who has previously completed the requisite probationary period and who is rejected during a subsequent probationary period for a promotional appointment shall be reinstated to the former position and salary step from which the employee was promoted; provided that this subsection shall not be construed so as to prohibit the City from discharging any employee during a subsequent promotional probationar1y period for those reasons and causes set forth in Section 39 of this Memorandum of Understanding. Employees will be evaluated by the Department while serving in their promotional probation period.

8.5. Rejection Following Promotion

8.5.1. Any employee rejected during the probationary period following a promotional appointment shall be reinstated to the position and salary step from which s/he was promoted.

8.6. Extension

8.6.1. The probationary period may be extended upon the written recommendation of the employee's department head and the approval of the city manager for one or more extension, each not to exceed six months duration. The Union will be notified in writing of extensions of probationary periods.

9. Promotion, Employment Lists

9.1.1. Promotion

9.1.1.1. The City will endeavor to fill vacancies by promotion when in the best interest of the City. In the event the City Manager or designee determines to fill a vacancy by promotion, Human Resources shall prepare and administer an examination for those employees holding similar positions in lower classifications. The names of the successful candidates shall be recorded in the order of their standing in the examination of an employment list. Promotional appointments will be made from the eligible candidates on the employment list.

9.1.1.2. If, in the opinion of the City Manager, a vacancy in the position could be filled better by an open, competitive examination instead of a closed, promotional examination, the City Manager may call for applications for the vacancy and arrange for an open, competitive examination, and for the preparation and certification of an eligible list.

42 of 537

9.1.2. Employment Lists

9.1.2.1. Employment lists shall become effective upon the approval thereof by the Personnel Officer. Employment lists shall remain in effect for one year, unless sooner exhausted, and may be extended prior to their expiration dates by action of the Personnel Officer for additional six-month periods, but in no event shall an employment list remain in effect for more than two years.

9.1.2.2. Original appointments can only be made from the top eight candidates on the employment list who are ready and willing to accept the position offered.

9.1.2.3. The name of any person on an employment list may be removed by the City Manager if the eligible person requests such removal in writing, if the candidate fails to respond to a written offer of employment within five business days next succeeding the mailing of notice, which shall be by registered or certified mail, if a subsequent report of a background investigation shows that the person is unsatisfactory, or if the employee bas been rejected for appointment three times.

9.1.2.4. If a candidate refuses to be considered for appointment or for interview, the City Manager may, remove the name of the candidate from the employment list.

9.1.2.5. The names of persons on promotional employment lists who resign from the service may be dropped from such lists.

10. Layoff and Re-employment

10.1. Layoff

10.1.1. Whenever, in the judgment of the City Council, it becomes necessary to abolish positions, the City Council may abolish any position including those set forth in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding, and the employee holding such position or employment may be laid off without the right of appeal. The City Manager may likewise lay off regular employees due to lack of work or funds.

10.1.2. In a reduction in force, employees with the least length of service shall be laid off first.

10.2. Re-employment after Layoff

10.2.1. In rehiring, the name of the employee last laid off within two years shall be placed at the head of an employment list for a position in the classification formerly held, and the employee shall be given preference in filling vacancies in that classification, and, if re-employed, shall be placed at the same step of the salary range previously held.

43 of 537

11. Resignation and Reinstatement

11.1. Resignation

11.1.1. An employee wishing to leave the competitive service in good standing shall file with the department head, at least two weeks before leaving the service, a written resignation stating the effective date and reasons for leaving. The resignation shall be forwarded to the City Manager with a statement by the department head or supervising official as to the resigned employee's service performance and other pertinent information concerning the cause of resignation.

Failure to comply with this rule shall be entered on the service record of the employee and may be cause for denying future employment by the City.

11.2. Reinstatement

11.2.1. A regular employee who has resigned in good standing may be reinstated to a vacant position of the same classification as the previous position within a period of two years from the effective date of resignation. Reinstatement shall be made at the salary step recommended by the department head and approved by the City Manager.

11.3. Demotion

11.3.1. Demotion is the movement of an employee from one class to another class having a lower maximum rate of pay. The City Manager may demote an employee in any class of employment upon probationary rejection, for disciplinary purposes, as a substitute for layoff where authorized by this Memorandum of Understanding, or where the employee volunteers to be demoted. No employee shall be demoted to a position for which s/he does not possess the minimum qualifications. Three days written notice of the demotion shall be given to the employee before the effective date of the demotion.

12. Salary Plan

12.1. Salary Ranges

12.1.1. The following reflects the understanding as to adjustments, modifications and changes related to salary and/or benefits:

12.1.1.1. Wages - the following increases shall apply to all bargaining unit members

• 4% increase effective the first full pay period in January 2026 (retroactive to January 12, 2026)2
• 4.53% increase effective the first full pay period in January 20273 • 53% increase effective the first full pay period in January 20284 • 2.753% increase effective the first full pay period in January 20295

Equity Adjustments – the City shall apply the following equity adjustments

44 of 537

to each of the identified classifications:

Effective the first full pay period in July 2026:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

Effective the first full pay period in July 2027:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

Effective the first full pay period in July 2028:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

12.1.1.2. Calculation of actual salary shall be as follows: For the five-step range, the range will be calculated by dividing each range step, beginning with top step, by the factor 1.0525.

12.1.1.3. Salary ranges for represented classifications shall be as set forth in Appendix “A".

12.2. Salary Plan Administration

12.2.1. Employees occupying a position set forth in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be paid a salary within the range established for that position's classification.

12.2.2. Effective upon ratification, the City will create a new Police Corporal job classification which shall be included in the list of classifications represented by the Police Bargaining Unit and added to Appendices "A" and "A-1". The Police Corporal job classification will be set 7.5% above Step 5 of the Police officer salary range.

12.2.3. The Parties agree to conduct a classification and compensation study of the Police Clerk I/II, Public Safety Dispatcher I/II, Community Services Officer I/II (digital and physical evidence only) job classifications and meet and confer regarding implementing any negotiable changes within 120 days of ratification of this agreement, and thereafter commencing bargaining over any negotiable changes, including but not limited to wage enhancements, for those classifications subject to the classification and compensation study.

45 of 537

12.3. Salary Plan Administration, Original Appointment

12.3.1. Except as herein otherwise provided, the salary for a new employee entering the competitive service shall be the minimum salary step for the classification to which the employee is appointed. However, when warranted by special circumstances, the City Manager may appoint a new employee at a salary step other than the minimum step of the respective classification. The City Manager's decision shall be final.

12.4. Salary Plan Administration, Advancement within Salary Range

12.4.1. No salary advancement shall be made so as to exceed the maximum rate established in the pay plan for the class to which the advanced employee's position is allocated. Employees hired at the first step of the salary range shall be evaluated for salary advancement after the first six months of service and after additional one-year periods of service thereafter until the employee has reached the maximum rate established. Employees hired at other steps of the salary range shall be evaluated for salary advancement after the first year of service from the anniversary date and after additional one-year periods of service thereafter until the employee has reached the maximum rate established.

Advancement within the salary range shall generally be made one step at a time.

However, the City Manager may, when circumstances warrant, advance the salary of an employee more than one step at a time or prior to the initial six months of service. If the City Manager takes such action the anniversary date for salary revision purposes shall be one (1) year from the date of such action.

12.4.2. Advancements shall not be automatic, but shall depend upon increased service value of an employee to the City as exemplified by recommendations of his/her supervising official, length of service, performance record, special training undertaken, or other pertinent evidence.

12.4.3. Advancement to the next higher step within the range of the assigned classification shall be implemented only upon final approval by the City Manager.

12.4.4. Changes in an employee's salary because of promotion, demotion, or an early or delayed salary advancement will set a revised salary anniversary date for that employee.

12.4.5. Salary range adjustments for a classification will not set a new salary anniversary date for employees serving in that classification.

12.4.6. Whenever the schedule of compensation for a classification is revised, each incumbent in a position to which the revised schedule applies shall be paid at the same step in the revised range as the step at which the employee was paid in the previous range.

12.4.7. If an employee takes a leave of absence, pursuant to Section 25, the time spent away from work shall not be counted toward the completion of the next step. If an employee takes a leave of absence with pay, the time spent away from work in excess of forty-five (45) consecutive calendar days shall not be counted toward the completion of the next step.

46 of 537

12.5. Anniversary Date

12.5.1. The anniversary date is the date from which time is calculated for purposes of salary step advancement, the ending of the probationary period, the advancement of vacation accrual dates, and the accrual of sick leave. This date shall be the actual date an employee is hired. Future salary and benefit adjustments for vacation etc., would be made effective the beginning of the pay period in which the employee's anniversary date occurred.

12.5.2. The actual date of appointment to a position shall govern seniority and eligibility to take a promotional examination and layoff.

12.6. Salary Plan Administration, Salary Step After Promotion or Demotion

12.6.1. Promotion

12.6.1.1. When an employee is promoted from a position in one classification to a position in a higher classification, that employee shall be entitled to receive the rate of pay of the lowest step in the salary scale of the higher classification which provides at least 5% above the base salary of the employee, not including acting pay or educational incentive pay.

12.6.2. Demotion

12.6.2.1. General. When an employee is demoted, his/her compensation shall be adjusted to the salary prescribed for the classification to which s/he is demoted, and the specific rate of pay within the range shall be determined by the City Manager. Where the demotion is not for disciplinary purposes, the City Council may provide for a rate of pay higher than the maximum step of the salary schedule for such classification.

12.6.2.2. Abolition of position. When an employee is demoted as a result of abolition of position, s/he shall be placed at the salary step in the lower classification which most closely approximates but does not exceed the employee's salary in the higher classification.

12.6.2.3. Voluntary demotions; demotions resulting from probationary rejections.

When an employee takes a voluntary demotion to a position previously held or is reappointed to such a position as the result of a probationary rejection, the employee shall be placed at the same step in the lower classification which the employee last held. The employee's service time at such step shall be the same as the service time held previously at such step.

12.6.2.4. Disciplinary demotions. When an employee is demoted to a lower classification for disciplinary reasons, the specific rate of pay in the salary

47 of 537

range of such classification to which the employee shall be entitled shall be determined by the City Manager.

12.7. Salary Plan, Pay Periods

12.7.1. Employees shall be paid bi-weekly.

12.8. Direct Deposit

12.8.1. All employees hired after February 28, 2001, shall be paid only via direct deposit into a bank account. Employees shall have thirty (30) days from the date of hire to submit appropriate information to the Finance Department for the processing of direct deposit pay.

13. Call Back Pav

13.1.1. Pay for employees who are called back to work from home shall commence when the employee reports for work at Police Department headquarters and shall terminate when the employee is released from work at headquarters.

13.1.2. Compensation for call back shall be earned at a minimum of three (3) hours and shall be compensated either in pay or compensatory time at the rate of one and one-half times the regular straight-time rate of pay of the employee. If an employee is called back to work within the three (3) hour minimum prior to his/her regularly scheduled shift, the employee will receive compensation only for the actual time worked and calculated to the nearest quarter hour.

13.1.3. If an employee is called to begin work at an earlier time other than his/her regularly scheduled shift, the following shall apply:

13.1.4. If the employee desires to be relieved from duty, they may do so only with the approval of the on-duty supervisor, subject to the staffing needs of the department. The employee shall have the option of using accumulated leave in lieu of completing his/her regularly scheduled shift; in such case the portion of work performed prior to his/her regularly scheduled shift shall be deemed to be overtime.

13.1.5. If the employee leaves work during his/her regularly scheduled shift due to sickness or disability s/he may use sick leave for the remainder of his/her regularly scheduled shift.

14. Overtime

14.1.1. Overtime is defined as the compensating of a full-time employee, either in compensatory time or pay, for authorized time actually worked in excess of 40 hours per week or in excess of the regularly scheduled work hours per day.

Overtime is calculated as being one and a half times employee's regular hourly rate, unless otherwise specifically identified in the MOU. The employee shall

48 of 537

have sole discretion in determining whether overtime is received in pay or compensatory time subject to the accrual maximum outlined in the "Compensatory Time Leave Bank" referenced in (a) (1) below.

14.1.2. A "Compensatory Time Leave Bank" is established with a maximum accrual balance of one hundred and twenty (1020) hours. Time in excess of the accrual maximum would automatically be paid as over-time and not allowed to build up in excess of the maximum level absent approval from the City Manager or designee. Employees shall have one-half of their accrued compensatory time off paid to them in cash in the pay period prior to promotion.

14.1.3. Employees may convert holiday time as it occurs to compensatory time leave in lieu of pay, but in no case exceed a total of one hundred and twenty (120) hours.

14.1.4. Time worked during the first one-quarter hour of excess time worked will not be compensated; however, time worked in excess of one-quarter hour through one- half hour will be granted at a minimum of one-half hour. When the time worked is in excess of one-half hour, overtime shall be computed for the total actual time worked and calculated to the nearest one-quarter hour.

15. Acting Pay

Police Officers*, Public Safety Dispatcher I/II's, and Police Clerk I/Il's of this unit who are assigned to an acting supervisor capacity shall receive an increase in pay of five (5) percent, retroactive to the start of the assignment, after completing the following:

Police Officers Five Eight (58) consecutive
hours shifts of duty
Public Safety Dispatcher I/II Eight (8) consecutive hours shifts of duty
Police Clerk I/II Eight (8) consecutive hours
shifts of duty

15.2. *Police Officers assigned to Corporal assignment duty are not eligible for acting pay per this provision, as acting in this capacity is included in 5% Corporal Assignment duty.

16. Special Assignment Pay

16.1. The following Special Assignments shall receive a 5% increase in base salary

49 of 537

beginning on the first day of the assignment and continuing until the last day of the assignment: Detective, Detective Trainee, K-9 Officer, Regional Task Force assignments, School Resource Officer, Bayhill Business Officer, Motor Officer, and Support Services Officer. The maximum Special Assignment Pay an employee may obtain under this section is five percent (5%) total.

16.2. Employees in sworn police classifications assigned to work as K-9 officers shall receive an additional $100 per month, for such special assignment. Officers are assigned as K-9 officers at the discretion of the Chief of Police. Employees may be returned to their original assignments at any time at the discretion of the Chief of Police and such return shall not be considered "punitive action" nor subject to any appeal. Employees in sworn police classifications assigned to work as K-9 officers shall be compensated for off-duty K-9 care as follows:

16.3. The City and the Association agree that the amount of off du(y compensable working time attributable to all ordinary aspects of canine care (including without limitation, handling, caring, feeding, exercising, grooming, kennel cleaning, cleaning of City vehicles, and ordinary transport to a veterinarian) by employees assigned to K-9 duty is seven (7) hours per week. Both the City and the K-9 officers agree that this 5% differential and additional $100 per month, is fair compensation for the duties of caring for the dog outside of work hours. This agreement is made pursuant Fair Labor Standards Act regulation 29 CFR § 785.23. If and when an employee assigned to K-9 duty performs any extraordinary work involving the animal, the employee shall report such work immediately to the Chief of Police in writing and in no event less than 24 hours after completing such work. "Extraordinary work" includes, but is not limited to, unanticipated trips for emergency veterinarian care and any work which causes a substantial increase in work time beyond the agreed-upon hours necessary for routine care as identified above.

16.4. Field Training Officer and Communications Training Officer will receive three hours additional pay at the time and one-half rate, for each full week or portion thereof that the trainer is providing training.

16.5. In-lieu of any existing practices of compensation, when a Police Clerk II is assigned as a Public Safety Dispatcher I/II for at least one full working day, such employee shall receive a five (5) percent increase to their base salary for those hours actually worked. Accordingly, effective upon ratification of this agreement, the City will eliminate the following from the Police Clerk II job description: " ...in addition to the performance of dispatching job duties as specified for Public Safety Dispatcher I, on a relief basis" and "Performs duties associated with Public Safety Dispatcher I on a relief basis at a level of skill and ability to perform the dispatching function for an entire shift, as assigned."

16.6. Employees performing the following collateral duties shall receive a two percent (2%) Collateral Duty Premium when assigned by the Chief: Regional S.W.A.T.

Team, Defensive Tactics Instructor, De-Escalation Instructor. Such assignment may be assigned and unassigned by the Police Chief at the sole discretion of the Chief and shall not be subject to the grievance procedure. The maximum Collateral Duty Premium Pay an employee may obtain under this section is two percent (2%) total.

50 of 537

16.7. Beginning the first pay period after the contract is executed, employees regularly assigned to work the "Night Shift" (i.e. any shift that includes the hours between 1900- 0700) will receive a one percent (1%) pay differential. Beginning in January 2023, employees regularly assigned to work the "Night Shift" will receive an additional one percent (1%) pay differential. Beginning in January 2024, employees regularly assigned to work the "Night Shift" will receive an additional one-half percent (0.5%) pay differential for a maximum of two and one-half percent (2.5%) of their hourly rate for all regularly scheduled hours worked between 1900-0700. For purposes of this section, "regularly assigned" is defined as being scheduled to work as part of a member's standard shift as part of a regular shift rotation (i.e. 6 months). Members not "regularly assigned" to the Night Shift will not be entitled to Night Shift Differential, even for hours worked between 1900-0700. At full authorized staffing levels, there are currently 12 such positions in the bargaining unit available for Night Shift Differential: eight (8) Police Officers; two (2) Police Corporals; and two (2) Public Safety Dispatchers I/II.

17. Special Circumstances Pav

17.1. An employee specifically assigned by a department head through use of the personnel action form process on a temporary or longer-term basis to regularly perform work outside of the scope of the employee's permanent classification but not performing substantially the duties of another job classification may receive Special Circumstances/Special Recognition Pay at the exclusive discretion of the City Manager. The City Manager may assign a rate of pay between 3.5% and 10% depending on the nature of the circumstances and organizational need. The determination as to the rate of pay made by the City Manager shall be final and not subject to use of the Grievance Procedure.

18. Incentive Pay Programs

18.1. Historical footnote: Section 18 Incentive Pay Programs was previously titled "POST Incentive Pay" and applied only to sworn personnel.

18.2.18.1. Incentive pay is calculated on an individual employee's base salary. The maximum incentive pay an employee may obtain under Section 18 Incentive Pay Programs is 8.5%. Subsections 18.23 POST Certification Pay and Section 18.43 Educational Incentive Pay -All Personnel are not to be included together for purposes of determining the level of incentive pay for Sworn employees. Sworn. eEmployees may only receive either POST Certification Pay or Education Incentive Pay at any one time but may not receive both incentives simultaneously.

18.3.18.2. POST Certification Pay
A. Sworn Personnel
• Four percent (4%) of employee's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate Certificate; OR
• Eight and one-half percent (8.5%) of employee's base salary for possession

51 of 537

of a POST Intermediate and possession of a POST Advanced Certificate

B. Dispatch Personnel effective the first full period in January 2027.

 Two and one-half percent (2.5%) of employee's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate Certificate; OR
 Five percent (5%) of employee's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate and possession of a POST Advanced Certificate

18.4.18.3. Educational Incentive Pay-All Personnel

• Three percent (3%) for AA or AS degree
• Six percent (6%) for BA or BS degree

18.5. Certification for Public Safety Dispatcher

18.5.1. The City acknowledges that POST has established Public Safety Dispatcher Certificates, professional certificates awarded in recognition of meeting specified education, training, and service requirements. POST has not mandated participation in the public safety dispatcher professional certificates program. In the event the State requires additional POST certification for the Public Safety Dispatcher classification, the parties agree to reopen this section of the MOU, only.

18.6.18.4. Fitness Incentive Pay Program

18.6.1.18.4.1. The City will provide a physical fitness incentive pay of $50 per month ($600 per year). Participation is strictly voluntary and requires participants to re- qualify annually. The program will be administered by the Chief of Police or designee.

18.7.18.5. Bi-lingual Incentive Pay Program

18.7.1.18.5.1. The City shall provide bilingual incentive pay in the amount of 2.5% of base pay to an employee who meets the criteria outlined in the City's Bilingual Program. These requirements include:

• Demonstrated proficiency in a language other than English (including American Sign Language), which is used within the community; • Successfully meets and maintains the program requirements, including re- qualifying every two years.

18.8.18.6. CSO Assignment Pay

18.8.1.18.6.1. Effective the first full pay period following ratification of this agreement by the City Council, a 5% special assignment pay for a CSO position whose regular assignments include:

• Property/Evidence Officer
• Court Officer

18.7 Retention Pay – Sworn Personnel

52 of 537

Effective the first full pay period in January 2027, employees in the Police Officer or Police Corporal classifications that have at least seven (7) years of sworn City service shall receive one percent (1%) of the employee’s base salary as a retention pay premium. Effective the first full pay period in January 2028, the retention pay premium shall increase by one percent (1%) for a maximum of two percent (2%) of the employee’s base salary.

19. Uniform Allowance

19.1. Uniform Allowances: It is understood that this uniform allowance is provided for the purposes of employee's compliance with departmental uniform requirements and that it is the responsibility of each employee to be in compliance with the departmental requirements at all times.

19.2. Effective July 1, 20122026 sworn officers and non-sworn personnel of this unit shall receive an annual uniform allowance of nine hundred and fifty ($950). Said uniform allowance shall be paid in an equal amount in each pay period and reported within the earned period report lump sum distribution no later than September 1 annually.

19.3. The City shall pay the employee's CalPERS contribution for uniform allowance, in accordance with current CalPERS and government code requirements.

20. Permanent Part-Time

20.1. Employees occupying permanent part-time positions shall work such hours and schedules as prescribed by the appointing authority.

20.2. Permanent part-time employees assigned to allocated positions shall be entitled to sick leave, industrial disability leave, and vacation leave, in proportion to the number of hours of the work week such employee bears to the number of hours of regular work week for employees occupying full-time positions.

20.3. Permanent part-time employees assigned to allocated positions shall be entitled to holiday pay in proportion to the percentage of full-time hours worked during the pay period which includes a holiday; e.g., if a permanent part-time employee works 50% of the full-time hours in a pay period, the employee shall be paid for one-half of each holiday falling within that pay period.

20.4. Permanent part-time employees assigned to allocated positions who are employed for more than 1040 hours and not less than six months in any 12- month period shall be eligible to participate in the Life Insurance Group Policy.

20.5. Permanent part-time employees shall be entitled to medical insurance in accordance with the provisions of Section 34 of this Memorandum of Understanding.

20.6. All permanent part-time employees in this bargaining unit are included in the

53 of 537

City's PERS retirement program for miscellaneous employees.

20.7. For purpose of this section, "permanent part-time" shall apply only to the following classifications: Police Officer, Public Safety Dispatcher I/II, and Police Clerk I/II.

21. Holidays

21.1. The City provides 116 hours of holiday pay. The following are designated as holidays:

• New Year's Day
• Martin Luther King, Jr.
• Lincoln's Birthday
• President's Day
• Memorial Day
• Independence Day
• Labor Day
• Admission Day
• Veterans Day
• Thanksgiving Day
• Day after Thanksgiving Day
• Day before Christmas Day
• Christmas Day
• Employee's Birthday
• Good Friday (4 hours)

21.2. Unless a Holiday is taken as time off on the day it is observed, employees in this bargaining unit will be paid for the Holiday in the pay period which such Holiday occurs at a straight time rate unless otherwise provided for in this MOU. All Holidays listed above are eight (8) hour holidays except for Good Friday which is observed at four (4) hours.

21.3. Employees who perform work on Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's Day shall earn holiday pay at the rate of one and one-half (1- 1/2) times the hours worked. As used in this section, the term "perform work" means the scheduling date of the holiday, regardless if the working hours extend to the following date. For example, an employee assigned to work the day prior would not be entitled to the overlap hour(s) that extend into the particular holiday.

22. Vacation Leave

22.1. Vacation accrual and maximum accumulation for employees of this bargaining unit shall be as follows:

Years of Service Hours of Bi-
Weekly Accrual
Hours of Monthly
Accrual
Maximum
Accumulation
1-5 3.078 6.67 280

54 of 537

6-10 4.615 10.00 280
11 4.92 10.67 280
12 5.178 11.22 280
13 5.538 12.00 280
14 5.848 12.67 280
15 6.152 13.33 280
16-20 6.457 13.99 280
20-24 6.771 14.67 280
25+ 7.08 15.34 280

22.2. Employees of this bargaining unit shall receive notice of their bi-weekly accrual upon completion of each pay period.

22.3. With written permission from the City Manager, employees in this bargaining unit may accumulate 40 hours more than the maximum annual accumulation stated above.

22.4. Employees who terminate employment shall be paid in a lump sum for all unused vacation leave in accordance with the provisions of this section upon or prior to the date of termination.

22.5. No additional vacation leave credit will be earned should an employee exceed their maximum accrual hours set forth above. Employees will be provided an opportunity to request consideration to exceed this level if they have documented plans for use of vacation leave with a reasonable time period subject to approval by the City Manager or upon recommendation of the Chief of Police if the department is not able to allow an employee to use vacation leave time.

23. Sick Leave

23.1. Purpose. Sick leave shall not be considered a privilege which an employee may use at their discretion, but shall be allowed in case of necessity and actual sickness or disability, except as provided in Subsections 23.2.4 and Subsection

23.2.5. In addition, sick leave may be used by an employee, subject to the limiting conditions outlined in Section 24 Bereavement Leave.

23.2. Rate and conditions of accrual and utilization of sick leave.

23.2.1. For full-time employees, sick leave shall be accrued at the rate of eight (8) hours for each calendar month of service.

23.2.2. There shall be no limitation on the amount of sick leave the employees of this bargaining unit may accumulate.

23.2.3. Sick leave, vacation leave, holiday leave and seniority shall not accrue when the employee is on leave without pay.

23.2.4. In the event sick leave is taken by an employee instead of a leave of absence for

55 of 537

industrial disability granted by state law where there is a bona fide dispute between the City and the employee as to whether the disability is industrial, and such dispute is resolved in favor of the employee, any sick leave which was erroneously deducted from the employee's accumulated sick leave shall be restored to the employee.

23.2.5. The procedure for use of sick leave for employees in this bargaining unit shall be governed by San Bruno Police Department General Order No. 77-51, Appendix 2, Section as amended.

23.2.6. Availability for notification. An employee who is absent on sick leave is expected to be available to answer telephone calls and receive visits by or from a supervisor in relation to work-related matters. No employee shall unreasonably refuse to answer a telephone ca or receive a visit from a supervisory employee for such purpose.

23.2.7. Suspension of sick leave. When, in the sole opinion of the City Council, a job action exists, it shall have the authority to suspend the use of sick leave benefits for the duration of the job action, retroactive to the beginning of such job action.

As used herein, '10b action" includes, but is not limited to, any strike, slowdown, stoppage of work, curtailment of production, concerted refusal of overtime work, refusal to operate designated equipment, or to perform customary duties due to any labor dispute, or any concerted refusal to appear at any assigned workstation because of claimed or asserted sicknesses or disabilities.

23.2.8. Medical certificate. When an employee returns after an absence on sick leave in excess of one workday, the department head may require him/her to submit a certificate signed by a licensed physician indicating with dates of illness and other infor01mation as allowed by state and federal law.

23.2.9. If the employee has previously been counseled or warned in writing by a supervisor regarding abuse of sick leave, such certificate may be required by the department head after absence on sick leave for any amount of time. The City agrees to pay for the cost of obtaining such certificate to the extent that the employee's health insurance coverage does not do so.

23.2.10. Prescription Medication Notice. When an employee has been absent on sick leave, upon his/her return s/he shall advise supervisor of any prescription medication the employee is taking which may affect their ability to perform their job duties and any treating doctor if applicable.

23.2.11. Termination of employment. Upon termination of employment with the City as a result of retirement, death, or abolition of position, the following amount of unused sick leave shall be paid on termination of employment.

• Employees who have completed twenty (20) or more years of City service as a full- time employee: fifty percent (50%) of unused sick leave, or six hundred (600) hours, whichever is less.
• Other employees: Fifty percent (50%) of unused sick leave, or four hundred eighty (480) hours, whichever is less.

56 of 537

23.2.12. Sick leave on holidays. If an employee in the bargaining unit is on sick leave during a holiday, that day shall be treated as sick leave taken.

23.2.13. Family Sick Leave. Sick leave may be applied to whenever an employee is compelled to be absent from duty because the employee's presence is needed to attend to for the health condition of a "family member" as defined by state and federal law., provided that such absence shall be limited to 50% of their annual accrual with the same provisions as other sick leave.

23.2.14. Conversion of Vacation Leave to Sick Leave. The City may have the option of allowing vacation or comp time leave to be changed to sick leave when (and if) the employee was actually sick during use of this time off. The City shall review the merits of each situation on a case-by-case basis and require documentation substantiating that the employee requesting such leave time change was actually ill or injured and required treatment. The intent of this language is to allow for an employee who scheduled time off but was actually ill to have that time converted to sick leave. The intent is not to allow someone who is suffering from travel related associated stomach upset, jet lag or similar affliction to convert vacation time to sick leave. Documentation (doctor's statement or personal affidavit) of the need for treatment is a necessary element for approval of such conversion.

24. Bereavement Leave

24.1. In the event of a death in the immediate family of an employee, as defined in Section 7.4.5 the employee shall, upon written request, be granted such time off as is necessary to make arrangements for the funeral and attend same, not to exceed three regularly scheduled working days. This provision shall not apply if the death occurs while the employee is on leave of any kind other than vacation or compensatory time off. Only in the event that the funeral takes place at a location more than 150 miles away from the City of San Bruno, reasonable time off for travel will be allowed not to exceed one regularly scheduled working day.

24.2. For the purposes of this provision, the immediate family shall be restricted to father, mother, brother, sister, spouse, domestic partner, child, stepchild, foster child, mother-in- law, father-in-law, step-parent, grandparents, grandchildren, spouse's grandparents, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandchild or great- grandparent.

24.3. At the request of the City, the employee shall furnish a death certificate and proof of relationship.

24.4. Bereavement leave applies only in instances in which the employee attends the funeral, or is required to make funeral arrangements, but is not applicable for any other purpose such as settling the estate of the deceased.

25. Leave of Absence

25.1. The City Manager may grant a regular employee a leave of absence without pay

57 of 537

or benefits not to exceed one year. Requests for such leave shall be in writing and approved by the City Manager in writing. The City Manager may terminate such leave of absence upon notice to return to duty prior to scheduled expiration of the leave if the City Manager determines that the circumstances justifying the leave do not exist, or if the needs of the City justify termination of the leave.

Upon expiration of a regularly approved leave, or within a reasonable period of time after notice to return to duty, the employee shall be reinstated in the position held at the time leave was granted. "Reasonable time" shall be defined as ten (10) days unless an extension or need for an extension is identified and approved by the City Manager. Failure on the part of an employee on leave to report promptly at its expiration, or within a reasonable time after notice to return to duty, shall be cause for discharge.

25.2. An employee who has requested a leave of absence for medical reasons may be required to complete a fitness for duty evaluation to determine that the employee is capable of performing the duties of the job. The employee shall submit a medical certificate which indicates the employee's personal or treating physician is releasing them to return to duty. Any limitations or exceptions must be included in the medical certification. The City of San Bruno reserves the right, at its expense, to send the employee to a physician of its choice for further evaluation. The final determination as to whether the employee is fit for duty shall be made by the City Manager or designee.

26. Jury Duty Leave

26.1. Any employee who is called and required to serve as a trial juror shall be entitled to absent himself/herself from his/her duties during the period of such service or while necessarily being present in court as a result of such call. Under such circumstances, the employee shall be paid the difference between his/her full salary and any payment received by him/her, except travel pay, for such duty.

The employee shall notify the department when noticed to serve as a trial juror of the time and place of such duty.

26.2. Where an employee is required to serve as a juror during his/her scheduled work shift, if s/he is relieved of his/her required presence as a juror prior to the end of such shift, s/he shall report to work and complete the shift.

27. Leave for Court Appearances

27.1. An employee who has been subpoenaed as a witness in his/her official capacity shall be paid:

27.2. His/her regular salary if s/he is required to appear as a witness while scheduled to be on duty, or

27.3. One and one-half (1 1/2) times his/her regular salary if the employee is required to appear as a witness while scheduled to be off duty.

27.4. On a scheduled work day compensation shall be earned at a minimum of four (4)

58 of 537

hours at time and one-half, except when the beginning of the court appearance is scheduled within the three hour period immediately prior to duty. In such case, the employee shall receive three hours compensation at time and one-half.

27.5. Officers who complete their shift immediately prior to when they are scheduled to appear in court shall be entitled to the four hour minimum. For example, officers who are regularly scheduled to complete their shift at 0700 hours, who actually work in the morning prior to the court appearance and who appear in court prior to 1000 hours shall receive the four hour minimum. Supervisory personnel may require officers to remain on duty, but shall allow reasonable and sufficient time with pay for the officers to go home if necessary to have breakfast and prepare themselves for the appearance. If the court appearance continues after 1100 hours, all hours, or portions thereof pursuant to Section 14.1.4 worked after that time shall be at the overtime rate, paid in addition to the four hour minimum.

27.6. On a non-scheduled work day, compensation shall be earned at a minimum of four (4) hours at time and one-half.

27.7. An employee who has been subpoenaed as a witness in his/her private capacity shall not be paid for the time s/he is not on duty, but may use compensatory time, vacation time, holiday time, or shift exchange.

27.8. Employees on a scheduled work shift who testify as a witness, shall report to work and complete their scheduled shift upon being released from testifying.

27.9. On a non-scheduled work day the City shall not pay for an employee's lunch period during Northern Judicial District court appearance; the lunch period is hereby defined to be one-half hour in length. This restriction shall not apply in the case of the four (4) hour minimum as defined above.

27.10. In regards to changes in shift assignments made necessary by court appearances, the City reserves the right to alter shift assignments when the officer is given 48 hours prior notice to the start of his/her assigned shift. If an officer is not given 48 hours notice s/he shall have the option to work his/her regularly assigned shift up to a maximum of 15 consecutive hours. The City reserves the right to require an officer to work longer than the 15-hour maximum if the needs of the department so require.

27.11. If a person who is scheduled to work swing shift is required to appear in court during hours s/he is scheduled to be off duty and s/he has not been notified to shift adjustment within the above 48-hour period, the following rules shall apply:

27.12. If the court appearance ends before noon, the employee shall next report to work for his/her regular scheduled shift and shall be entitled to overtime compensation otherwise due him/her in accordance with the provisions of this section.

27.13. If the court appearance ends after noon, employee may, at his/her option, report to police headqua1iers and continue working until s/he has completed 10 hours of work for that day. S/he shall then be off duty until his/her next scheduled shift the following day. S/he shall not be entitled to overtime compensation under these circumstances. The employee shall advise their supervisor as to whether

59 of 537

the employee will elect to continue working on shift or not.

27.14. If the court appearance ends after noon, the employee may, upon the approval of the on- duty supervisor, continue to work until s/he has completed 15 hours work for that day. S/he shall be entitled to five (5) hours overtime compensation.

27.15. The City reserves the right to require employees to work in excess of 15 hours in a day if the department head determines that this is necessary to meet the operational needs of the department.

28. Military Leave

28.1. Military leave shall be provided for in accordance with state and federal law. Any organizational requirements should be contained in either the departmental or city administrative directive as developed by the City Manager.

29. Pregnancy Condition

29.1. Leave regarding pregnancy, birth, and/or adoption shall be governed by applicable state and federal law, as presently worded or subsequently amended.

29.2. Sick leave as provided for by the City for employee use when medically required.

Doctor's certification required.

29.3. Vacation leave when used in accordance with existing use provisions.

29.4. Compensatory Time Off or administrative leave available to the employee in accordance with existing use provisions.

29.5. In addition, the City shall provide leave time and/or benefits in accordance with the provisions of current and/or future California State law and federal law governing the birth or adoption of a child, parental leave rights and/or an individual employee's medical condition. The details and procedures outlining the City's compliance with these state and federal policies shall be outlined in city administrative directive as developed by the City Manager.

30. Industrial Disability Leave

30.1. Sworn personnel. Industrial disability leave for Police Officers shall be governed by Section 4850 of the Labor Code as presently constituted or subsequently amended.

30.2. Non-sworn Personnel. Any regular employee of the City who has suffered any disability arising out of and in the course of employment, as defined by the workers' compensation laws of the State of California, may be entitled to disability leave while disabled without loss of compensation for the period of such disability to a maximum of 60 days. Such disability with pay may be extended by

60 of 537

the City Manager not to exceed one year. The City Manager may call for medical examinations as frequently as would be reasonably necessary, given the nature and extent of the injury and the degree of change of condition within a given period of time, but shall not schedule examinations so frequently as to constitute harassment of the employee. The City may terminate industrial disability leave if a disability retirement is initiated.

31. State Disability Insurance as an Employee Paid Benefit

31.1. To the extent permitted by the State of California, the City agrees, as a 'fully employee paid' benefit and handled as an authorized employee payroll deduction, to enroll qualified employees subject to this Memorandum of Understanding into the State Disability Insurance (SDI) program if agreed to by members of the bargaining unit as a group.

31.2. The City shall facilitate coordination of benefits with regard to the use of authorized sick leave accruals used by an employee during such period(s) of time when such employee is drawing SDI insurance benefits relating to paragraph (a).

31.3. In no event shall an employee, during absence from work for an illness or disability where SDI benefits are paid, earn an amount of compensation greater than the straight- time wages regularly payable if the employee had actually worked.

32. Catastrophic Leave

32.1. The City shall provide for a Catastrophic Leave Program as outlined in city administrative directive as developed by the City Manager. The City agrees to meet and confer with the Union as to any changes in this administrative procedure.

33. Provision of Long-Term Disability Insurance

33.1. The City agrees to include personnel in this bargaining unit in a City-wide Long- Tenn Disability (LTD) insurance program at the City's expense.

34. Health and Welfare

34.1. An eligible employee with respect to whom monthly contributions are required shall mean any employee on the payroll on the first day of any calendar month who has been on the payroll of the City eighty (80) hours or more during the preceding calendar month, and shall otherwise be defined by Article I of the Teamsters Local 856 Trust by laws. Said contribution shall institute full compliance with and full performance of all obligations of the City to provide health and welfare benefits for its employees.

61 of 537

34.2. The City shall pay 75% and employee pays 25% of the health and welfare benefit premium increase over the prior plan year based on the cost of the plan options which they have selected.

• Beginning January 1, 2022 2026 through December June 310, 2025 2029 the City shall pay 75% and employee shall pay 25% of health and welfare benefit premium increase over the prior plan year.

34.3. Retiree Health Coverage

34.3.1. Employees in this unit participate in Retiree Plus Health Coverage established January 1, 2021. For terms of this contract, the City shall pay 75% and employee shall pay 25% of Retiree Plus Health Coverage premium.

34.3.2. Eligibility for any Retiree coverage: If you retire from employment with an employer who is making contributions for retiree coverage, you will be eligible for retiree benefits provided: (1) You were covered under this Plan for a total of 120 months, and (2) You were eligible for at least 12 continuous months immediately prior to the date of your retirement.

34.3.3. Eligibility for Retiree Plus Coverage: If you retire from employment with an employer who is making contributions for retiree coverage, you will be eligible for the reduced Monthly Self-Pay rate provided: (1) You have at least 240 months of coverage, and (2) 12 continuous months immediately prior to the date of your retirement with an employer who paid into the Retiree Plus Plan. If you have at least 120 months, but less than 240 months, you will be eligible for Retiree coverage but not for the reduced Monthly Self- Pay rate. Retirees are encouraged to review the Retiree Plus Health Coverage Plan Document for exceptions and enrollment deadlines.

34.4. Plan Restructure

34.4.1. The Plan year shall move to a calendar year cycle. Future year increases will be effective January 1.

34.4.2. There will be no retroactive payment of benefit premium cost increase before March 1, 2014.

34.5. “Opt out"

34.5.1. Employees who demonstrate possession of comparable health coverage may elect to opt out of the City health benefit.

34.5.1.1. An amount equal to 15% of the monthly premium shall be paid to the employee based on the composite rate with the 'no co-pay' prescription plan

34.5.1.2. An amount equal to 35% of the monthly premium shall be paid to the Trust based on the composite rate with the 'no co-pay' prescription plan

62 of 537

34.6. The Trust shall offer a "10/20" drug prescription option, which may be utilized at employees choice only

35. Flexible Benefits Program

35.1. City agrees to make available an IRS Section 125 Flexible Benefits Program consistent with applicable IRS provisions. Such a program may have an employee cost to participate.

36. Life Insurance

36.1. The City shall provide, at its expense, a term life insurance group policy for Teamster Local 856 members covered under this agreement, in an amount equal to the employee's annual base salary as stated in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding. Income tax consequences, in conformance with IRS regulations, will be the responsibility of the employee. All employees earning under $50,000, will have a life insurance benefit of $50,000.

36.2. Said employees shall be entitled to purchase, at their own expense, additional term life insurance to the extent permitted by the policy carrier under such terms and conditions as are customarily imposed by such carrier in its normal course of business.

37. Retirement and Retirement Related Benefits

37.1. PERS Membership

37.1.1. Safety Retirement

37.1.1.1. "Classic" employees in sworn public safety classifications shall continue to be covered by the PERS three percent (3%)@ 50 retirement benefit option. Employees shall continue to contribute 9% of pensionable compensation.

37.1.1.2. The retirement contract in effect on December 1, 1984, between the City of San Bruno and the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) on behalf of eligible employees of this unit shall be continued during the term of this Memorandum of Understanding. Final compensation for purposes of calculating retirement benefits shall be based upon the "highest year" method under the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).

37.1.1.3. 'Credit for Unused Sick Leave' is an additional retirement benefit option that is available for sworn public safety members of the bargaining unit under the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS).

The Credit for Unused Sick Leave' benefit is mandated by CalPERS for all risk pooled plans, and this benefit will continue to be offered as long as the City continues to be required by CalPERS to stay in the risk pool. At retirement, an employee must notify the City as to how they wish to apply

63 of 537

their accrued, but unused sick leave balance: as cash (as specified in Sec 18.l l(b)(11); or as PERS sick leave credit; or a combination of these options.

37.1.1.4. For employees hired on or after January 1, 2013, their retirement shall be as provided by the California Public Employees' Retirement Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) and AB340 and AB197). PEPRA members shall pay member contributions pursuant to Government Code Section 7522.30, which shall be at least 50% of normal cost as determined annually by CalPERS, and expressed as a percentage of payroll.

37.1.2. Miscellaneous Retirement

37.1.2.1. Employees in other classifications set forth in Exhibit "A" shall continue to be covered by the PERS Miscellaneous 2.7% @ 55 retirement benefit option.

37.1.2.2. Effective the first pay period after 7/1/05 the City will resume liability for the total agency contribution.

37.1.2.3. The retirement contract in effect on December 1, 1984, between the City of San Bruno and the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) on behalf of eligible employees of this unit shall be continued during the term of this Memorandum of Understanding. Final compensation for purposes of calculating retirement benefits shall be based upon the "highest year" method under the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).

37.1.2.4. For employees hired on or after January 1, 2013, their retirement shall be as provided by the California Public Employees' Retirement Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) and AB340 and AB197. PEPRA members shall pay member contributions pursuant to Government Code Section 7522.30, which shall be at least 50% of normal cost as determined annually by CalPERS, and expressed as a percentage of payroll.

37.2. Deferred Compensation

37.2.1. Consistent with the provisions of Resolution No. 1984-48 Authorizing and Approving a Deferred Compensation Plan. for Participating Employees and Replacement of Resolution No. 1983-42, the City shall permit employees of the bargaining unit, to the extent permitted by law, to voluntarily participate in one of the City's designated deferred compensation programs.

37.2.2. The City agrees to make available at least two (2) different deferred compensation providers at the City's discretion. No mandatory City contributions to such plans or administrative expense shall be required of the City. Costs charged to an employee's individual deferred compensation account by the plan provider shall not be deemed to be an administrative cost of the City.

37.2.3. The City agrees to meet and confer with the union, at their request, should the Internal Revenue Code be amended so as to adversely impact the intended purpose of the of the adopted deferred compensation program. However, it is

64 of 537

understood that the City must adhere to all Internal Revenue Code provisions and regulations applicable to a deferred compensation program.

37.2.4. The City shall continue to offer deferred compensation plans. No mandatory City contributions to such plans or administrative expense shall be required of the City in addition to the contributions made or administrative expense incurred by the City as of February 28, 1985. Costs charged to an employee's individual deferred compensation account by the carrier shall not be deemed to be an administrative cost of the City.

37.3. 1959 Survivor's Benefits and Long Term Disability

37.3.1. The City shall continue in effect as an employer paid employee benefit the current PERS retirement plan option relating to 1959 Survivor's Benefits [Level II and then changed to Level IV as outlined below] and the Long-Term Disability program described in Resolution No. 1980-85 Adopting and Approving a Long- Term Disability Program.

37.4. Change in 1959 Survivor's Benefit Level

37.4.1. The City provides Level IV 1959 Survivor's Benefits for local safety members. It is understood that there is an increased cost to both the employer (agency) and member (employee) rate. The association has agreed that all employees in the bargaining unit shall be responsible, through payroll deduction, for paying both the appropriate member (employee) rate for this program and any employer contribution which exceeds $2.50 per month. As of this date, current employee cost is projected to be $2.00 per month and current employer cost is projected to be $8.50 per month resulting in an individual employee payroll deduction of $8.00 per month. These costs may change by implementation date and the then current costs shall be used to determine the accurate employee payroll deduction amount. Please note that the City also provides a Long-Term Disability (LTD) program.

38. Tuition Reimbursement Program

38.1. The provisions of this section shall apply to all positions in the unit:

The City will pay the costs of books and tuition at accredited public institution equivalent to the San Francisco State University (SFSU) tuition rate. If the course is at a private institution, the approval of the City Manager or designee is required, and the City reserves the right to reimburse only a portion of the tuition up to the maximum tuition rate equivalent to SFSU. The institution may be located in any one of the nine Bay Area counties, or another accredited institution that allows for remote or asynchronous learning. For all employees hired into the unit after the date of ratification of a past amended contract (effective date March 13, 2018), the maximum tuition reimbursement shall be equivalent to the SFSU (San Francisco State University) tuition for the appropriate program level (undergraduate or graduate) for part time (six units or less per semester) enrollment, and shall not be reimbursed through the City's

65 of 537

other reimbursement programs.

38.1.1. The courses of instruction taken by the employee must be job related and the employee must have obtained the prior approval of the department head Police Chief, City Manager, or designee and the City Manager, if appropriate, prior to taking the course in order to be entitled to reimbursement.

38.1.2. The employee must receive a passing grade in order to receive reimbursement and must be employed by the City at the start of the eligible course(s).

38.1.3. Reimbursement will be made upon submission to the City of written evidence that the employee obtained a passing grade in the approved course, and reimbursement will be subject to appropriate IRS regulations.

39. Discipline

39.1. The City may discharge, suspend, demote, reduce salary, or otherwise discipline any employee for cause including, but not limited to, dishonesty, insubordination, drunkenness, incompetence, willful negligence, failure to perform work as required or failure to comply with or violation of the City's reasonable rules regarding safety conduct and operations. Any employee who has been subject to such discipline shall be furnished the reasons for such action in writing with a copy of such letter furnished to the Union.

39.2. Letters of Reprimand Not Subject to Grievance Procedure

39.2.1. Notwithstanding any other provision of this MOU, a Letter of Reprimand issued by the City to any employee shall be handled only in accordance with the provisions of this section, and shall not be subject to the grievance procedure as provided in Section 41.

39.2.2. The employee shall have thirty (30) days within which to file a written response.

Such written response shall be attached to, and shall accompany the Letter of Reprimand.

39.2.3. An employee may request that a Letter of Reprimand be purged from his/her work record after the specific duration set forth in the Letter of Reprimand, or after a period of twenty-four (24) months if no time period is specified in the letter, or as required by law. Such removal is subject to the approval of the Department Head.

39.2.4. Within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of a Letter of Reprimand, the employee may, in writing, appeal such to the City Manager for administrative review. The City Manager shall, after affording the employee the opportunity to personally meet with him or her, consider the basis for issuance and such written and/or oral objections presented by the employee. Thereafter, the City Manager shall either affirm, rescind, otherwise modify the disciplinary action.

39.2.5. In the event a Letter of Reprimand issued subject to this section is subsequently used to evidence that progressive disciplinary action has been considered in

66 of 537

determining the extent of a more severe disciplinary action, such letter(s) with any employee response attached thereto as provided in Section 39.2.2 shall be submitted on appeal to the reviewing authority for such consideration as the reviewing authority deems appropriate.

39.3. Pre-disciplinary Hearings

39.3.1. No regular employee shall be demoted, suspended, or discharged for a disciplinary purpose except in accordance with the provisions of this section; provided, however, that this section shall not apply to suspensions of less than 40 hours.

39.3.2. Whenever the City Manager proposes to demote, suspend, or discharge a regular employee in a case in which this section is applicable, the City Manager shall conduct an informal hearing at which the employee shall have the right to respond to the charges. The City Manager shall provide the employee with written notice of the hearing not less than five days prior thereto.

39.3.3. The notice shall state the nature of the proposed disciplinary action and the reasons therefore. The notice shall also include a copy of the charges and materials upon which the proposed action is based.

39.3.4. At the hearing, the employee shall have the right to present an oral or written response to the proposed action. Thereafter, the City Manager shall determine, based upon such response and the materials upon which the proposed action was based, whether to impose the action initially imposed, lesser action, or to take no action. The City Manager shall promptly notify the employee in writing of such decision.

39.3.5. If, prior to the hearing, the employee presents to the City Manager a written request that the City Manager disqualify himself/herself from conducting the hearing due to bias or prejudice, the City Manager shall assign a designee having no supervisory control over the employee to conduct the hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer shall recommend to the City Manager the disciplinary action to be taken, if any, and the City Manager shall make a determination and promptly notify the employee in writing of such decision.

40. Suspension

40.1. Suspensions Without Pay

40.1.1. An employee in a classification of employment set forth in Appendices "A" hereto may be suspended without pay for a disciplinary purpose.

40.1.2. A department head shall have the power to suspend a subordinate employee without pay for not more than 40 hours. The department head shall immediately notify the City Manager of the suspension in writing. The City Manager shall have the power to rescind, extend, or reduce the suspension.

67 of 537

40.1.3. The City Manager shall have the power to suspend a subordinate employee for an amount of time the City Manager deems appropriate.

40.1.4. It is the intent of this section to allocate to the department head the power to impose minor suspensions without the approval of the City Manager, but with immediate notice to him/her, to enable the department head to take immediate action to remedy employee misconduct which may pose an immediate threat to the health, safety, or welfare of other employees or to the public at large.

40.2. Administrative Leave with Pay

40.2.1. An immediate supervisor, a department head, or the City Manager shall have the power to suspend a subordinate employee with pay pending investigation of a matter in which the employee may be involved which may lead to disciplinary action against the employee, or pending consideration of possible disciplinary action against the employee, or where the employee's continued presence would, in the judgment of the supervisor, department head, or City Manager, jeopardize the employee's health or safety or that of others. An immediate supervisor making such suspension shall immediately notify the department head, who shall immediately notify the City Manager in writing. The department head or the City Manager may terminate such suspension. A department head making such suspension shall immediately notify the City Manager in writing.

The City Manager shall have the power to rescind, extend, or reduce administrative leave with pay.

41. Grievance Procedure

41.1. Definition. A grievance is any dispute which involves the interpretation or application of any provision of this Memorandum of Understanding during its term, or any provision of the Personnel Rules, or written rules of the Police Department. All ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations, the subject of which is not specifically covered by this Memorandum of Understanding, the Personnel Rules, or the Police Department rules, are excluded from the grievance procedure, and are not covered by the procedures set forth in this section.

41.2. Initial presentation. The initial (fast level) presentation of a grievance shall be to the immediate supervisor of the employee claiming to have a grievance. The grievance may be either oral or in writing. If made in writing, the grievance shall comply with the requirement of Subsection 41.3 for a formally presented grievance.

41.3. Formal presentation. The formal presentation of a grievance shall be written and shall state which provision of this Memorandum of Understanding, Personnel Rules, or Police Department rule has been misapplied to the detriment of the grievant and shall indicate the redress sought. The grievance shall be signed by the individual or Union presenting the grievance. In the event that more than one individual is alleged to be aggrieved, the grievance may be signed by a duly authorized representative of the Union, in which case the grievance shall indicate the names of the persons on whose behalf it is filed. In the event the person to

68 of 537

whom the grievance is presented dete1mines that the grievance is defective on its face, s/he shall reply in writing to the filer within twelve days after receiving the grievance, indicating in writing the specific defects. The reply shall specify that the grievant has twelve days to correct the defects or the grievance shall be deemed to be withdrawn. If the grievance is not corrected within said 12-day period, it shall be deemed to have been withdrawn. This subsection is intended to avoid unnecessar1y grievances. The failure of an individual to file a grievance in a particular situation does not of itself establish a past practice.

41.4. Department Head. A grievance which is not settled at the first level may, within twelve days of the decision of the supervisor, be appealed in writing to the department hbead. If so appealed, the grievance, unless previously formally presented, shall be presented as provided in Subsection 41.3. The department head shall render his/her decision and comments in writing and return them to the employee within twelve days after receipt of the for01mal grievance.

41.5. Power of immediate supervisors and department heads in resolving grievances.

In the resolution or decision of a grievance, no immediate supervisor or department head shall modify any procedure or rule within the department unless and until s/he shall have received the written approval of the City Manager. However, the immediate supervisor and department head may interpret and apply existing procedures or rules.

41.6. City Manager. A grievance which is not settled at the department head level may be appealed in writing to the City Manager within 12 days of the decision of the department head. Within 12 days after receipt of the appeal, the City Manager shall set a date, which is not more than 12 days from the date of receipt of the appeal, to meet with the grievant and with other appropriate persons to attempt to resolve the grievance. If a solution is not agreed upon, the City Manager shall render a decision within 12 days of the meeting.

41.7. Time limits. Grievance shall he filed within 15 days of the incident or occurrence about which the employee claims to have a grievance, except that a grievance may be filed within 30 days of such incident or occurrence if the employee can show that within 15 days of the occurrence s/he did not have actual knowledge of the occurrence or had no reason to know of it.

41.8. Representation. The grievant shall have the right at all steps of the grievance procedure to be represented by a person or organization of his/her own choosing; provided, however, that if the grievant is not represented by the Union, s/he shall present to the City a written waiver of his/her right to be represented by the Union and shall hold the Union harmless from any liability to him/her arising from the lack of Union representation.

41.9. Effect of a grievance. The making or filing of a grievance shall not prevent the City or any authorized employee of the City from taking action deemed appropriate, nor shall it have the effect of suspending action previously taken, even though the action may involve or be part of the subject matter of the grievance. The fact that any employee, including a probationary employee, has filed a grievance or has authorized the Union to file a grievance shall not be taken into account in any evaluation of his/her work performance. The failure of

69 of 537

an individual to file a grievance in a particular situation does not of itself establish a past practice.

41.10. Disciplinary matters. In the event an employee feels that a discharge, suspension, or demotion is unjust, the employee shall have the right to appeal the case through the grievance procedure by filing a grievance through the City Manager within 12 days from the date the employee was notified of the action.

41.11. Untimely appeals shall not be entertained under the grievance procedure; provided, however, that the City Manager in his/her sole discretion may allow the filing of an appeal of a disciplinary action within 30 days from the date the employee was notified of the action if the City Manager determines that the failure of the employee or his/her representative to file the appeal within the normal 12-day period was the result of excusable neglect or inadvertence.

41.12. Upon the timely filing of a grievance, the provisions of Subsections 41.22 through

41.26, inclusive, shall apply. The discharge of probationary employees shall not be subject to the grievance procedure.

41.13. Decisions of arbitrators and adjustment boards on matters properly before them shall be final and binding on the parties hereto, except as provided in this paragraph. The arbitrator and adjustment boards shall only have the power to reduce the discipline imposed if it is determined that the degree of discipline imposed was arbitrarily excessive. Such decision shall not be deemed to have been arbitrarily excessive unless the arbitrator shall have evaluated and made specific findings regarding the following:

• The employee's work record and performance evaluations; • The employee's prior disciplinary record;
• The seriousness of the conduct for which discipline was imposed; • The impact of such conduct upon police operations;
• The frequency of occurrence of such conduct;
• The effect of such conduct upon community safety and the safety of fellow officers;
• In the case of discharge, the effect of the employee's continued employment on community safety, safety of fellow officers, and the integrity of delivery of police services;
• In the case of discharge, the effect of the recurrence of such conduct on police department morale;
• The likelihood of recurrence of such conduct;
• The existence of mitigating factors related to the conduct, which shall be specified.

41.14. In making such evaluation and findings, arbitrator shall be guided by prior arbitration decisions, prior court decisions, and the history of prior discipline within the police department.

41.15. The decision of the adjustment board or arbitrator is final.

41.16. In the event the adjustment board or arbitrator has evaluated the above criteria and has rendered an award with a different level of discipline than that initially

70 of 537

imposed by the City, it shall be concluded that the adjustment board or arbitrator has found that the initial discipline was arbitrarily excessive.

41.17. Days. The time limits provided herein refer to calendar days.

41.18. Waiver of time limits. The time limits provided herein may be waived by the mutual consent of the parties.

41.19. Determination of arbitrator or adjustment board. A grievance which is not settled by the City Manager may be appealed in writing for final determination. The written notice of appeal must be filed with the City Manager within 12 days of the date of his/her written decision.

41.20. If the grievance is of a disciplinary action consisting of a suspension of less than 30 days (the words", a reprimand," deleted on 4/1/87) or another action where there is no discharge, demotion, or reduction in pay, the grievance shall be submitted to an adjustment board comprised of two employee representatives and two representatives of the City. No decision of the adjustment board shall be final and binding without receiving the affirmative votes of at least three members. The parties may mutually agree to submit other types of grievances to the adjustment board.

41.21. If the grievance is of a disciplinary action consisting of a discharge, a suspension of 30 days or more, a demotion, or a reduction in pay, or a dispute which involves the interpretation or application of any provision of this Memorandum of Understanding, any provision of the Personnel Rules, or written rules of the Police Department, or a dispute which has been submitted to an adjustment board and the board has been unable to arrive at a majority decision, the grievance shall be submitted to an arbitrator.

41.22. Selection of arbitrator or adjustment board. Within 12 days after the filing of the appeal, the City Manager or Human Resources Director and the grievant shall meet or otherwise communicate to select an adjustment board or mutually acceptable arbitrator, as the case may be, who agree to serve. Where the matter is to go to arbitration, if the parties cannot agree, a list of five arbitrators will be obtained from the California State Conciliation Service, American Arbitration Association, or some other source mutually agreed upon.

If the parties cannot agree on one of the names on the list, each party (beginning by lot) shall alternately strike one name from the list until one name remains, who shall be the arbitrator if s/he agrees to serve. If s/he will not serve, the process shall be repeated until an arbitrator is found.

41.23. Decision. The decision of the arbitrator shall be in writing and shall set forth the findings of fact and conclusions on the issues. It shall be submitted to the City Manager and the grievant and shall be final and binding upon the parties.

41.24. Changes in Memorandum of Understanding not arbitrable. Proposals to add to or change this Memorandum of Understanding or written agreements or addenda supplementary hereto shall not be arbitrable, and no proposal to modify, amend, or terminate this Memorandum of Understanding, nor any subject matter a1ising

71 of 537

out of or in connection with such proposal, may be referred to arbitration under this section. Neither any adjustment board nor arbitrator shall have the power to modify this Memorandum of Understanding or written agreements or addenda supplementary thereto, or to establish any new terms and conditions of employment.

41.25. Limitation. No adjustment board or arbitrator shall entertain, hear, decide, or make recommendations on any dispute unless such dispute falls within the definition of a grievance, as set forth in Subsection 41.1 above.

41.26. Costs. The fees of the arbitrator (including any per diem expenses, travel and subsistence expenses), the cost of any hearing room, and the cost of preparing the transcript of the hearing, if any, for the arbitrator shall be borne one-half by the City and one-half by the grievant. All other costs and expenses shall be borne by the party incurring them.

41.27. Exclusiveness of remedy. The grievance procedure shall be the exclusive remedy for matters which are grievable thereunder.

41.28. All grievances involving or concerning the payment of compensation shall be initially filed in writing with the Chief of Police. In such cases no adjustment shall be retroactive for more than 30 days from the date upon which the grievance was filed.

42. Leaving Work for Personal Business

42.1. Employees shall not be permitted to leave work for the conduct of personal business or non-emergency doctor and dental appointments.

42.2. Employees may request from their supervisor a rescheduling of work to allow them to go to doctor and dental appointments without loss of accrued leave.

42.3. If there is a rescheduling, the employee must still work a full shift. The operational needs of the department shall be the criterion from which rescheduling decisions are made.

43. Safety Equipment

43.1. In recognition of Labor Code Section 6401 and Government Code Section 5008.1, the City will furnish to full-time personnel designated as peace officers as defined by Penal Code Section 830.1 (1981 Statutes) the following identified items constituting safety equipment:

• Duty Firearm (1)
• Firearm Holster (1)
• Equipment Belt (1)
• Sufficient Rounds of Ammunition and Holder (1)
• Baton and Baton Holder (1)
• Rain Coat and Rain Pants (1)

72 of 537

• Chemical Agent and Chemical Agent Holder (1)
• Knife(1)
• Handcuffs and Holder (1)
• Flashlight (1)
• Whistle (1)
• Rainboots (1 Pair)
• Black Rain Cap (1)
• Ballistic Vest (1)
• Service Emblems According to Department Policy (1)
• Field Utility Uniform (1)
• Riot Helmet (1)
• Patrol Boots (1 Pair)
• Bicycle Shirt (1)
• Bicycle Shorts (One Pair)
• Quick Code (Penal and Vehicle Code) (1)
• Taser with Holster (1)
• Taser Cartridges
• Taser Cartridge Holster
• Biochemical Bag (1)

Bicycle Personnel only

• Bicycle Shirt (1)
• Bicycle Shorts (One Pair)

• Motorcycle Personnel only
• Leather Jacket (1)
• Breeches (1)
• Leather Boots (1 Pair)
• Safety Glasses (1 Pair)
• Leather Gloves (1 Pair)
• Motorcycle Helmet

43.2. Prior to purchasing the above mentioned equipment, the City will meet and confer with the Union to consider recommendations from the Union on quality and brand of such equipment.

43.3. Such Safety equipment shall remain the property of the City and shall be subject to such City-adopted specification and operating procedures as deemed necessary by the City.

43.4. The wearing of ballistic vests is required as outlined in the Police Department Policy Manual and the City shall not be responsible for the death or injury attributable to the failure of wearing such vests except as is presently provided by workers compensation law.

44. Loss of Driver's License

44.1. An employee whose driver's license is suspended or revoked for a period of six (6) months or less so as to prevent him/her from lawfully operating a vehicle

73 of 537

during the course of his/her duties, where operating a vehicle is part of the regular course of employment, shall be suspended without pay or benefits for that period. If the loss of such driver's license is attributable to the use of alcohol or drugs, the employee shall agree to and shall faithfully participate in a counseling and rehabilitation program agreed to by the City to correct the problem, if requested to do so by the City Manager. Failure to agree and to faithfully participate in such a program shall constitute a cause for dismissal.

44.2. Any suspension or revocation of the driver's license of an employee for a period of more than six (6) months which prevents him/her from lawfully operating a vehicle during the course of his duties, where operating a vehicle is a part of the regular course of employment, or any failure of an employee to notify the City of any suspension or revocation of his/her driver's license, regardless of duration, shall constitute a cause for dismissal.

44.3. If an employee does not have a valid driver's license for reasons other than suspension or revocation of such license, the City may direct the employee to acquire his/her license within the next working day of the Department of Motor Vehicles. All time missed from work shall be deducted from accumulated vacation, holiday, or compensatory time. If the employee does not acquire his/her license within the required time, s/he shall be treated as if his/her license had been suspended or revoked for a period of six months or less.

45. Disaster Responsibility

45.1. When a significant disaster, as defined by the Police Chief or City Manager, or designee, occurs in San Bruno, employees in classifications set forth in Appendix "A" of this Memorandum of Understanding shall report to the City of San Bruno San Bruno Police station for duty upon notification; provided, however, where a natural or man-made disaster is of such magnitude that a reasonable person would think to respond, no notification is necessary.

46. No Strike

46.1. Participation in any job action, as defined in Subsection 23.2.7 of this Memorandum of Understanding, by an employee pertaining to his/her employment with the City of San Bruno shall constitute an automatic resignation from the position, which position shall be deemed for all purposes to be vacant.

47. Patronizing Businesses Subject to Job Actions

47.1. The City will make reasonable efforts to avoid obtaining materials, supplies, and equipment from businesses within the City that are the subject of a job action if there are reasonable alternative sources within the cities of Millbrae, San Bruno, or South San Francisco. This will not apply to materials, supplies, or equipment which the City is legally required to obtain from a particular source due to competitive bidding requirements or other contractual obligations. In the event that such items are to be picked up at a place of business which is the subject of

74 of 537

such a job action, the City shall refrain from the use of bargaining unit employees to obtain them if other alternatives are reasonably available. ln times of emergency, this paragraph will not be applicable. For purposes of this paragraph, "emergency" is defined as an immediate threat to life and property.

The Union shall be notified when the "emergency" exception is to be invoked.

48. Attendance

48.1. Failure on the part of an employee, absent without leave, to return to duty within 24 hours after notice to return shall be cause for immediate discharge, and such employee automatically waives all rights under the Personnel Ordinance, Rules and Regulations, and this Memorandum of Understanding. Notice shall consist of a letter by registered or certified mail delivered to the last-known address of the employee.

49. Past Practices and Existing Memorandum of Understanding

49.1. Continuance of working conditions and practices not specifically provided herein or authorized by ordinance or resolution of the City Council shall not be guaranteed by this Memorandum of Understanding.

49.2. Specific provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding shall supersede all existing and prior Memoranda of Understanding between City and the Union, Personnel Rules, Regulations, and Ordinances on the same subject.

50. Negotiable Benefits

50.1. The inclusion of certain benefits in this Memorandum of Understanding shall not preclude the City and the Union from meeting and conferring and agreement upon other or substituted benefits in subsequent Memoranda of Understanding.

51. Severability of Provisions

51.1. Should any section, clause, or provision of this Memorandum of Understanding be declared illegal by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidation of such section, clause or provisions shall not invalidate the remaining portions hereof, and such remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect for the duration of this Memorandum of Understanding.

51.2. In the event of such invalidation, the parties agree to meet and confer concerning substitute provisions for the provisions rendered or declared illegal.

52. Lunch Break and Rest Periods and Shift Schedule Changes

52.1. Police Clerk I/Il's shall be entitled to one (1) fifteen (15) minute rest period in the first half of a shift and a one (1) fifteen (15) minute rest period in the second half

75 of 537

of a shift. In addition, Police Clerk I/II's shall be entitled a thirty (30) minute, non- paid, uninterrupted lunch period near the middle of their shift. In case of an emergency, as determined by the department, a Police Clerk I/II may be called back to work. In such case the lost lunch time will be provided later in the shift or overtime if the lost lunch time cannot be provided during the shift. If a Police Clerk I/II leaves the premises for lunch, 15 minutes total travel shall be added to the 30-minute lunch break. Note: Reference to Police Secretary removed.

52.2. Public Safety Dispatcher I/IIs shall be entitled to one (1) fifteen (15) minute rest period in the first half of a shift and a one (1) fifteen (15) minute rest period in the second half of a shift. In addition, Public Safety Dispatcher I/IIs shall be entitled to a thirty (30) minute, paid lunch period on the premises, near the middle of their shift, subject to immediate response and subject to working a 10 hour shift including the lunch period.

52.3. The Police Department's General Orders will be updated to reflect that the shift schedule change will occur in the months of March and September.

53. Resolution of Impasses

53.1. In the event that the parties to this Memorandum of Understanding fail to successfully negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding to succeed this one, and either party declares an impasse, the parities shall proceed to mediation pursuant to Resolution No. 1970-20, as amended, and if that procedure does not resolve the dispute, the parties shall proceed to advisory fact-finding, the result of which shall be kept confidential. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement after the conclusion of such fact-finding, the Union shall not be precluded from conducting informational picketing on City premises in accordance with state and federal law; provided, that the Union, its officers, and representatives shall not prevent any City employee from reporting to work.

54. Term

54.1. This Memorandum of Understanding, entered into on the, shall remain in effect for those employees employed in the classifications set forth in Appendices "A" and "A-1" for the period from January l, 20226 through December June 301, 20259 except to the extent that such Memorandum of Understanding may be modified by the parties during such period, and shall continue in full force and effect until either superseded by a subsequent Memorandum of Understanding or by such other action of the City Council affecting wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the employees in classifications covered by this Memorandum of Understanding.

54.2. This Memorandum of Understanding is a compilation of the previous memorandum of Understanding, with modifications negotiated by and between the parties, and thereafter approved pursuant to San Bruno City Council Resolution 2026-##2-33.

76 of 537

For the City of San Bruno For the San Bruno Police Bargaining Unit, Represented by the Professional and
Vocational Employees Division of Teamsters
Local 856, IBT

Alex D. McIntyreJovan D. Grogan,
City Manager

Peter Finn, Secretary/Treasurer/Principal
Officer, Teamsters 856

Date

City Bargaining Team
J. Dianos
B. Dunphy
D. Jacobson
J. Jimenez
D. Torres-Wong

Date

Union Bargaining Team
C. Anisko
A. Calderon
P. Hoffmann
T. Ledesma
M. Lindblom
O. Reich

56. Appendix A. Salary Schedule

Effective first full pay period following in January 1, 20226

STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5
Police Officer 8,561 9,010 9,483 9,981 10,505
Police Corporal 9,203 9,686 10,195 10,730 J 1,293
Public Safety Dispatcher I 6,695 7,047 7,417 7,806 8,216 Public Safety Dispatcher II 7,363 7,750 8,157 8,585 9,036 Police Clerk I 5,133 5,403 5,687 5,986 6,300
Police Clerk II 5,648 5,944 6,256 6,584 6,930
Community Services Officer 4,782 5,033 5,297 5,575 5,868 Code Enforcement Officer I 6,401 6,737 7,091 7,463 7,855 Code Enforcement Officer II 7,041 7,411 7,800 8,209 8,640 Senior Code Enforcement
Officer
7,924 8,340 8,778 9,239 9,724

77 of 537

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856, IBT (POLICE UNIT)

Initial Police Corporal Classification Appointments

WHEREAS the City of San Bruno (City) and Teamsters Local 856,IBT (Police) are parties to a Memorandum of Understanding effective January 1, 2022 and expiring December 31, 2025 (MOU) for employees in the Police bargaining unit;

WHEREAS pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the Parties agreed to establish a Police Corporal job classification that is included in the list of classifications represented by the Police bargaining unit with base wages equal to seven and one-half percent (7.5%) above the base pay of a Step 5 Police Officer;

WHEREAS prior to the adoption of the MOU, four (4) employees in the Police Officer Job classification were designated as Corporals; a special assignment receiving a five percent (5%) special assignment premium;
WHEREAS the four (4) employees in the Police Officer job classification were previously selected by the Chief of Police to serve in the Corporal special assignment, performed the duties and responsibilities of the Police Corporal job classification, and satisfy the requirements for promotion to the newly established Police Corporal job classification;

WHEREAS the Parties have met and conferred in good faith and agreed that the four (4) employees previously serving in the Corporal special assignment will be promoted to the Police Corporal job classification.

NOW THEREFORE, the City and Teamsters Local 856 agree that the following individuals are promoted to the Police Corporal job classification:

1. Miseal Covarrubias

2. Aaron Wong

3. Chris Anisko

4. Thomas Tangataevaha

Additionally, pursuant to the terms of the MOU, each individual shall receive back pay to March 22, 2022 for any compensation due to the employee corresponding with the seven and one-half percent (7.5%) base wage Increase, offset by compensation paid to the employee for the Corporal special assignment premium.

FOR THE CITY FOR THE UNION

___________________________ ___________________________ Peter Finn, Secretary-Treasurer
Date: Date: October 7, 2022

78 of 537

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 856, IBT (POLICE UNIT)

Property and Evidence
Technician

WHEREAS the City of San Bruno (City) and Teamsters Local 856, IBT (Police) are parties to a Memorandum of Understanding effective January 1, 2022 and expiring December 31, 2025 (MOU) for employees in the Police bargaining unit;

WHEREAS pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the Parties agreed to participate in a classification and compensation study of the Community Services Officer (digital and physical evidence only) job classification and meet and confer regarding implementing any negotiable changes.

WHEREAS the City thereafter contracted with Bryce Consulting to prepare a classification and compensation study of the Community Services Officer (digital and physical evidence only) job classification.

WHEREAS Bryce Consulting's recommendation found:

Based on a review of the duties, the classification of Community Services Officer is not appropriate for the duties being performed. The Community Services Officer is primarily for field positions performing tasks related to investigations and enforcing laws not requiring a sworn officer. The positions under review do not participate in field duties but rather receive, process, maintain, destroy and prepare for the District Attorney's Office in addition to preparing documentation and evidence for the District Attorney's Office. In addition, the positions require knowledge of chain of custody and laws surrounding the release and destruction of property. Because of the specialized knowledge, it is not uncommon for agencies to have a separate classification specific to property and evidence. For example, Daly City, Foster City, Menlo Park, Pacifica, Redwood City, San Mateo and South San Francisco all have classifications specific to property and evidence.

Consistent with industry practice, the recommendation is for the City to adopt the classification of Property and Evidence Technician and the positions allocated accordingly.

With respect to salary, the salary and benefits for Community Services Officer was compared to the labor market for the property and evidence function.

The City is 21.86% below the labor market median for maximum base salary,

14.21% below for total cash and 11.87% below market for total compensation.

WHEREAS the City and Teamsters Local 856, IBT have met and conferred regarding the job specifications for a newly created Property and Evidence Technician job classification and

79 of 537

establishing wages for the classification to ensure that the City is able to successfully recruit and retain qualified personnel in the Property and Evidence Technician job classification.

WHEREAS prior to the adoption of the MOU, two (2) employees in the Community Services Officer were designated as working assignments primarily concerned with digital and physical evidence;

WHEREAS the Parties have further met and conferred in good faith and agreed that the two (2) Community Services Officer employees primarily concerned with digital and physical evidence will be reclassified into the newly created Property and Evidence Technician classification.

NOW THEREFORE, the City and Teamsters Local 856 agree to the following:

1. The job specification for the Property and Evidence Technician job classification shall be as set forth in Exhibit A (attached).

2. The City and Teamsters Local 856 (Police) agree to incorporate the Property and Evidence Technician job classification which shall be included in the list of classifications represented by the Police Bargaining Unit and added to Appendices "A" and "A-1".

3. The City and Teamsters Local 856 further agree that the following individuals are to be promptly reclassified into the Property and Evidence Technician job classification while maintaining their current placement in the salary step schedule (e.g., a Step 4 Community Services Officer will be reclassified to a Step 4 Property and Evidence Technician): Crystal Garza and Leticia Soto.

4. In recognition of the compensation analysis prepared by Bryce Consulting and the bargaining pattern established by the City in negotiating market equity adjustments for those classifications that were significantly behind the labor market, effective upon ratification of this Side Letter Agreement, the wage schedule for the Property and Evidence Technician shall be set to an amount two percent (2%) greater than that of a Community Services Officer . The 5% special assignment pay for the handling of property and evidence which the two individuals have been receiving will be incorporated into the base. The new salary range will be as follows:

5. In addition to the future wage enhancements set forth in Section 12 ("Salary Plan") of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Teamsters Local 856 (Police), the

Property and Evidence Technician job classification shall also receive the following market equity adjustments:
• Effective the first full pay period in January 2023, a three percent (3%) market equity adjustment.
• Effective the first full pay period in January 2024, a three percent (3%) market equity Property and Evidence Technician
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
5121.52 5390.34 5673.09 5970.83 6284.63

80 of 537

adjustment.
• Effective the first full pay period in January 2025, a four percent (4%) market equity adjustment.

6. All other terms and conditions of employment set forth in the Memorandum of Understanding shall continue without modification.

FOR THE CITY FOR THE UNION

Jovan D. Grogan, City
Manager Date: 12/14/22
Peter Finn
Date:11/21/22

DocuSign Envelope ID: 1F8FED98-2822-4B0A-9FED-D954C1700AFD

81 of 537

DocuSign Envelope ID: 3CDB7E2E-9D5A-48D9-9B14-779D7797F7CS

SIDE LETTER

City of San Bruno and Police Bargaining Unit
Represented by Teamsters Local 856

Job Class Specifications for Public Safetv Dispatcher I/II and Police Clerk I/II

Pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Bruno (the "CITY") and the City of San Bruno Police Bargaining Unit represented by Teamsters, Local 856 ("MOU"), this Side Letter of Agreement is entered into on October 26, 2022, between the City and the Teamsters Local 856 ("Side Letter Agreement").

The City and the bargaining unit have met and conferred in good faith concerning the terms and conditions of this Side Letter Agreement and its implementation and now therefore agree to the following amendments effective the first full pay period following this signed agreement:

Effective the first full pay period following this fully executed agreement, the City will adopt the attached revised job class specifications for Public Safety Dispatcher I/II and Police Clerk I/II identified as Exhibit 1 and dated October 26, 2022.

For Citv of San Bruno

___________________________________ ____________________________ Jovan D. Grogan, City Manager Date

For Teamsters Local 856 Union

___________________________________ ____________________________ Secretary-Treasurer/Principal Officer Date

82 of 537

Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 1 of 6 ends

CONFIDENTIAL MEDIATION SUPPOSAL

BETWEEN

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
AND
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856, IBT SAN BRUNO POLICE BARGAINING UNIT MAY 6, 2026
This supposal is passed under the confidential mediation privilege. Should either the Police Unit or the City fail to ratify this supposal, the parties will revert to the previous positions. This supposal will not be admissible in factfinding or any other proceeding regarding 2025/2026 successor negotiations.

1. Recognition

12. Salary Plan

12.1. Salary Ranges

12.1.1. The following reflects the understanding as to adjustments, modifications and changes related to salary and/or benefits:

12.1.1.1. Wages - the following increases shall apply to all bargaining unit members
• 4% increase effective the first full pay period in January 2026 (retroactive to January 12, 2026)
• 4.5% increase effective the first full pay period in January 2027
Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2 83 of 537
ATTACHMENT 2
Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 2 of 6 ends

• 5% increase effective the first full pay period in January 2028 • 2.75% increase effective the first full pay period in January 2029

Equity Adjustments – the City shall apply the following equity adjustments to each of the identified classifications:

Effective the first full pay period in July 2026:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

Effective the first full pay period in July 2027:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

Effective the first full pay period in July 2028:

Police Officer – 1.59%
Police Corporal – 1.59%
Police Recruit – 1.59%
CSO – 4.29%

12.l. l.2. Calculation of actual salary shall be as follows: For the five-step range, the range will be calculated by dividing each range step, beginning with top step, by the factor 1.0525.

12.1.1.3. Salary ranges for represented classifications shall be as set forth in Appendix “A".

14. Overtime

14.1.2. A "Compensatory Time Leave Bank" is established with a maximum accrual balance of one hundred (100) and twenty (120) hours. Time in excess of the accrual maximum would automatically be paid as over-time and not allowed to build up in excess of the maximum level absent approval from the City Manager or designee. Employees shall have one-half of their Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2

84 of 537

Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 3 of 6 ends

accrued compensatory time off paid to them in cash in the pay period prior to promotion.

15. Acting Pay

15.1. An employee assigned to perform substantially the duties of a higher job classification shall, commencing with the seventh (7th) consecutive complete calendar day from the commencement of the assignment, receive the rate of pay established for the salary step of the classification of the temporary assignment that is a minimum of five percent (5%) greater than the employee is currently earning, retroactive to the date the employee was assigned to such duties. In no event shall the rate paid exceed the top step of the assigned classification. Police Officers*, Public Safety Dispatcher I/II's, and Police Clerk I/Il's of this unit who are assigned to an acting supervisor capacity shall receive an increase in pay of five (5) percent, retroactive to the start of the assignment, after completing the following:

Police Officers Eight (8) consecutive hours of
duty
Public Safety Dispatcher I/II Eight (8) consecutive hours of duty
Police Clerk I/II Eight (8) consecutive hours of
duty

18. Incentive Pay Premiums

18.1. Historical footnote: Section 18 Incentive Pay Programs was previously titled "POST Incentive Pay" and applied only to sworn personnel.

18.12. Incentive pay is calculated on an individual employee's base salary. The maximum incentive pay an employee may obtain under Section 18 Incentive Pay Programs is 8.5%. Subsections 18.3 2 POST Certification Pay and Section 18.4 3 Educational Incentive Pay - All Personnel are not to be included together for purposes of determining the level of incentive pay for Sworn employees. Sworn Employees may only receive either POST Certification Pay or Education Incentive Pay at any one time but may not receive both incentives simultaneously.

18.23. POST Certification Pay

A. Sworn Personnel

Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2

85 of 537

Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 4 of 6 ends

• Four percent (4%) of employee 's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate Certificate; OR
• Eight and one-half percent (8.5%) of employee's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate and possession of a POST Advanced Certificate

B. Dispatch Personnel effective the first full pay period in January 2027.

• Two and one-half percent (2.5%) of employee 's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate Certificate; OR
• Five percent (5%) of employee's base salary for possession of a POST Intermediate and possession of a POST Advanced Certificate

18.34. Educational Incentive Pay - All Personnel

• Three percent (3%) for AA or AS degree
• Six percent (6%) for BA or BS degree

18.5. Certification for Public Safety Dispatcher

18.5.1. The City acknowledges that POST has established Public Safety Dispatcher Certificates, professional certificates awarded in recognition of meeting specified education, training, and service requirements. POST has not mandated participation in the public safety dispatcher professional certificates program. In the event the State requires additional POST ce1tification for the Public Safety Dispatcher classification, the parties agree to reopen this section of the MOU, only.

18.64. Fitness Incentive Pay Program

18. 64.1. The City will provide a physical fitness incentive pay of $50 per month ($600 per year). Participation is strictly voluntary and requires participants to re-qualify annually. The program will be administered by the Chief of Police or designee.

18.75. Bi-lingual Incentive Pay Program

18. 75.1. The City shall provide bilingual incentive pay in the amount of 2.5% of base pay to an employee who meets the criteria outlined in the City's Bilingual Program.

These requirements include:
o Demonstrated proficiency in a language other than English (including American Sign Language), which is used within the community;
o Successfully meets and maintains the program requirements, including re- qualifying every two years.

18.86. CSO Assignment Pay

18. 86.1. Effective the first full pay period following ratification of this agreement by the City Council, a 5% special assignment pay for a CSO position whose regular assignments Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2

86 of 537

Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 5 of 6 ends

include:
• Property/Evidence Officer
• Court Officer

18.97 Retention Pay – Sworn Personnel

34. Health and Welfare

34.2. The City shall pay 75% and employee pays 25% of the health and welfare benefit premium increase over the prior plan year based on the cost of the plan options which they have selected.

• Beginning January 1, 202622 through December 31, 2025June 30, 2029 the City shall pay 75% and employee shall pay 25% of health and welfare benefit premium increase over the prior plan year.

54. Term

54.1. This Memorandum of Understanding, entered into on the, shall remain in effect for those employees employed in the classifications set forth in Appendices "A" and "A-1" for the period from January l , 202622 through June 30, 2029December 31, 2025 except to the extent that such Memorandum of Understanding may be modified by the parties during such period, and shall continue in full force and effect until either superseded by a subsequent Memorandum of Understanding or by such other action of the City Council affecting wages, hours, gndand conditions of employment of the employees in classifications covered by this Memorandum of Understanding.

Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2

87 of 537

Confidential Mediation Supposal | May 6, 2026 b/w City of San Bruno and Teamsters Local 856 IBT, Police Unit

Page 6 of 6 ends

Additional individual non-economic tentative agreements:

• Section 6 – Filling of Vacancies
• Section 38 – Tuition reimbursement Program
• Section 19 - Uniform Allowance
• Section 43 - Safety Equipment
• Section 45 - Disaster Responsibility

FOR THE CITY FOR THE UNION

____________________________ ____________________________ Alex D. McIntyre Peter Hoffmann
City Manager Rains Lucia Stern St Phalle & Silver

Approved as to form:

____________________________
Dania Torres Wong
Sloan Sakai Yeung & Wong LLP
Docusign Envelope ID: 92972875-099D-8F3B-8292-8457CA4C3AA2 5/6/2026
5/6/2026
5/6/2026

88 of 537

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 12, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Harry Yip, Interim Principal Engineer
Kelly Beggs, Assistant Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Supporting the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County’s (C/CAG’s) 2026 San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan and Determining the Action is Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act

BACKGROUND
Beginning in the Fall of 2024, C/CAG led the development of the San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) to update the initial CBTP created in 2012. Planning and Engineering staff from the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno served on a working group to support the development of the plan.

Community-Based Transportation Plans focus on areas designated as Equity Priority Communities, or EPCs. EPCs are determined by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

These are census tracts that have a significant concentration of low-income residents and people of color and are prioritized for investment and planning to address historical disinvestment and ensure equitable access to transportation and housing. See Figure 1 for a map which outlines the EPCs in South San Francisco and San Bruno.

In San Bruno, the CBTP focuses mainly on the area east of El Camino Real and West of the Caltrain tracks.

Community Outreach
C/CAG’s development of the CBTP has been guided by the perspectives of residents and community organizers in the San Bruno and South San Francisco communities. From San Bruno, the C/CAG team held pop up events at La Mexicana Produce Market and Rico Pan Latin Pastries and held two focus groups.
89 of 537 Item 6g.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 12, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

1 0
5 1
Figure 1. Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno

90 of 537

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 12, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

1 0
5 1

DISCUSSION
San Bruno residents and community stakeholders, along with City and SamTrans staff, provided their ideas and experiences to help C/CAG learn what improvements will help the most – related to buses and paratransit, sidewalks, streets, policies, programs, and educational outreach. The CBTP captures this input as recommended projects and identifies the costs, funding needs, and strategies to implement the recommendations. The table below provides an overview of strategies identified in the CBTP to address identified transportation challenges, each of which have specific projects identified in the CBTP. The first strategy includes a project to enhance lighting. The community identified needed lighting enhancements on the 380 underpasses at Huntington and San Mateo Avenues and along San Bruno Avenue, Herman Street, Kains Avenue, and on Angus Avenue near Third Avenue. Staff extended the project to San Mateo Avenue to facilitate implementation of the San Mateo Avenue Streetscape Plan.

Next Steps
C/CAG’s board will consider adoption of the CBTP June 11, 2026. The CBTP identifies certain improvements that are aligned with the City’s Capital Improvement Program but also identifies additional needs that are not currently represented in the CIP, including transit amenities, bus service enhancements, and community-based programs. Implementation of these recommendations will require coordination with partner agencies, such as SamTrans, Caltrans, BART, and C/CAG, and with community-based organizations, and may require the pursuit of external funding sources. The City will also conduct annual tracking of project implementation as set forth by the CBTP.

FISCAL IMPACT
While there is no fiscal impact associated with passing a Resolution of Support for the CBTP, implementing the Plan’s recommendations will require a combination the following:
incorporating the projects into existing CIP projects, seeking grant funding, and partnering with

91 of 537

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 12, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

1 0
5 1
other agencies, such as SamTrans and Caltrans. Recommended projects in the CBTP receive preferential points for future MTC funding.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Approval of the contract is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and no environmental review is necessary. Recommendations identified in the 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP may be considered and evaluated as appropriate under CEQA by the applicable decision-making body at a future time; and

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution supporting the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County’s (C/CAG’s) 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan.

ATTACHMENTS

1.Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Bruno supporting the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County’s (C/CAG’s) 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan
a.2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan b.Appendices

92 of 537

1 3
6 8
8 RESOLUTION NO. 2026 - ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO SUPPORTING THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY’S (C/CAG’S) 2026 SAN BRUNO / SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY-BASED

TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND DETERMINING THE ACTION IS EXEMPT UNDER THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) initiated the Community- Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) program in 2002 to enhance mobility for residents of historically-disadvantaged Equity Priority Communities (EPCs); and WHEREAS, in 2024, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG), as the County’s Congestion Management Agency, obtained funding through an MTC Community-Based Transportation Planning Grant to prepare an update to the 2012 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno is one of two jurisdictions included in the 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP study area, in addition to the City of South San Francisco; and
WHEREAS, the 2026 San Bruno/South San Francisco CBTP was led by C/CAG in partnership with the project’s local Advisory Group, comprised of staff members from the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno; and
WHEREAS, the 2026 San Bruno/South San Francisco CBTP leveraged and built upon an extensive community engagement plan approved by the local Advisory Group and conducted by the C/CAG project team; and
WHEREAS, the 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP project team implemented a bilingual community input process comprised of online mapping survey distribution; focus group meetings, and community engagement pop-up events at La Mexicana Produce Market and Rico Pan Latin Pastries; and
WHEREAS, based on community input and technical analysis, the project team recommends twenty-six projects to address mobility gaps for residents of EPCs in the City of San Bruno; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno staff provided revisions to the administrative draft 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP recommendations in November 2025, and revisions to the draft 2026 San Bruno/South San Francisco CBTP in March 2026; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno supports the recommendations of the Plan as they relate to its jurisdiction and to pursuing future implementation of project recommendations for which the City of San Bruno is identified as the Lead Agency, as feasible and as funding and staff resources are available; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno agrees participate in the annual project tracking process outlined in the CBTP; and
93 of 537 ATTACHMENT 1
2 3
6 8
8 WHEREAS, the City has determined that execution of the agreement is not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as defined in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Section 15378.

WHEREAS, the recommendations identified in the 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco CBTP may be considered and evaluated as appropriate under CEQA by the applicable decision-making body at a future time; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the San Bruno City Council hereby:

1. Support the recommendations included in the 2026 San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan as they relate to its jurisdiction;

2. Determines that the Plan is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as it is not a “project” under CEQA Guidelines.

Exhibit A: San Bruno / South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan Exhibit B: Appendices
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2026 - ___ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 12, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk

94 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco
Community-Based
Transportation Plan
2026
City/County Association
of Governments
of San Mateo County
C/CAG
95 of 537
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 2 |
,,

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks to the Steering Committee, made up of staff members from the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco, as well as to community members and residents of San Bruno and South San Francisco.

CBTP Steering Committee
Kelly Beggs, City of San Bruno
Harry Yip, City of San Bruno
Steve Ojeda, City of San Bruno
Michael Laughlin, City of San Bruno
Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, City of South San Francisco
Matthew Ruble, City of South San Francisco
Project Facilitators and Plan Development Team
Susy Kalkin, City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) Taylor McAdam, Fehr and Peers
TF Chen, Fehr and Peers
Schenae Rourk, Redwood Resources
Daniel Iacofano, MIG
Maria Mayer, MIG
Noé Noyola, MIG
Stephanie Pavón, MIG
Ed Canalin, MIG
Community Advisors
Hermes Monzon, Brittany Burgo, and Dana Abarca, Friends of Old Town (South San Francisco)
Julio Garcia, Rise South City
Nicolas Rackard-Hilt, San Bruno Healthy Homes
Matt Jones, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
Elida Valencia Sobalvarro, YMCA Resource Center
Nicholette Tolmie, SamTrans
Community Organizations
Panaderia RicoPan, San Bruno
Resilient San Bruno
All Souls Church, South San Francisco
La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco
Rise South City, South San Francisco
South San Francisco Farmers’ Market
YMCA South San Francisco
96 of 537 ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 3
2026
City/County Association
of Governments of
San Mateo County
(C/CAG)
San Bruno/South San Francisco
Community-Based
Transportation Plan

97 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 4 |
Executive Summary

98 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 5
This Community-Based
Transportation Plan includes
a set of recommended projects
and programs to address local
transportation and mobility
challenges raised by community
members and provide solutions
that will benefit residents across
the cities of San Bruno and South
San Francisco.

A Community-Based Transportation
Plan, or CBTP, seeks to address
transportation access issues for
residents who are more likely to be
dependent upon transit or other forms
of transportation other than a car, but
may have less resources or access
to travel where they need to go. The
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC), which is the organization that
coordinates transportation planning for
the nine counties in the Bay Area region,
funds community-recommended projects
which advance access to transportation and
mobility in communities it has identified
as Equity Priority Communities, or EPCs.

These EPCs are census tracts across the
Bay Area which have higher than average
low-income residents, residents of color,
older adults, people with disabilities,
residents without cars, single parent
families, and residents paying a
majority of their incomes toward
housing payments. These community
members are more likely to be transit
dependent.

C/CAG, the City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County,
is the coordinating organization
for this CBTP, which covers several
census tracts in the cities of San
Bruno and South San Francisco.

MTC has identified six Equity Priority
Communities in these two cities,
shown in Figure 1, where residents
meet some or all of the EPC
characteristics mentioned above. Two
of these Equity Priority Communities
are located in census tracts near
Downtown San Bruno. Four Equity
Priority Communities are in South
San Francisco—in census tracts
which include the neighborhoods of
Downtown South San Francisco, Old
Town, Paradise Valley, Orange Park,
Mayfair Village, Lindenville, and the
area east of Highway 101.

Figure 1: Map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050

99 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 6 |
In partnership with community organizations, the CBTP project team created a community survey and organized and/or attended eight community events.

The team heard from more than 400 community members who live in these six Equity Priority Communities about the transportation challenges and safety issues they experience when they travel, and their suggestions to improve the local transportation system. Community members shared their challenges when walking, bicycling, and using the bus or other transit options.

Community members talked about unsafe intersections where it is hard to cross, sidewalks and streets in need of repairs, bus stops without shelters, missed bus connections, desire for more local transportation options, and streets in need of bicycle lanes. Many residents mentioned the difficulty in getting to school, work, community services and other destinations via available bus and paratransit/shuttle services, due to infrequent or lack of transit service in their communities, and busy highways and streets that create barriers between their neighborhoods and where they need to travel.

At several community events, residents mentioned that they needed more local and affordable shuttle services for residents. In San Bruno, several community members suggested that additional shuttles might ease traffic and parking congestion they experience in their neighborhoods. Community members also mentioned the need for more information about existing transit services in their communities. In addition to making safety improvements, improving pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and expanding transit service where possible, increasing efforts to promote and provide information about available transportation services will be a key and ongoing goal of this CBTP.

This is the second CBTP developed by C/CAG and community partners for the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco. Many of the strategies laid out in this CBTP are similar to those from the previous plan developed in 2012, such as the ongoing need for sidewalk repairs and pedestrian crosswalks, expanding bikeway miles and safe routes to school, and providing more information about existing bus, shuttle, and other transportation services. The proposed projects and programs laid out in this CBTP are organized into several strategies, which together address the current transportation challenges most often raised by community members. These strategies will help C/CAG and its partners at local jurisdictions, SamTrans, regional transit agencies, and community organizations focus on projects that will provide the most benefit to residents in EPCs.

Some of the projects related to these strategies are at specific locations in these six Equity Priority Communities, such as enhancing crosswalks at Lomita Park Elementary in San Bruno, providing a crossing for bicyclists from the Centennial Way Trail to San Bruno BART and the Huntington Ave cycle track, and expanding bus access to serve Paradise Valley in South San Francisco. Other projects recommend larger programmatic changes, such as expanding the 101 Express Lanes travel voucher program to serve more residents; providing more real- time information for transit and shuttle services; and offering more multilingual education and support for would be bus and transit users.

Staff from the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco and from SamTrans transit agency reviewed and responded to a potential list of projects and programs relevant to their communities and service areas, and have shared updates about how they might implement many of these recommendations through their Capital Improvement Plans or other upcoming planning efforts, if approved by city/agency leadership.

MTC recently introduced a new round of grant funding called Community Action Resource and Empowerment (CARE), which may be available to support many of these community-identified projects. Given the broader changes to federal funding streams that C/CAG, MTC and area jurisdictions and transit agencies

100 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 7
rely upon to fund transportation and transit-related improvements in their communities, the project team has included several other potential streams of funding which may help support the implementation of some of the projects and programs suggested in this CBTP. C/CAG will continue to meet regularly with partners and jurisdictions to review the status of CBTP projects and determine what additional support is needed to ensure that community-based recommendations are implemented where it is possible to do so, and residents experience improved mobility and access to the places they need to go.

This CBTP includes several types of
proposed projects:

Extend planned bicycle routes to connect South San
Francisco residents to San Bruno BART station
Enhance crosswalks near Lomita Park Elementary so
students and parents feel safe walking to school
Install more street lighting along sidewalks in San Bruno where community members say they feel unsafe walking
at night
Expand frequency and bus service along SamTrans routes
which serve EPC residents

Develop new employer partnerships to expand San Bruno
shuttle service
Expand travel vouchers to residents to
encourage a shift from driving to the bus, bicycle
or other modes
Provide multilingual trainings for residents who want
to use the bus but don’t understand how to access
information or discount programs

BIKE, WALK & ROLL
SAFETY

AFFORDABILITY

INFORMATION

TRANSIT

101 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 8 |
Executive Summary .......................................................................4 Introduction ......................................................................................9 MTC and CBTP Process and Goals .......................................................10 Equity Priority Communities .................................................................. 11 Current Planning Context ..................................................................... 12 Community Profiles .....................................................................14 Priority Communities Analysis ............................................................. 15 San Bruno EPCs Profile ........................................................................ 18 San Bruno Community Area EPC Metrics ........................................... 20 South San Francisco EPCs Profile ........................................................ 21 South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics ............................23 Community Travel Patterns ..................................................................26 Existing Transportation Infrastructure and Services ......28 Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure ........................................................30 Existing Bicycle Network ...................................................................... 31 Physical Travel Barriers ........................................................................34 Transit Service and Ridership ..............................................................40 Traffic Hotspots and Vehicle Volumes .................................................46 Street Safety ........................................................................................47 Review of Previous CBTP Strategies ................................................... 51 Community Needs Assessment .............................................52 Overview of Community Engagement Activities..................................53 Community-Identified Transportation Needs and
Suggestions ....................................................................................... 58 Recommendations to Address Community
Transportation Challenges .......................................................66 Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................... 68 Proposed Transportation Strategies and Projects ...............................68 CBTP Project Matrix and Implementation Plan...............121 CBTP Projects Table ...........................................................................123 Available Funding Opportunities ....................................................... 133 Monitoring and Evaluating Progress ...................................................137 Appendices ..................................................................................138 Appendix A: Community Assessment Report of San Bruno
and South San Francisco EPCs
Appendix B: Review of Previous CBTP Plan Strategies
and Implementation
Appendix C: Community Engagement Summary
Appendix D: Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Sample)
Table of Contents

102 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 9
Introduction

103 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 10 |
In neighborhoods across South San Francisco, San Bruno, and the broader Bay Area region, residents, workers and visitors travel to school, work, the doctor, the grocery store and so many more places. For some community members,
these trips require more time and effort, due to distance, cost, access to transportation, health and/or age, and many depend upon available transportation services to get where they need to go.

This Community-Based Transportation Plan, or CBTP, is an effort to address the needs of community members who are more likely to depend on transit or modes of travel other than by car. In some communities, these other travel options are less accessible. The CBTP, in coordination with local cities and agencies, community organizations and residents, lays out some key priorities and potential projects to improve transportation options and mobility for San Bruno and South San Francisco residents, focused especially on several neighborhoods where there is a greater need for equitable access to transportation.

C/CAG and partners at the City of San Bruno, City of South San Francisco, SamTrans and others created an initial CBTP for San Bruno and South San Francisco in 2012. This document reviews the progress of the previous plan and serves as an update to that CBTP.

MTC and CBTP Process and Goals
Community-Based Transportation Plan development is coordinated on a regional level by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), which provides funding to county transportation and coordinating agencies such as C/ CAG to develop a CBTP in partnership with community members, stakeholder groups and local jurisdictions. Community members identify the most important transportation challenges in their neighborhoods, and potential strategies and projects to improve mobility and transportation in their communities.

The Key Goals of Community-Based
Transportation Plans
Engage residents and community
organizations in conducting
the analysis and shaping
recommendations of the plan.

Improve access and mobility for
low-income communities

104 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 11
The process to develop this CBTP included the following steps:

1. Assess the current conditions of residents in local Equity Priority Communities

2. Review the past CBTP to check progress on projects and strategies

3. Engage community members and stakeholders about their current transportation and mobility challenges, needs and suggestions for improvements

4. Develop, in partnership with jurisdictions, transit agencies and community members, a set of recommended strategies to address local transportation and mobility needs

5. Create a priority projects list, reviewed by community stakeholders and partner jurisdictions and agencies

6. Determine which projects are already underway at cities/agencies

7. Develop an implementation plan for final list of priority projects

8. Review the plan together on an annual basis to determine progress Equity Priority Communities
CBTPs focus on several community areas that have been determined by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to be most in need for priority funding to support improving access for residents to transportation services. MTC used a region-wide process of analyzing communities by a set of key U.S. Census data points which measure the percentages of underserved populations, such as high percentages of households with low incomes, or residents of color in a given census tract compared to the average for all of the Bay Area.1 MTC identified six Equity Priority Communities in San Bruno and South San Francisco. These are census tracts with high percentages of residents who are more likely to be transit dependent – including residents of color, low- income residents, older adults, residents with disabilities, residents who many not speak English very well, single parents, and residents without access to a car—and who may be most in need of access to additional transportation options in their communities. Because some of these census tracts include more than one neighborhood, the project team has identified some of the feedback and recommendations by its neighborhood location within these EPCs.
1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “What are Equity Priority Communities?” Accessed September 2025 from https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/access-equity-mobility/equity-priority-communities

105 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 12 |
The 8 EPC Metrics
Equity Priority Communities are census tracts in Bay Area counties which have a significant concentration of residents from underserved populations—these communities may have experienced disadvantage and underinvestment due to their background or socioeconomic status, and who may be more likely to be transit dependent. These include:

MTC determines a community is an EPC if it has a greater percentage of residents of color and low-income residents than most Bay Area census tracts, or if the community area exceeds the regional percentage threshold for low-income residents as well as three or more other demographic variables listed above.
1 People of Color
2 Low-Income
3 Limited English Proficiency
4 Zero-Vehicle Households
5 Seniors 75 Yrs and Over
6 People with a Disability
7 Single Parent Families
8 Severely Rent-Burdened Households
Current Planning Context
Many of the sources of funding which C/CAG, local jurisdictions, and agency partners use to support projects like those recommended in this CBTP originate from federal sources, including some COVID-19 era funds that are coming to an end. There also may be changes at federal agencies which may require C/CAG and partners to consider different sources of funding to support this work. Inconsistent and low ridership levels on some SamTrans bus routes, which collect fares to help fund service, affects how much funding there may be available to expand transit routes and frequencies.

In addition to changes in funding sources and availability, another key limitation to improving mobility in San Bruno, South San Francisco, and across the Bay Area and beyond is the shortage of people to work as bus and shuttle drivers. The shortage of drivers affects transit agencies, school districts, and other industries who employ drivers. While this trend is slowly beginning to reverse, this may also limit what additional transit services local cities and agencies can provide.

106 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 13

107 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 14 |
Community Profiles

108 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 15
Priority Communities Analysis
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) determined that four census tracts in the City of South San Francisco and two in the City of San Bruno qualified as Equity Priority Communities (EPCs), as seen in the map in Figure 1. The City of San Bruno’s EPCs comprise the neighborhoods of San Bruno Park, Downtown San Bruno and Lomita Park (in yellow). In South San Francisco, the EPCs include Paradise Valley, Old Town, Downtown, Orange Park, Lindenville, and East of 101 (in blue).

Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, What are Equity Priority Communities? Figure 2: Map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 People of Color
(70% threshold)
Low-Income
Residents (28%)
Limited English
Proficiency (12%)
Older Adults 75 Y ears of
Age and Over (8%)
People with a
Disability (12%)
Single Parent
Families (18%)
Severely Rent-Burdened
Households (14%)
Equity Priority Communities as defined by MTC are census tracts which exceed the regional concentration threshold (the % in parentheses below) of residents according to several key demographic factors:

Zero-Vehicle
Households (15%)

109 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 16 |
The thresholds listed here represent one-half of a standard deviation above the Bay Area regional average, which means that there is a statistically significant concentration of residents who identify as or experience this demographic factor.2 If a census tract exceeds both the threshold values for low-income residents and people of color, or exceeds the threshold value for low-income residents and also exceeds the threshold values for three or more of the other factors listed above, it is designated an Equity Priority Community.

The regional averages and thresholds for these data factors were determined by MTC using 2018 ACS data, which is shown in the table in Figure 2. At the time, these six census tracts were only four—two of these tracts (6041.01 in San Bruno and 6022 in South San Francisco) were split into two in 2020.

All four of these 2018 census tracts in San Bruno and South San Francisco exceed the Bay Area regional threshold of residents of color and low-income residents (highlighted in yellow in Figure 3), which means they qualify as Equity Priority Communities. Additionally, these census tracts far exceed the Bay Area regional average and threshold for the percentage of households who are severely rent burdened, meaning they pay more than half of total household incomes toward rent or a mortgage. Three of these census tracts have high percentages of residents who say they speak English less than very well or not at all. Two South San Francisco census tracts have high percentages of single parent families, and the other South San Francisco census tract has a high percentage of older adults relative to the Bay Area average and threshold.

In 2024, MTC proposed revisions to these thresholds based upon updated Census data from 2022. In San Bruno and South San Francisco, many of these data points shifted. While thresholds of residents of color far exceeds the regional average and threshold, only two of the six census tracts in this CBTP would qualify as EPCs when using this updated data, since the others no longer meet the threshold of low-income residents (see Appendix A for 2022 data).

The project team and advisory committee determined that this update would maintain the 2012 study area and use the 2018 data thresholds for this CBTP.

However, the Equity Priority Community profiles which follow this section use more recent data, from 2022, to describe the residents who live within these EPCs. Most of the analysis describes the community areas from each city separately, focusing especially on the key metrics where they meet the EPC thresholds.

A census tract is an area in a community
about the size of a neighborhood, which
the U.S. Census Bureau uses to analyze
populations. Each census tract has a
population size of 1,500 and 8,000
residents.
(Source: www.census.gov)
2 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. PBA2050+ 2024 Equity Priority Communities Update, MTC Policy Advisory Council Presentation. April 2024

110 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 17
Figure 3: Threshold Measures for Equity Priority Communities in San Bruno and South San Francisco (2018 U.S. Census American Community Survey data) Demographic Factor (Higlighted: Meets or Exceeds Regional Threshold)
Bay Area
Regional
Average
Bay Area
Regional
Threshold
San Bruno
EPC 6041.01*
South San
Francisco
EPC 6021
South San
Francisco
EPC 6022*
South San
Francisco
EPC 6023
People of Color 58% 70% 84% 88% 87% 88%
Low-Income Residents (<200% of Federal Poverty Threshold) 21% 28% 32% 47% 31% 29% Limited English Proficiency 8% 12% 13% 20% 17% 9%
Zero-Vehicle Households 9% 15% 7% 7% 10% 9%
Older Adults 75 Years of Age and Over 6% 8% 4% 3% 4% 10% People with a Disability 10% 12% 8% 9% 7% 11%
Single-Parent Families 13% 18% 14% 20% 24% 16%
Severely Rent-Burdened Households 10% 14% 35% 35% 21% 39% Sources: MTC. Plan Bay Area 2050; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 5-year data tables, 2018. *Note: in 2020, many census tracts were revised, including two included in this CBTP. San Bruno 6041.01 was divided into 6041.03 and 6041.04, and South San Francisco 6022 was divided into 6022.01 and 6022.02

111 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 18 |
Population, Households and Families
The EPCs in San Bruno are two census tracts in and near Downtown San Bruno, shown in yellow in Figure 3, which also include parts of the San Bruno Park and Lomita Park neighborhoods. Approximately 8,206 people live in the San Bruno EPCs, in 2,576 households.3 Thirty-six percent of families in the EPCs are headed by a single parent. One in ten single parent families in the EPCs are experiencing poverty.4
Race and Ethnicity
Two thirds of San Bruno EPC residents (67%) identify as people of color or multi-racial. More than half of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino (57%), 22 percent as Asian and nearly seven percent as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander.

Income
Nearly one in five residents (18%) in the San Bruno EPCs earn annual incomes below 200 percent of the poverty threshold. Eight percent of residents, or 658 people, earn incomes less than the poverty threshold, of $14,880 for one person (2022 threshold and data). The median income for the San Bruno EPCs is approximately $22,000 less than the median for the entire City of San Bruno ($131,700 in 2022). As seen in Figure 4, nearly half of households in both San Bruno EPCs have annual incomes of less than $100,000 per year.

Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 3 U.S. Census Bureau. “ Demographic and Housing Estimates.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Table DP05, 2022. A detailed community profile of all of the EPCs is available in Appendix A.
4 U.S. Census Bureau. “Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families by Family Type by Work Experience of Householder and Spouse.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Detailed Table B17016, 2022
San BrunoEPCS PROFILE
Figure 4: San Bruno Equity Priority Communities

112 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 19
Age
One in four residents in the San Bruno EPCs are under 21. Twelve percent of EPC residents are over the age of 62, and four percent of residents are over the age of 75. Most residents in the San Bruno EPCs are working-age adults.

Residents with Disabilities
Approximately nine percent of residents in the San Bruno EPCs area are living with a disability. Four percent of residents in the San Bruno Park EPC (Census Tract 6041.04), or 165 people, have a vision difficulty. In the Lomita Park/ Downtown EPC (Census Tract 6041.03), six percent of residents, or 265 people, are living with a cognitive disability.

Language Proficiency
Almost two-thirds of residents in the San Bruno EPCs say they speak a language other than English at home. Forty-six percent of residents speak Spanish, approximately six percent of residents speak Chinese (which includes Cantonese and Mandarin) and three percent speak Tagalog. One in three San Bruno EPCs residents say they speak English less than very well—this includes 61 percent of Spanish speakers, more than half of Chinese speakers (55%), and one-third of Tagalog speakers (36%).

Vehicle Ownership
Approximately 11 percent of households in the San Bruno EPCs do not have at least one vehicle at home. Most of these households are in the Lomita Park/ Downtown EPC, where 17 percent of households do not have a car.

Rent Burden
Approximately 39 percent of households in the San Bruno EPCs, or 680 households, are severely rent-burdened, meaning that they use 50 percent or more of their income toward rent or other housing costs. 34%
38%
47%
44%
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000
$50,000 to $75,000 $75,000 to $100,000
San Bruno Park
(6041.04)
Lomita Park/
Downtown San Bruno
(6041.03)
City of San Bruno
San Mateo County
64%
39%
45%
36%
61%
55%
Tagalog Spanish Chinese
Speaks English "very well" Speaks English less than "very well" Figure 5: San Bruno EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Figure 6: San Bruno EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2022 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars).” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables, 2022, Table S1901 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over.” Amercan Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Detailed Tables, Table C16001, 2022

113 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 20 |
64% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
20% of residents live in low-income households
19% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
5% of residents are 75 years or older
9% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
17% of households have no vehicle at home
50% of Spanish and Chinese speakers (including
Cantonese and Mandarin), and 45% of Tagalog speakers
speak English less than very well
42% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
70% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
17% of residents live in low-income households
No single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
2% of residents are 75 years or older
10% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
4% of households have no vehicle at home
69% of Spanish and Chinese speakers (including
Cantonese and Mandarin) speak English less than very
well
34% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
San Bruno Community Area EPC Metrics
Lomita Park/Downtown San Bruno
(Census Tract 6041.03) San Bruno Park (Census Tract 6041.04)

114 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 21
Population, Households and Families
The Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco are four census tracts, which include the neighborhoods of Paradise Valley, Old Town, East Downtown and West Downtown, Orange Park, Mayfair Village, Lindenville, and the area East of 101. Approximately 15,806 people live in these four EPCs in 5,167 households.5 One-third (33%) of families in the EPCs are headed by a single parent. Nearly one in five single parent families (19%) in the EPCs are experiencing poverty.6
Race and Ethnicity
Nearly eight in every ten South San Francisco EPC residents (77%) identify as people of color or multi-racial. Approximately half of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino (52%), and one in four (24%) as Asian. Three of the four EPCs have more than ten percent of residents who identify as Filipino.

Income
One in four residents (24%) in the South San Francisco EPCs earn annual incomes below 200 percent of the poverty threshold.

Twelve percent of residents, or 1,897 people, earn incomes less than the poverty threshold, of $14,880 for one person (2022 threshold and data).

In three of the four South San Francisco EPCs, the median income of all households is $40,000 to $45,000 less than the city’s median income of $127,000. More than half of households in the East Downtown/Old Town EPC and Paradise Valley EPC, and two-thirds of households in the West Downtown EPC have annual incomes below $100,000.

Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area 2050 South San FranciscoEPCS PROFILE
Figure 7: San Bruno Equity Priority Communities
5 U.S. Census Bureau. “ Demographic and Housing Estimates.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Table DP05, 2022. A detailed community profile of all of the EPCs is available in Appendix A.
6 U.S. Census Bureau. “Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families by Family Type by Work Experience of Householder and Spouse.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, Detailed Table B17016, 2022

115 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 22 |
Age
One in four residents (24%) in the South San Francisco EPCs are under the age of 21. One in five (21%) are older adults: 16 percent are over the age of 62, and five percent of residents are over the age of 75.

Residents with Disabilities
Approximately eight percent of residents in the South San Francisco EPCs area are living with a disability. Nearly seven percent of residents in the Downtown/Oldtown EPC (Census Tract 6022.22), or 207 people, experience a cognitive difficulty. In the Paradise Valley EPC (Census Tract 6021), approximately six percent of residents, or 219 people, are living with an ambulatory disability.

Language Proficiency
Seventy-one percent of residents in the South San Francisco EPCs say they speak a language other than English at home. Forty percent of residents speak Spanish, six percent of residents speak Chinese (which includes Cantonese and Mandarin), and another six percent speak Tagalog.

One in four South San Francisco EPCs residents (27%) say they speak English less than very well—this includes 44 percent of Spanish speakers, more than half of Chinese speakers (53%), and one-third of Tagalog speakers (34%).

Vehicle Ownership
Approximately 8 percent of households in the South San Francisco EPCs do not have at least one vehicle at home. Thirteen percent of households in the East Downtown/Old Town EPC, and ten percent of households in the West Downtown EPC do not have a car.

Rent Burden
Approximately 29 percent of households in the South San Francisco EPCs, or 973 households, are severely rent-burdened, meaning that they use 50 percent or more of their income toward rent or other housing costs.
34%
40%
58%
65%
58%
33%
San Mateo County
City of South
San Francisco
Paradise Valley (6021)
West Downtown South
San Francisco (6022.01)
East Downtown South San Francisco/
Old Town (6022.02)
Orange Park/ Lindenville/
East of 101 (6023)
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000 $50,000 to $75,000 $75,000 to $100,000 Figure 8: South San Francisco EPC Residents with Incomes Below $100,000 in the last 12 Months
Figure 9: English Language Proficiency Among South San Francisco EPC Residents Who Speak Other Languages at Home
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Detailed Tables, Table C16001, 2022 66%
56%
47%
34%
44%
53%
Tagalog Spanish Chinese
Speaks English "very well"
Speaks English less than "very well"
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2022 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars).” American Communi- ty Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables, 2022, Table S1901

116 of 537

| 23
82% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
31% of residents live in low-income households
2% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
3% of residents are 75 years or older
9% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
7% of households have no vehicle at home
50% of Spanish speakers, 70% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 36% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
29% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
59% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
26% of residents live in low-income households
1% single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
6% of residents are 75 years or older
7% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
10% of households have no vehicle at home
42% of Spanish speakers, 36% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 37% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
30% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics
Paradise Valley (Census Tract 6021) West Downtown South San Francisco (Census Tract 6022.01) San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 23

117 of 537

88% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
20% of residents live in low-income households
8% of single parent families are experiencing poverty
6% of residents are 75 years or older
10% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of
residents have a hearing difficulty and 6% have a
cognitive difficulty
13% of households have no vehicle at home
54% of Spanish speakers, 70% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 24% of
Tagalog speakers speak English less than very well
28% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
84% of residents identify as people of color or multi-
racial
21% of residents live in low-income households
9% single parent families in this EPC are experiencing
poverty
5% of residents are 75 years or older
7% of residents are living with a disability. 4% of EPC residents have a vision difficulty
4% of households have no vehicle at home
26% of Spanish speakers, 40% Chinese speakers
(including Cantonese and Mandarin), and 8% of Tagalog
speakers speak English less than very well
21% of residents pay more than half of their incomes
toward rent or housing costs
South San Francisco Community Area EPC Metrics
East Downtown South San Francisco/Old Town
(Census Tract 6022.02)
Orange Park/Mayfair Village/Lindenville/
East of 101 (Census Tract 6022.01)
24 |
San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan

118 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 25

119 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 26 |
Community Travel Patterns
Nearly three fourths of residents in both San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs drive to work—73 percent in the San Bruno EPCs and 74 percent in South San Francisco EPCs. But many do not drive alone. In South San Francisco, an average of 19 percent of EPC residents carpool to work. In the East Downtown South San Francisco/Old Town EPC, 25 percent of residents carpool. Approximately seven percent of residents in the San Bruno CBTP Area carpool to work.

Nine percent of all South San Francisco EPC residents use public transit to get to work, while four percent walk and two percent bike to work. In some neighborhoods within the South San Francisco EPCs, 10 percent of residents walk to work. In the San Bruno EPCs, eight percent of residents use public transit, six percent bike to work and three percent walk. In the San Bruno Park/Downtown San Bruno EPC, one in ten residents (11%) bike to work.

The map in Figure 10 shows this commute mode split for each of the six Equity Priority Community Areas in San Bruno and South San Francisco.

Approximately one in three workers in both the San Bruno EPCs (31%) and South San Francisco EPCs (also 31%) work in the city they live in. Nearly three fourths of San Bruno EPC residents (74%), and 71 percent of South San Francisco EPC residents work in San Mateo County.
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
IÆ
%&k(
%&j(
?»
San Francisco
International Airport
San Francisco
Bay
Centennial Trail
San Mateo Ave
Spruce Ave
Eucalyptus Ave
Utah Ave
Littlefield Ave
Gateway Blvd
Oyster Point Blvd
S Airport Blvd
San Bruno Ave
Jenevein Ave
Crystal Springs Rd
Sneath Ln
El Camino Real
Cherry Ave
Grand Ave
Linden Ave
City of
South San Francisco
City of
San Bruno
City of Brisbane

EAST SIDE

OYSTER POINT
SOUTH

AIRPORT

LINDENVILLE

MAYFAIR

VILLAGE

EL CAMINO

FRANCISCO

TERRACE

SOUTHWOOD
ORANGE
PARK

DOWNTOWN

PARADISE
VALLEY

OLD TOWN

SAN BRUNO
PARK

DOWNTOWN
LOMITA
PARK
BART
BART
Caltrain
Caltrain
BART
°
0 0.5 10.25
Mile
BART Routes!!
Caltrain Routes!!
Project Area and Transit
Bus Stops
Study Area Boundary
City Boundaries
Basemap
Trails
Parks and Open Space
San Francisco Bay
Commute Mode
Drove Alone
Carpooled
Transit
Walked
Bicycle
Worked from Home (WFH)
Other
Tract Boundary
Figure 10: Commute Mode Split, San Bruno and South San Francisco CBTP Equity Priority Community Areas, 2022
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022

120 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 27
Ten percent of South San Francisco EPC residents work from home, at least part of the week, which is less than half of the percentage of all San Mateo County residents who work from home (19%). Only seven percent of San Bruno CBTP Area residents say they work from home.

Two thirds of all workers who live in San Bruno EPCs (63%) and half of South San Francisco EPCs workers (55%) travel 20 to 24 minutes or less to get to work. While the commute for most EPC residents is 45 minutes or less, six of San Bruno EPC residents and 14% of South San Francisco EPC residents travel 45 minutes or longer to get to work. The chart below compares commute times with the average for all San Mateo County residents.
19%
2%
1%
7%
9%
59%
7%
3%
5%
8%
7%
66%
10%
4%
2%
9%
19%
55%
Worked
from Home
Walked
Biked
Used Public
Transit
Carpooled
Drove alone
to work
South San Francisco EPCs
San Bruno EPCs
San Mateo County
6%
33%
22%
26%
7% 6%
19%
30%
21%
24%
3% 3%8%
28%
21%
24%
10% 9%
Less than 10
minutes
10 to 20 minutes 20 to 30 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 45 to 60 minutes More than 60 minutes
South San Francisco EPCs San Bruno EPCs San Mateo County Figure 12: Workers Who Commute from San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs and San Mateo County, by Travel
Mode, 2022
Figure 11: Travel Time (in Minutes) to Work for Residents of San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs and San Mateo County
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.” American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Tables, Table S801, 2022

121 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 28 |
Existing Transportation
Infrastructure and
Services

122 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 29
This section describes the existing
transportation infrastructure and services
within the cities of San Bruno and
South San Francisco. It also highlights
recommendations from relevant city and
countywide plans that identify needs and
improvements related to pedestrian, bicycle,
transit and street infrastructure and services.

This map of Key Destinations in the San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities at right (Figure 13) shows major streets, transit routes and connections.

The map also highlights some of the key destinations that community members have described as being important
to reach in their neighborhoods, including grocery stores, schools, medical offices, and community and senior centers.

Figure 13: Key Destinations in San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: County of San Mateo; GTFS; California EDD; Google Maps

123 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 30 |
Figure 14: Missing Sidewalks in San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: Active South City Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, 2022; Google Maps.

Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure
South San Francisco’s 2022 Active South City Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan includes recommendations related to pedestrian infrastructure including sidewalks, curb ramps, crosswalks, signals and beacons, and other pedestrian support facilities, such as shade structures, benches, and landscaping. The plan identifies several gaps in the existing pedestrian network, such as sidewalk gaps and degraded pedestrian support facilities.

Within South San Francisco EPCs, most of these sidewalk gaps are in the area east of Highway 101, with additional gaps along El Camino Real and Railroad Avenue. The map in Figure 14 illustrates the gaps in sidewalks in and around South San Francisco EPCs.

The 2016 City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan identified existing pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, crosswalks, and off-street footpaths. The plan highlights that the city has a comprehensive system of sidewalks, marked crosswalks, and pedestrian crossing signals, especially on arterials and collectors. Additionally, many residential streets have sidewalks on at least one side of the street, and many intersections in residential areas have marked crosswalks, particularly when crossing a major street. Off-street footpaths are found within two parks, San Bruno City Park and Juniper Serra County Park, both within walking distance of the study area. San Bruno does not have an inventory of missing sidewalks.

124 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 31
Existing Bicycle Network
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recognizes four classifications of bicycle facilities as described here:

Class I—
Shared-Use Path
Provides a completely separated right-of-
way for the exclusive use of bicyclists and
pedestrians with crossflow minimized (e.g.,
off-street bicycle paths).

Class II—
Bicycle Lanes
Provides a striped lane for one-way travel on
a street or highway. May include a “buffer”
zone consisting of a striped portion of street
between the bicycle lane and the nearest
vehicle travel lane.

Class III—
Bicycle Route
Provides for shared use with motor vehicle
traffic; however, are often signed and/or
include traffic calming.

Class IV—
Separated Bikeway
Provides a right-of-way designated exclusively
for bicycle travel adjacent to a street and
protected from vehicular traffic. Types of
separation include, but are not limited to,
grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible
physical barriers, or on-street parking.

The City of South San Francisco’s existing bicycle network includes a mix of these facility types and includes more than 50 miles of bikeways, or 31 percent of the city’s streets. The existing bicycle network is comprised of 10 miles of Class I shared-use paths, 16 miles of Class II bike lanes, 23 miles of Class III bike routes, and 2.3 miles of Class IV separated bikeways. Approximately half of the city’s bike network, 24.25 miles, are bikeways that are separated from vehicle traffic (Class I, Class II, and Class IV).

Based on the 2016 City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan, the city has a limited bicycle network, with Class II bike lanes on only a handful of streets including Sneath Lane, Commodore Drive, and Sharp Park Road. Within the study area, San Bruno’s bike network primarily consists of bicycle facilities (Class IV and Class III) along the length of the Huntington/San Antonio Avenue corridor. The city is currently constructing a protected Class IV bicycle route, the Huntington Cycle Track on Huntington Ave, which when completed will run from the Centennial Way Trail and San Bruno BART station south to San Bruno Avenue and the San Bruno Caltrain station. The Centennial Way Trail connects San Bruno and South San Francisco.

The map in Figure 15 displays the existing and recommended bicycle networks by class type in the EPCs and surrounding neighborhoods in South San Francisco, as proposed in the Active South City Plan. An additional view on the next page (Figure 16) shows the bike network in San Bruno as proposed in its Walk ‘n Bike Plan.

125 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 32 |
Figure 15: Existing and Recommended Bicycle Network in South San Francisco (2022) Source: Active South City Plan

126 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 33
Source: City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan
Figure 16: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network in San Bruno (2016)

127 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 34 |
Physical Travel Barriers
Several streets and highways, Caltrain’s rail line and Colma Creek create physical barriers and challenging crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists in the EPCs. The map in Figure 17 visualizes these barriers. Some of these are impassable outside of designated crossings while some are more permeable but involve a high-stress and time-consuming crossing.

In the City of South San Francisco, US-101 and Colma Creek serve as physical barriers in some places, blocking residents’ movements around their neighborhoods; Interstate 380 crosses through several neighborhoods in the City of San Bruno, and limits access between communities to its north and south. El Camino Real (State Highway 82) and Caltrain’s right of way affect residents and create challenging crossings in both South San Francisco and San Bruno.

Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans
The previous South San Francisco/San Bruno Community-Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) included a strategy aimed at improving pedestrian amenities. Since the previous CBTP was developed in 2012, South San Francisco upgraded El Camino Real between the BART station and Arroyo Drive and will be launching a study of additional improvements. San Bruno and South San Francisco are also in the process of planning access improvements around the San Bruno BART Station along Huntington Avenue and Sneath Lane.

In addition to the goals set forth in the 2022 Active South City Plan, the South San Francisco General Plan proposes policies to improve pedestrian connections and sidewalks and expand amenities such Figure 17: Travel Barriers in the San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities
Source: City of South San Francisco Lindenville Specific Plan, 2023

128 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 35
as street furniture and lighting. The
Lindenville Specific Plan (see Figure 18)
also envisions a network of connected
trails, greenways, and open spaces,
that would enhance the pedestrian
experience in this portion of South San
Francisco.

The San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan sets
the goal of making walking more
pleasant and convenient by filling
existing sidewalk gaps, removing
pedestrian obstacles, and providing
more pedestrian amenities such as
street lighting and benches. The
Active South City Plan and the San
Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan each identify
intersections and corridors for
pedestrian infrastructure improvements
within the study area (see Figure 19
and Figure 20). Many of the pedestrian
improvements along San Bruno Avenue
have since been implemented.

PARKS AND OPEN SPACE 95

Figure 24: Parks and Open Space Framework
Figure 18: Lindenville Specific Plan, Parks and Open Space Framework Source: City of South San Francisco Lindenville
Specific Plan, 2023

129 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 36 |
FINAL – JUNE 2022
MAp 12
Source: Active South City Plan
Figure 19: Pedestrian Priority Areas, Active South City Plan

130 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 37
City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan | Pedestrian projects Page 66 Proposed pedestrian projects

Source: San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan
Figure 20: Proposed Pedestrian Projects, San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike Plan

131 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 38 |
One of the goals in the San Mateo County Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is to establish a connected network of facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians.

This plan includes several of the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs as “pedestrian focus areas,” or communities within the county likely to have the highest walking activity, and it calls out the difficulties of accessing both the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART station as a pedestrian and when trying to cross Highway 101. The plan includes a list of corridors that might benefit from complete streets enhancements, including El Camino Real, and sections of San Mateo Ave and San Bruno Ave in San Bruno, and McLellan Drive, Westborough Blvd/Chestnut Ave, and Grand Ave in South San Francisco.

The San Mateo County Transportation Plan also calls out the physical barriers to access that many pedestrians experience, including the Caltrain rail line and barriers to walking created by the US 101, I-280 and I-380 freeways. It highlights the unsafe intersection crossing conditions near Caltrain and BART stations, as well as poor lighting along the routes that may discourage walking to transit stations. This plan mentions the need for pedestrian improvements such as safe crossings along El Camino Real, and the potential for safety improvements on ECR for all street users through the Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI), which was recently relaunched by SamTrans. When completed, the GBI will provide safety enhancements including traffic calming, medians and lighting, and expand space for active transportation by widening crosswalks and adding separate bikeways and street trees.

The recent Active 101: US 101 San Mateo County Crossings Improvement Implementation Plan, coordinated by San Mateo County Transportation Authority, identifies crossing and corridor improvement projects near US 101 which would expand and support safe bicycling, pedestrian and other active mobility use and reduce traffic congestion, looking especially at equity priority communities and areas identified as part of local high injury networks. The plan proposes a Priority Network of corridor projects throughout San Mateo County, and calls out six projects to serve as pilot projects, including the San Bruno Avenue East overcrossing at the US 101/I-380 interchange.

In the previous CBTP, “Improve Bicycle Amenities” was listed as a strategy. The 2022 Active South City Plan sets goals to improve bicycle and pedestrian network connectivity to major transit stops and community destinations such as parks, schools, libraries, and community centers. The plan specifically identifies gaps in the network and recommends upgrading 29 miles of the network, for a full buildout mileage of approximately 73 miles. The proposed bicycle network would include over 20 miles of Class IV separated bikeways. Within the study area, there are many corridors with proposed added and improved bicycle infrastructure, including upgraded Class IV separated bikeways on E. Grand Avenue, Utah Avenue, Airport Boulevard, El Camino Real, Sister Cities Boulevard, and Chestnut Avenue.

The City of San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike plan set a goal of creating a bicycle network that connects residents to destinations within and beyond San Bruno, including downtown, rail transit stations, schools, parks, and other key destinations. The plan identifies a total of 53 corridors for bike network expansion, including several proposed Class III bike routes along Euclid Avenue, Angus Avenue, Mastick Avenue, and San Mateo Avenue within the study area. These would all intersect with the existing bike lanes on the Huntington Avenue/San Antonio Avenue corridor, which the city is in the process of upgrading to a Class IV bikeway.

132 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 39
The 2021 San Mateo County Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan includes recommendations to complete a countywide “Backbone Network” of bicycle lanes, to expand north-south and east-west connections across the county, increase connections between and within communities, and improve access for residents who live in underserved areas to other parts of San Mateo County. Some of the segment recommendations included adding new bicycle facilities to segments of El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue and Sneath Lane in and near the San Bruno EPCs, along Grand Avenue near Spruce Avenue in South San Francisco, and adding connections to Centennial Way Trail and BART in South San Francisco.

In addition to closing gaps in the local bicycle network, the San Mateo County Transportation Plan emphasizes the importance of reducing barriers to access and circulation caused by rail lines, freeways and major streets. It also calls for cities and local agencies to adopt bicycle-friendly policies and standards for new developments and transportation projects and promote complete streets design principles to ensure safe and convenient access to bicyclists. It also calls for transit agencies to encourage and support bicycle use by providing better access for riders and facilities like bike parking.

Figure 21: Transit Service in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs Sources: GTFS; SamTrans; BART; Commute.org

133 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 40 |
Transit Service and Ridership
Service Coverage
The following transit operators serve the study area, offering rail, bus, shuttle, and ferry services, illustrated in the map in Figure 21.

Rail
BART provides regional rail service between the East Bay, San Francisco, and San Mateo County. The South San Francisco, San Bruno, and San Francisco International Airport stations are within a mile of the study area. Two BART lines serve the South San Francisco, San Bruno, and San Francisco International Airport Stations: the Yellow Line connecting Antioch with San Francisco International Airport, and the Red Line connecting Richmond and Millbrae. Both lines travel to the East Bay via San Francsico. The Yellow line operates every 15 minutes throughout the day, and the Red Line has 20-minute headways. A one-way trip originating from any of the three BART stations in the study area costs between $4 to about $20 depending on the distance of the trip.7 Caltrain provides passenger rail service on the Peninsula between San Francisco and San José, and limited service to Morgan Hill and Gilroy during weekday commute periods. The South San Francisco Caltrain Station serves local, limited, and express trains, with approximately 15-minute headways during peak times and 30-minute headways during off-peak times in both the northbound and southbound directions.

The San Bruno Caltrain Station serves local trains, with 30-minute headways throughout the day in both the northbound and southbound directions. A one- way trip originating from either Caltrain station costs between $4 to about $15 depending on the number of “zones” a passenger travels through. The Caltrain stations are both within the study area.

Bus
SamTrans is the regional bus provider for San Mateo County. Several routes connect the study area to Palo Alto, Daly City, and downtown San Francisco.

SamTrans routes that serve the study area include those listed in Figure 22.

Figure 23 illustrates SamTrans stop locations by the average number of weekly boardings, taken from data collected in August 2024. The bus stops with the greatest number of boardings include BART stops in South San Francisco and San Bruno, and several stops in downtown South San Francisco. One single ride on a SamTrans bus costs about $2 at a flat rate.
7 Fares for each mode are based on payment made via a standard Clipper Card and by an adult when applicable. Other payment methods and passenger types may be subject to discounts. See section about Transit Fares and Other Transportation Discounts below for more details.

134 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 41
Figure 22: SamTrans Bus Routes with Service in the CBTP Study Area Route Hours of Service
Route 41
(Parkside IL – San Bruno BART)
School-Oriented Service
Route 130
(Daly City BART - Airport & Linden/Oyster Point)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:00 AM and 12:04 AM with 10- to 15-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 6:00 AM and 10:25 PM with 15-minute peak hour headways Route 138
(Safe Harbor Shelter)
Limited outbound AM service and inbound PM service on weekdays and weekends Route 141
(Airport/Linden - Skyline College)
Weekdays and Weekends: Operates between 6:15 AM and 10:48 PM with 30-minute peak hour headways
Route 142
(SFO - Shelter Creek)
Weekdays and Weekends: Operates between 6:02 AM and 6:21 PM with 60-minute peak hour headways
Route 292
(San Francisco - SFO - Hillsdale Mall)
Weekdays: Operates 24 hours per day with 20-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 4:00 AM and 2:52 AM with 30-minute peak hour headways Route 397
(San Francisco - Palo Alto Transit Ctr)
Weekdays and Weekends: Overnight service with 40 – 60-minute headways Route ECR
(Daly City BART - Palo Alto Transit Ctr)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:00 AM and 2:00 AM with 15-minute peak hour headways Weekends: Operates between 4:50 AM and 2:20 AM with 15-minute peak hour headways Route EPX (East Palo Alto -
San Bruno BART and San Francisco)
Weekdays: Operates between 5:05 AM and 8:15 PM with 40- to 50-minute headways Source: SamTrans

135 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 42 |
Ferry
The Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) provides weekday commuter ferry service from the Oakland/Alameda ferry terminals to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. There are three morning departures from Oakland/Alameda to South San Francisco, and three evening departures from South San Francisco to Oakland/Alameda. The ferry route serves commuters from the East Bay traveling to South San Francisco for work.8 One single ride on the ferry route costs about $5 at a flat rate.

Shuttle
The City of South San Francisco operates the Free South City Shuttle with three routes: the Western Shuttle Route (Orange Route), the Clockwise Shuttle Route (Blue Route), and the Counterclockwise Shuttle Route (Green Route) (Figure 24). The Orange Route offers connections between the Serramonte Center, South San Francisco BART/Route 130, schools, and parks. The Blue and Green Routes connect with South San Francisco BART/ Route 130, Route ECR, City Hall, medical facilities, recreation facilities, schools, and parks.

Commute.org operates seven shuttle routes in the South San Francisco study area that connect various employment centers in the area east of US- 101 to the South San Francisco BART and Caltrain stations and the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The routes include Oyster Point BART, Oyster Point Caltrain, Oyster Point Ferry, Utah-Grand BART, and Utah-Grand Caltrain.

Oyster Point Mobility Group provides commuting options in the Oyster Point area of South San Francisco, offering connections to BART, Caltrain, and the San Francisco Bay Ferry at the Oyster Point Marina Terminal.

Figure 23: SamTrans Transit Stops by Average Weekly Boardings, August 2024 Source: SamTrans
8 WETA Onboard Ferry Survey Summary Report, 2025.

136 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 43
Paratransit and Mobility Services
SamTrans provides two on-demand, shared ride ADA
paratransit services for San Mateo County residents with disabilities who cannot independently use SamTrans
bus service. Redi-Wheels serves residents in Bayside
communities of the county, including San Bruno and South San Francisco. RediCoast serves residents in San Mateo County coast side communities. Users have to apply to use the service and call one day in advance to book a ride.

The City of South San Francisco offers three free shuttle routes which provide connections to key destinations
in neighborhoods throughout the city and run from
approximately 7 AM to 7 PM Monday through Friday.

The shuttle service has an app that provides real-time
information about the locations of shuttles on each route.

The City of San Bruno provides a Senior Center Bus with door-to-door service to programs for San Bruno residents.

San Bruno’s Senior Center Bus runs Monday through Friday and requires reservations 24 hours in advance.

Sam Trans provides mobility ambassadors and training to support older adults, new riders and users with mobility challenges learn how to confidently ride the SamTrans bus system.
9 San Mateo County Paratransit Rider’s Guide. SamTrans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/18512 10 City of South San Francisco. Free South City Shuttle. Accessed from www.ssf.net/Services/Free-South-City-Shuttle 11 Senior Mobility Guide. Sam Trans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/34996/download?inline Figure 24: Free South City Shuttle Route Map
Source: City of South San Francisco, Free South City Shuttle

137 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 44 |
Service Gaps
While there are a number of transit options available in and around the study area, several factors limit their impact on residents’ mobility. First, due to the high number of transit providers, service in the area is not always well integrated, and a single trip often involves navigating more than one system. Additionally, many of the providers primarily serve traditional commuters, so service is sparser during off-peak hours, including the middle of the day and later in the evening.

The focus on commuters is also reflected in the imbalance between the prevalence of north-south routes, which connect the study area to San Francisco and the South Bay, and the relative lack of east-west routes, which enable trips between the study area and the surrounding communities. The same physical barriers which limit pedestrian and bicycle mobility also limit residents’ access to transit. These include area freeways, Colma Creek, and Caltrain’s right of way.

Transit Fare and other Transportation Discounts
Transit users across the Bay Area can use the Clipper Card to pay fares on all Bay Area Transit Agency vehicles, including SamTrans buses, Caltrain, BART, and ferries.12 Clipper provides a discount fare program for low-income riders, called Clipper START, which provides a 50 percent discount on all fares.13 Clipper also provides Regional Transit Cards, which give discounted fares to riders with disabilities, and discounted Youth and Senior Clipper Cards, for riders ages 5 to 18 and 65 or older.14
The Go Card program, provided by San Mateo 101 Express Lanes, offers $200 per year to low-income San Mateo County residents to help to pay for transportation costs, including trips on public transit, through express lanes, toll bridges, paratransit and bike or scooter rentals.15
Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans
Several local plans have implications for the future of transit in the study area.

The previous South San Francisco/San Bruno CBTP identified several strategies related to transit improvements, including improving stop amenities and security, improving affordability of transit, increasing SamTrans bus service, improving connectivity of existing service, and enhancing access to the South San Francisco Caltrain station. Programs such as the free South City Shuttle have supported the implementation of some of these strategies. Since that time the South San Francisco Caltrain station has been relocated to connect directly with Grand Avenue and E. Grand Avenue for easier access and a more open, pleasant rider experience on the platforms.

The 2022 Shape South San Francisco General Plan includes recommended actions to improve station access, leverage employee transportation demand management programs, and implement transit improvements including transit signal priority, bus bulb outs, and bus-only lanes on transit priority corridors. The 2013 San Bruno Transit Corridors Plan lays out a vision of the city’s commercial corridors that are accessible by transit and full of more dense, mixed-use land uses. Key transit recommendations identified in the Corridors Plan include implementing a circulator shuttle route, enhancing bus shelters and waiting areas, and promoting opportunities to increase transit ridership.

The San Mateo County Transportation Plan includes recommendations to provide a transit signal priority at more intersections and Bus Rapid Transit along key 12 Clipper Card. Clipper. Accessed from www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/new-to-clipper.html 13 Clipper Start. Accessed from www.clipperstartcard.com/s/ 14 Discount Cards. Clipper. Accessed from www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/discounts.html 15 101 Express Lanes. Go Card Program. Accessed from 101expresslanes.org/program/equity-program

138 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 45
commuting corridors where congestion is a growing issue. It also calls for increased local bus service to connect riders to regional transit stations, such as the BART and Caltrain stations in and near the EPCs.

The Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI) is a key countywide project that includes transit, walk, and bike improvements along El Camino Real. The project aims to improve bus access and travel times along the corridor and implement streetscape changes that will include bus stop enhancements, bus lanes, transit signal priority and greater access to bus stops. South San Francisco is leading its own El Camino Real Mobility Plan that will be incorporated into the GBI. The plan will include recommendations for enhancing safety for all modes and
improving the experience for people walking, biking, and taking transit. San Bruno is currently leading a study with C/CAG and the City of Millbrae to determine multimodal improvements along the corridor. All of these plans align with the CBTP in addressing El Camino Real as a local travel barrier.

As a result of the Reimagine SamTrans project, SamTrans finished implementing an updated bus network in August 2024. The new network includes improved frequency, expanded service hours, more direct routes, new connections, and a new on-demand service. SamTrans also initiated the Bus Stop Improvement Plan (BSIP) in 2022 to enhance the bus stop experience for all customers by upgrading amenities and facilities. This included changing stop locations and consolidating bus stops on El Camino Real to improve travel times.

Source: Google Maps; Note: Blue dots outline the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno Figure 25: Traffic Volumes in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs

139 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 46 |
Traffic Hotspots and Vehicle Volumes
There are several heavily trafficked arterials and freeways that run through the CBTP study area, given it’s location on the peninsula between San Francisco and Silicon Valley. US-101, CA-82 (El Camino Real), and I-380 all increase access to regional destinations for local residents. These highways and streets also enable vehicle travel to and from adjacent employment centers such as the East of 101 employment area and San Francisco International Airport. While these freeways improve mobility for study area residents, their high levels of vehicle traffic also bring negative consequences to the area. The map in Figure 25 shows the traffic volumes during afternoon peak hour travel in the EPCs.

Several neighborhoods in the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno have disproportionately high pollution burdens from diesel particulate matter and congestion, two pollution sources that stem from the area’s industrial and logistics uses and its proximity to high-volume roads. The high proportion of freight truck traffic traveling to, from, and through the area disperse diesel particulate matter, and exhaust from non-diesel vehicles contains many toxic chemicals that may pose health risks to the study area’s residents and workers. Based on these and other socio-economic factors, Caltrans has identified the portions of the study area west of US-101 as Transportation-Based Priority Populations, meaning that residents in those areas are most burdened by the transportation system and receive the fewest benefits from it. See the Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) map in Figure 26 which illustrates these communities in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs. Darkest purple shows the neighborhoods which experience the greatest exposure to high traffic volumes.

Another local transportation burden is the congestion caused by the high traffic volumes on adjacent freeways. During the afternoon peak period (4-6pm), US-101 and I-380 both experience congested conditions, most notably at the interchange between the two freeways. Traffic congestion on US-101 also backs up onto the streets near its on and off ramps, including Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue to the west and East Grand Avenue and Gateway Boulevard to the east.

Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans
South San Francisco, in their 2040 General Plan, Shape SSF, identified congestion as a potential hindrance to economic growth of the city, as it could deter commercial and residential growth. The plan identifies that traffic congestion could particularly threaten growth of the East of 101 portion of the study area where many jobs are distant from Caltrain. However, the city has begun to address this issue by partnering with large employers in the area, including Genentech, to implement transportation demand management measures such as commute shuttles. At the time of the writing of the general plan, South San Francisco was also working to establish a community facilities district to fund transportation and infrastructure upgrades in the East of 101 area. Shape SSF identifies walkable station areas and first/last mile options as critical to reducing congestion and improving the overall transportation system in South San Francisco. These improvements are particularly importation for the East of 101 and Lindenville areas where buses and shuttles provide reliable connections and can reduce burdens from traffic congestion and delays.

The San Mateo County Transportation Plan also highlights the growing role of congestion in the region as the county has emerged as an employment destination within the Bay Area. One key objective in the Transportation Plan’s Action Plan Priorities list is to increase the number of employers and employees within San Mateo County who have access to and participate in a commute alternatives program at work.

The San Mateo 101 Express Lanes Equity Study looked at potential investments for mobility improvements in historically underserved communities along the 101, in order to ensure that community members would benefit from revenue generated

140 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 47
from Express Lanes tolls. The study explored potential options for a Pilot Equity Program responsive to the needs and suggestions of community members who live near the Express Lanes, as well as provide financial support for low-income travelers who might use the Express Lanes. The study recommended an Equity Program which included a combination of pre-loaded toll tags for low-income drivers, and pre-loaded Clipper cards for transit users. This is now known as the Community Transportation Benefits Program and provides an annual benefit of $200 in transit credit on a Clipper Card and a one- time benefit of $200 in Toll credits on a FasTrak Transponder.16 Street Safety
Extensive street safety planning has been conducted in South San Francisco and San Bruno and both cities have Local Roadway Safety Plans (LRSP) that identify collision patterns and trends as well as recommended safety interventions. South San Francisco and San Bruno have both identified high injury networks in previous planning documents, as displayed in the maps which follow below in Figure 27 and Figure 28. These networks represent street segments and intersections that pose the some of the highest safety risks to pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.

San Bruno’s identified high injury network accounted for 55 percent of injury collisions and 83 percent of fatal or serious injury collisions between 2015 and 2019. In South San Francisco, the high injury network accounted for 75 percent of injury collisions between 2015 and 2019. South San Francisco recently completed a safe speed limit assessment and is starting a Vision Zero Action Plan, which will inform Figure 26: Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) in the San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs
Source: Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) Version 1.0 Web Map; Note: Blue dots outline the Equity Priority Communities in South San Francisco and San Bruno. 16 Senior Mobility Guide. Sam Trans. Accessed from www.samtrans.com/media/34996/ download?inline

141 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 48 |
street safety priorities with a context-based approach rather than a crash-rate based approach.

Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans
The LRSP for each city identifies priority street segments and intersections for future street safety improvements. In San Bruno, many of the priority intersections are concentrated along El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue, both of which run through the city’s Equity Priority Communities. Safety projects, including intersection improvements at both signalized and unsignalized intersections (installing raised pavement and striping, advanced stop bars, and flashing beacons) and street segment improvements (installing separated bike lanes) are identified for many intersections and segments throughout San Bruno, including several intersections along El Camino Real.

In South San Francisco, the priority intersections within the EPCs include:
• Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue,
• Grand Avenue and Spruce Avenue,
• Spruce Avenue and North Canal Street,
• Commercial Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, and
• Shaw Road and San Mateo Avenue
The South San Francisco 2040 General Plan Shape SSF and LRSP identify broad policies and actions that the city can take to enhance safety for all road users.

Shape SSF discusses improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists by enhancing street crossings at key locations like El Camino Real and near the South San Francisco BART station. The city plans to implement measures such as median refuges, bulb-outs, highly visible crosswalks, and flashing beacons to increase safety at intersections throughout the city. Additionally, there is a broader effort to reduce vehicle speeds and implement traffic calming measures across the city to decrease the frequency and severity of collisions, with an emphasis on high-risk areas like school zones and streets with vulnerable users.

142 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 49
Figure 27: City of San Bruno High Injury Network
Source: City of San Bruno Local Roadway Safety Plan, 2023 San Mateo and Huntington Avenues, San Bruno

143 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 50 |
Figure 28: City of South San Francisco, High Injury Network Source: Draft General Plan, November 2021. Collisions from Transportation Injury Mapping System 2015-2019

144 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 51
Review of Previous CBTP Strategies
In 2012, C/CAG and partner cities completed a Community Based Transportation Plan for San Bruno and South San Francisco, which included most of the same communities that are part of this plan.

Before engaging community members about current issues and needs, the project team reviewed the progress of strategies and related actions proposed in the 2012 plan to address what residents considered their priority transportation and mobility- related needs at that time. Strategies in the 2012 CBTP included making improvements to bus stops, improving pedestrian safety, expanding the bicycle network, increasing public access to information about transit and shuttle services, and expanding existing transit service and frequencies. Many of these strategies are continued here in this plan.

The project team met with planning staff at the cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco, and at SamTrans, the local transit agency to discuss these strategies, their status toward completion, and how these strategies related to their current work. This review also assessed whether infrastructure and service updates were completed at specific locations provided by community members that were in need of transportation infrastructure improvements.

The project team developed a matrix to review the 2012 CBTP strategies and projects, and reviewed updates to all location- based comments from community members that were included in the 2012 plan. These are available in Appendix B.

Downtown South San Francisco

145 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 52 |
Community Needs
Assessment

146 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 53
Overview of Community Engagement
Activities
Between November 2024 and June 2025, consultant staff
from MIG and Redwood Resources partnered with the City/ County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/ CAG) to gather community input for this CBTP.

The team collected feedback from more than 400 community members through a combination of in-person and virtual
methods. The project team held interviews with seven local community advocates, organized four community focus
groups and four pop-up events, and participated in several briefing sessions with city planning committees. There were 126 responses to the paper survey.

During these activities, the project team heard from
community members about their transportation challenges and suggestions for improvements to transportation
services in their community. Project team members also
asked participants to identify any unsafe locations and key destinations they travel to in their neighborhoods and community.

Themes from the input are described below. Much of this input was also geographically located onto a map of San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Priority Communities.

This can be accessed at: https://bit.ly/46AYMCT. A full summary of engagement activities is available in Appendix C.

Interviews with Community Advocates
As a foundational step, the team identified and talked to representatives from five community organizations that have direct relationships with residents living in EPCs in San Bruno and South San Francisco.

These organizations were selected for their trusted roles within the community and their deep understanding of
local needs. Through a series of one-on-one and small
group interviews, representatives from these organizations provided a comprehensive view of the transportation
challenges faced by San Bruno and South San Francisco’s Equity Priority Communities.

Representatives emphasized the following themes:

Transit Affordability and Access
• Cost is a major barrier, especially for low-income
residents and warehouse workers.
• Loss of previous SamTrans bus pass assistance programs funded through the Lifeline Transportation Program has
worsened transit access.
• Infrequent or unreliable transit service makes commuting inefficient and especially difficult for residents with multiple jobs or family responsibilities.

Connectivity and Coverage Gaps
• Limited transit routes and first/last-mile connectivity force people to rely on cars.

Stakeholder
organizations
interviewed by the
project team:
• San Bruno Healthy Homes
(San Bruno)
• Rise South City (South San
Francisco)
• YMCA Community
Resource Center (serves
South San Francisco and
San Bruno residents)
• Friends of Old Town
(South San Francisco)
• Silicon Valley Bike
Coalition (regional
organization, serves South
San Francisco and San
Bruno communities)

147 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 54 |
• Key locations like the YMCA Resource Center and food distribution sites are hard to access without a car.
• Transit-dependent residents in South San Francisco would benefit from more information about the Free South City shuttle services.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Issues
• Poor walkability due to narrow or damaged sidewalks and unsafe crossings. • Lack of bike lanes and connectivity, particularly along major corridors and at key intersections (e.g., El Camino Real and San Mateo Avenue in San Bruno, and connections to San Bruno BART).
• Unsafe infrastructure deters walking and biking, especially for youth and seniors.

Transit Infrastructure Needs
• More bus shelters with seating, lighting, and weather protection are needed, especially at high traffic bus stops.
• Improved wayfinding and signage can enhance user experience and safety.

Proposed Transportation Solutions
• Expand shuttle routes and improve frequency for buses and Caltrain. • Add dedicated bus lanes or BRT on corridors like El Camino Real. • Enhance bike and pedestrian infrastructure, including safer crossings, extended bike lanes, and sidewalk improvements.
• Improve connections between major transit hubs and underserved neighborhoods.

Geographic and Policy Considerations
• Community organization representatives urged the inclusion of East San Bruno and San Bruno Avenue in the study area due to upcoming redevelopment (e.g., Tanforan Mall).
• They also encouraged alignment with the San Bruno Transit Corridors Plan and soliciting input from advisory committees such as the South San Francisco Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) and San Bruno Complete Streets Committee.

Outreach Strategies
Community representatives interviewed by the project team recommended engaging EPC community members through trusted, informal, and culturally responsive and accessible approaches. They suggested tailoring outreach efforts to reflect the diversity of the community and ensuring in-language engagement for residents who primarily speak Spanish or other non-English languages.

Interviewees also emphasized offering incentives and hosting activities at familiar community hubs like churches and resource centers and with trusted community organizations which have established relationships and trust with the community and are well-positioned to lead grassroots outreach. Additionally, community representatives reminded the project team that offering virtual engagement options like Zoom focus groups, scheduling sessions outside of regular business hours, and ensuring materials and events are accessible in both English and Spanish can help to effectively reach underserved and hard-to-reach populations.

To initiate the engagement process, the project team developed large-format posters in English and Spanish featuring detailed maps of each Equity Priority Community (EPC), accompanied by key questions such as: “What is most frustrating about transportation in your area?” and “What ideas do you have for improving mobility?” The team also created a bilingual paper survey designed to gather more

148 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 55
in-depth information about residents’ transit use and mobility habits. These are all available as part of Appendix B.

With these materials prepared, the project team reached out to a range of community settings to ensure broad participation. This included outreach to community-based organizations, developing pop-up events outside churches and stores, and organizing focus groups collaborating with key partners.

The project team held eight community outreach events in the six Equity Priority Communities.

More than 300 people participated in interviews and engagement events, and there were 126 responses to the community survey. Community-identified transportation needs and recommendations are summarized below, and a summary of outreach activities is available as Appendix C.

Community Pop-up Events
and Focus Groups
Pop-up Events
All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco
La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco
La Mexicana Produce Market, San Bruno
Rico Pan Latin Pastries, San Bruno
Focus Groups
Friends of Old Town (South San Francisco)
Resilient San Bruno
San Bruno Healthy Homes
YMCA Community Resource Center

149 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 56 |
WHAT ARE YOU TRANSPORTATION IDEAS?
¿CUÁLES SON SUS IDEAS DE TRANSPORTE?
!!
!!
!!
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³ !³
!³!Hns !Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns !ñ
!ñ
!ñ
!ñ
ÆcÆc
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4!4
!4
!4
!Þ !×
Cit y o f
South San F r ancisco
City of Brisbane
San Francisco
Bay
Ce n te n n ia l Tra il
?»
IÆ
%&k(
San Bruno
(Caltrain)
South San Francisco
(Caltrain)
San Bruno
(BART)

SA N BRUNO
PARK

EL CA MINO

FRA NCISCO

T ERRA CE LINDENV ILLE

MA Y F A IR

V ILLA GE

SOUT HWOOD

ORAN GE
PARK

DOWNTOWN

O L D T O W N

PARAD I SE

V A LLEY

SO U TH

AI RPORT

EASTSI D E

OY S T ER POINT
E Sa n B ru n o Ave
S L i n d en Ave
H i l l si d e B l vd
H a zel wood D r
Ch estn u t Ave
W Or a n g e Ave
SSpruceAve
Larch Ave
Dubuque Ave
SpruceAve
4Th L n
Li nden Ave
M a p l e Ave
5 Th Ave
N Ca n a l St
Bayhill Dr
M i l l er Ave
M yr tl e Ave
Gra n d Ave
R ockwood D r
B a d en Ave
Sa n B ru n o Ave W
Pal m Ave
EucalyptusAve
Oyster P oi n t B l vd
Ch err y Ave
Forest Vi ew D r
E Gra n d Ave
2 N d L n
M a sson Ave
Huntington Ave
Park Way
El CaminoReal
Ta m a ra ck L n
3 R d L n
Northwood Dr
HemlockAve
I n d u stri a l Way
Sh aw R d
Com m erci a l Ave
1 St L n
Sa n M ateo Ave
U tah Ave
S Ai rp or t B l vd
LittlefieldAve
GatewayBlvd
H a rb or Way
N Access R d
AirportBlvd
R a i l roa d Ave
SMapleAve
Sn eath L n
F orb es B l vd
M ari n a B l vd
Eccles Ave
N
Mcdonnell Rd
Si ster Ci ti es B l vd
D n a Way
Sign Hill Park
T errabay
Gy mnasium
Oyster
Point Park
Centennial
Dog Park
Paradise
V alley
Park
San Bruno Mountain
S t a t e a nd C o unt y P a r k
Sister Cities Park
7t h A v enue and
W alnut
Park
7th
A v enue
Park
Orange
Memorial
Park
Gardiner Lot
Cypress
and Pine Play lot
San Bruno
Point Park
Bayshore Circle
Park
Hillside
Ath l etic
Field
Forest Lane
Park
Cit y Hall T ot
Lot
Commodore
Park
Brentwood
Park
0 0.2 0.4
Mile
Uses | Usos
!× Senior Centers | Centro para Ancianos
!Þ Community Centers | Centros Comunitarios
!4 Schools | Escuelas
Æc Library | Bibliotecas
!ñ Government Facilities | Instalaciones Gubernamentales !Hns C linic s a nd Me d ic a l C e nt e r s | C linic a s y C e nt r o s Mé d ic o s !³ Grocery Stores | Tiendas de Comestibles
c5 Neighborhood Retail Centers | Centros V ecinales de Tiendas Minoristas c5 Regional Commercial Centers | Centros Comerciales Regionales !l Major Employers | Principales Empleadores
Employment Area | Áreas de Empleo
Commercial District | Distrito Comercial
T rails | Senderos
Caltrain Routes | Ruta de Caltrain
Basemap Features | Características del Mapa Base
B A R T R o ut e s | R ut a d e B A R T
!!
!!
C it y Bo und a r y | L í mit e d e la C iud a d
B us S t o p s | P a r a d a d e A ut o b ús
QUESTION 1:

What transportation challenges are most
frustrating in this area?
QUESTION 2:

What improvements at what locations
would make you feel safer driving, walking,
or using a mobility device, or on a bike?
PREGUNTA 1:
¿Cuáles son los desafíos de transporte más
frustrantes en esta área?
PREGUNTA 2:
¿Qué mejoras en qué lugares le harían
sentir más seguro al conducir, caminar,
usar un aparato de movilidad o andar en
bicicleta?
!!
!!
!!
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
!l
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
c5
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³
!³ !³
!³!Hns !Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns
!Hns !ñ
!ñ
!ñ
!ñ
ÆcÆc
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4
!4!4
!4
!4
!Þ !×
Cit y o f
South San F r ancisco
City of Brisbane
San Francisco
Bay
Ce n te n n ia l Tra il
?»
IÆ
%&k(
San Bruno
(Caltrain)
South San Francisco
(Caltrain)
San Bruno
(BART)

SA N BRUNO
PARK

EL CA MINO

FRA NCISCO

T ERRA CE LINDENV ILLE

MA Y F A IR

V ILLA GE

SOUT HWOOD

ORAN GE
PARK

DOWNTOWN

O L D T O W N

PARAD I SE

V A LLEY

SO U TH

AI RPORT

EASTSI D E

SA N BRUNO
PARK

EL CA MINO

FRA NCISCO

T ERRA CE LINDENV ILLE

MA Y F A IR

V ILLA GE

SOUT HWOOD

ORAN GE
PARK

DOWNTOWN

O L D T O W N

PARAD I SE

V A LLEY

SO U TH

AI RPORT

EASTSI D E

150 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 57
Figure 30: CBTP Community Survey

151 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 58 |
Community-Identified Transportation
Needs and Suggestions
The transportation challenges, issues and recommendations heard from community members during interviews, at outreach events and through the survey are summarized below under several themes. These include pedestrian, bicycle, street and transit infrastructure; transit service; safety; affordable access; and awareness and knowledge about the existing transportation system. The sections discussing each of these themes include some of the key issues and recommendations from residents collected during outreach. Some of these issues may have already been addressed by cities as we developed this plan. See Appendix C for a more detailed discussion of comments from community members.

La Hacienda Market, South San Francisco Rico Pan, San Bruno La Mexicana Market, San Bruno

152 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 59
Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements
Across 37 individual comments, community members emphasized the urgent need for safer, more accessible, and better-connected pedestrian infrastructure in both San Bruno and South San Francisco. Many comments reflect concerns over unsafe walking conditions, particularly in areas with high traffic volumes, near schools, or in neighborhoods where sidewalks and lighting are inadequate or deteriorating. Community members called for improved crosswalks and intersection safety, especially near Cypress and Pine Playlot in South San Francisco, Lomita Park Elementary School in San Bruno, and along major roads such as El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue, and Spruce Avenue. Women especially noted fears about safety when walking in poorly lit areas, such as along South Linden Ave, south of Canal Street in South San Francisco, along Sneath Lane in San Bruno, and on the Centennial Way Trail between Orange Park and Maple Avenue.

Other comments from community members centered on the need for a more comprehensive and connected network of pedestrian pathways, to address gaps in sidewalks and walking paths that make it difficult for residents to reach transit, parks, schools and neighborhood services. This lack of connectivity especially affects children walking to school (community members mentioned Belle Aire Elementary School sidewalks flood on rainy days) and residents who are trying to access public transit without a car (lack of a marked crossing on Huntington Avenue from the Centennial Way Trail and reaching the bus stops at Linden and Armor Avenues are two examples). Respondents also recommended adding streetscape design elements, such as benches, trees for shade, and signage along walking corridors to encourage walking and address local environmental concerns.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Many sidewalks are narrow and poorly maintained
• Dim or inadequate street lighting makes walking at night feel unsafe, along South Linden Avenue south of Canal Street in South San Francisco, and along San Bruno Avenue, Herman Street and Kains Avenue, and on Angus Avenue near Third Avenue
• Safety enhancements such as raised crosswalks and stop signs with flashing lights are needed for pedestrians at intersections, such as those around Lomita Park Elementary
• Install bulb-outs, pedestrian refuge islands along busy streets such as El Carmino Real, and at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue and ECR
• Confusing or dangerous crossings along or under busy streets near the San Bruno BART station and Interstate 380 in San Bruno • Gaps or hazards in pedestrian pathways prevent residents from getting to transit stops, schools, and other key destinations, such as flooding near Belle Air Elementary
• Prioritize pedestrian infrastructure enhancements in underserved, residential neighborhoods

153 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 60 |
Bicycle and Active Transportation Infrastructure
Community feedback revealed a strong and consistent demand for safer, more connected, and more accessible bicycle infrastructure in South San Francisco and San Bruno. Across 53 individual comments, residents emphasized the need to shift from fragmented, high-risk biking environments to a more bike-friendly network with first/last-mile connections to transit.

Many participants described the existing bicycle network as incomplete or unsafe, especially along major corridors and near schools, parks, and commercial centers. Bicyclists reported feeling forced to share the street with fast-moving vehicles due to a lack of dedicated bike lanes or shoulders.

Comments highlighted that even where bike lanes exist, they are often unprotected, too narrow, or interrupted by unsafe intersections, creating stress and discouraging ridership.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• The bicycle network is incomplete along major corridors and near schools, parks, and commercial corridors
• Riders feel unsafe sharing streets with fast moving vehicles • Unprotected bike lanes discourage ridership
• There is a lack of east-west connections from key locations like Skyline College in San Bruno, especially across Highway 101 and along the Caltrain corridor
• Arterial streets are intimidating for younger riders and families • There is a need for separated, protected bicycle lanes which would support use among students, low-income workers, older adults and new riders who may avoid biking due to fear of traffic • More secure bike parking at transit hubs and public buildings, wayfinding signage, and improved lighting along popular bicycle corridors such as Centennial Way Trail and Linden Avenue • Add bike repair stations, particularly near transit nodes to support riders and promote transit and bicycle integration All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco

154 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 61
Street Infrastructure
A total of 54 comments pointed to street-related concerns, including poor pavement conditions, unsafe intersections, and traffic flow issues. Some suggested redesigning specific intersections to enhance safety for pedestrians, while others asked for traffic calming and speed enforcement in neighborhoods.

These improvements were often framed as necessary for safety but also for improving transit performance and multimodal integration.

Community members in San Bruno also talked about the expense and complication of parking in their neighborhoods, and desires for simpler, more affordable parking options near businesses and in Downtown San Bruno. They also requested alternatives like shuttles that residents and visitors could use to get around the city, especially between residential neighborhoods and San Bruno BART and Caltrain stations, to Skyline College, Skyline Trail, and to key retail and medical destinations along El Camino Real.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Repair streets, especially those with many potholes and poor pavement conditions, including El Camino Real in San Bruno and South San Francisco, as well as and 2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno which can be safety hazards for scooter and bicycle users
• Improvements to streets like El Camino Real can help improve reliability and comfort of transit service
• Traffic management is needed to address speeding on local neighborhood streets, such as Cypress and Linden Avenues and Park Way in South San Francisco
• Visitor traffic and parking in residential neighborhoods in San Bruno limits access for residents
All Souls Catholic Church, South San Francisco

155 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 62 |
Transit Services
Community members across South San Francisco and San Bruno expressed strong and consistent interest in improving the area’s public transit system, and discussed the importance of frequent, reliable, and well-connected transit options, especially for residents who rely on transit as their primary means of mobility.

Some of the key issues mentioned by residents included a need for an enhanced local bus service network (69 comments) with more frequent service, especially on evenings and weekends, and expanded service, particularly to underserved or disconnected communities which need better access to medical facilities, schools and job centers. Community members also shared the need for better first- and last-mile connections and local shuttle services (31 comments) to link communities with existing transit services, and improving regional connectivity between local and regional transit, particularly BART and Caltrain (25 comments). Other comments included suggestions for improving real time bus arrival information and trip planning tools and expanding paratransit options for residents with disabilities.

Community members also requested enhancements at bus stops to improve safety and comfort while waiting for the bus, including better lighting at bus stops, more visible and maintained shelters with weather protections, and a stronger presence from transit ambassadors or community safety patrols at transit hubs.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• More frequent bus service needed, especially on evenings and weekends
• Expanded bus service, especially in underserved and
disconnected communities
• Better first- and last-mile connectivity between BART and Caltrain stations and residential neighborhoods
• More local shuttle service to link communities to transit and to important community destinations
• Better regional transit connectivity
• Improved real time information and trip-planning tools • Expanded paratransit services
• Lighting and shelter enhancements at bus stops
• Better maintenance of shelters
• Stronger community safety presence needed at transit stations

156 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 63
Safety
Residents expressed a desire for streets and transit environments that feel safe, secure, and welcoming for all users, whether walking, biking, or waiting for the bus. These concerns spanned both traffic-related safety and personal security, with particular emphasis on vulnerable users such as seniors, youth, and people with disabilities.

Community members shared concerns related to pedestrian safety, especially in areas with high traffic volumes, limited street crossings or poorly maintained sidewalks. Residents identified numerous locations where crossing the street felt dangerous due to missing or faded crosswalks, wide intersections with fast moving vehicles, and lack of pedestrian signals or stop signs.

This was especially important for residents near schools, transit stops and senior housing, where residents often rely on walking as a primary mode of transportation. Comments included suggestions for traffic management measures, such as speed humps, bulb-outs and raised crosswalks to make walking routes more visible and protected. Near schools, residents called for more crossings with flashing beacons, curb extensions and crossing guards.

Residents also mentioned concerns about personal safety, particularly when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas. Many residents, especially women, seniors and people with disabilities, say they felt vulnerable, especially in early morning or evening, to theft, harassment or violence.

Community members suggested better lighting at bus stops and along walking paths, more visible and maintained shelters, more security features such as emergency call buttons, and a stronger presence of ambassadors or community safety patrols at transit hubs.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Pedestrian safety concerns in areas with high traffic volumes, limited crossings or poorly maintained sidewalks
• Wide intersections with fast moving vehicles, missing or faded crosswalks and lack of pedestrian signals or stop signs are concerns especially for residents near schools, transit stops and senior housing who depend on walking
• Unsafe crossings and unmonitored bus stops seen as barriers to independence and mobility in neighborhoods with high populations of young people
• Community members feel vulnerable when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas
• Need for better lighting and security features, visible and maintained shelters, community safety patrols at transit centers to foster a sense of safety and encourage walking, biking and transit use

157 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 64 |
Affordability and Cost Barriers
For many residents in South San Francisco and San Bruno, the cost of transportation is a significant and ongoing barrier to mobility. Community feedback revealed that even when transit services are available, the price of riding – along with hidden costs related to time, reliability, and access – can deter regular use, particularly among lower-income households, youth, older adults, and residents in affordable housing.

Community members mentioned the strain of paying for daily transit fares, especially for families and riders who rely upon multiple trips per day. Participants shared that even modest fare costs add up quickly, and current discount programs are not sufficient or well known.

Concerns about affordability were especially common among older adults on fixed incomes, low-wage workers commuting to multiple jobs, and youth and students without access to free or reduced fares. Several comments suggested a need for free or subsidized transit programs for priority populations, and expanding existing youth and senior fare programs, which they stressed would increase local transit ridership.

In addition to fare costs, residents shared that discount programs are not accessible, due to their complex eligibility requirements or lack of awareness about them. Some mentioned that language barriers or limited internet access prevented them from enrolling in fare discount programs.

Affordability concerns among EPC residents extended beyond fares, to the indirect costs that many experience. Riders miss work or appointments due to long wait times and infrequent service; a lack of safe walking or biking access to transit leads some to rely on more costly ride hail services. And riders often have to pay multiple fares when they miss a transfer connection. Several residents without access to a personal vehicle expressed frustration with how much more expensive and time-consuming it can be to depend on public transportation, especially in a system that isn’t always reliable. While driving is often perceived as faster and more convenient, many low-income residents simply cannot afford to own and maintain a car—making the affordability of transit a fundamental equity issue.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Paying daily transit fares, especially on multiple trips, strains the budgets of low-income families and riders
• Need for subsidized transit programs for priority
populations
• Inaccessibility of current discount programs due to
eligibility requirements, lack of awareness, language
barriers, limited internet access
• Indirect costs to riding transit include missed work and appointments because of long wait times and infrequent
service; use of costly ride hail service due to unsafe
walking or biking access to transit; and paying multiple fares because of missed transit connections
• Affordability of transit is a fundamental equity issue, since many residents cannot afford to own and maintain a
personal vehicle

158 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 65
Information and Awareness
Community feedback from residents of South San Francisco and San Bruno revealed a significant need for better communication, outreach, and visibility around local and regional transportation services. While many people expressed interest in using transit, shuttles, and other mobility options, they often lacked the information or guidance to do so confidently. This disconnect was especially prominent among immigrant families, seniors, and low-income households—populations that are most likely to benefit from accessible transportation but are often least likely to receive or understand critical information. In both cities, community members highlighted the linguistic diversity of their neighborhoods and called for translated and culturally relevant materials, especially in Spanish, Tagalog, Cantonese and Mandarin. Many residents rely on printed materials and are less likely to access transit information online.

Residents mentioned they had never heard of discount programs, such as Clipper START, the youth Clipper Card or local shuttle or paratransit services, and didn’t know how to apply for them. Others who know about these programs say they find them inaccessible because of confusing eligibility requirements or language barriers. Residents suggested providing assistance with applications and enrollments at schools and senior centers, and during community food distribution events, and sharing informational charts about fare options and benefits in multiple languages.

Community members, especially in San Bruno, expressed frustration with outdated signage about transit service and difficulty in finding updated schedules. Many said they needed low-tech printed brochures and staff to call for support. Residents said they need information in real time about delays, route changes, and shuttle availability, and suggested that route information should be posted at high-traffic areas, transit stations and senior housing complexes.

Residents in both South San Francisco and San Bruno suggested that more positive messaging could encourage transit use and reduce the stigma to using transit, especially for those new to the system. Community members suggested free “Try Transit” days, transit ambassadors or ride-alongs for seniors and young people, and social media or local radio campaigns showcasing real riders and the benefits of using transit.

Key issues and suggestions raised by
community members:
• Limited awareness among residents about local
transit services, such as the San Bruno Senior
shuttle, bus service connections from the San
Bruno Caltrain station, and SamTrans route
changes and frequencies, particularly along El
Camino Real and Sneath Avenue
• Need for more multilingual and culturally
accessible printed informational materials
• More promotion and education related to fare
discount and low-cost transit programs for
older adults, young people and low-income
riders, such as Clipper START, and the youth
and senior Clipper Cards and how to apply for
them
• More real-time, easy to use information on
signage/postings available to all residents to
view and access
• Promote benefits of transit use to encourage
new riders and expand use among those new
to the system

159 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 66 |
Recommendations to
Address Community
Transportation
Challenges

160 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 67
Based on the input collected during community
engagement, the project team has developed
a set of recommended strategies to address
community members’ stated needs related to
transportation challenges, access and mobility
in and around their communities.

Strategy Description
Improve pedestrian safety and community
access
Improve pedestrian safety and access by installing more crosswalks and safety enhancements to reduce traffic collisions, improve safety, and expand neighborhood accessibility.

Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety,
and amenities
Provide bicycle connectivity to existing shared-use paths such as the Centennial Way Trail, on critical corridors such as El Camino Real and San Mateo Avenue. Create safe, comfortable bikeways on streets with high vehicle volumes and speeds. Provide repair stations and additional bike parking at transit stations.

Improve street infrastructure and safety Repair damaged street pavement and implement traffic management strategies to facilitate safer travel for everyone.

Improve transit amenities
Maintain and expand bus stop amenities such as shelters, benches, restrooms at transit stations, and improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to bus stops and transit centers to enhance the rider experience and encourage new ridership.

Extend and adjust transit service routes, times,
and frequencies to reflect the needs of older
adults, students, and essential workers
Adjust transit and shuttle routes, timing and frequency to reflect the needs of community members who need travel options in the evenings and on the weekends.

Improve transit reliability and connectivity Improve on-time performance of existing transit services and ensure riders in need of regional travel can make efficient connections between transit routes and regional transit systems.

Expand options for low- or no-cost
transportation services
Expand programs which reduce the financial burdens of transit on low-income residents.

Expand awareness of transit and
transportation services
Promote transportation services that are already available to residents through ongoing campaigns to grow awareness among potential riders and encourage mode shift.

This section assesses these strategies and several recommended projects which meet the goals of each strategy.

Figure 31: 2025 CBTP Transportation Strategies

161 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 68 |
Evaluation Criteria
Each strategy and related recommended projects and programs are briefly discussed in the section that follows. These suggested projects and programs are introduced and assessed based upon their potential to provide benefits to residents who live in one or more of the six San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs, and whether and how they relate to existing projects or plans. Each suggested project and program is also evaluated on how well it responds to the questions laid out below: how it might increase access to transportation services and expand mobility for residents, how feasible partner cities and agencies could find funding for the project, and how easy or difficult it might be to implement the work needed to bring the project to completion.

Community Benefit
• Does this serve communities in the EPCs who are in greatest need for additional services, or who experience the greatest barriers to mobility? • Will this improve local health and safety outcomes for community members? • Does the project have support from community members and organizations? • Does it provide widespread benefits that will impact many people? Increases Access and Mobility
• Does this provide additional transportation access and expand mobility for transit-dependent residents?
Financial Feasibility
• Are there existing or potential funding sources available to cover the costs of this project?
• Are there additional ongoing costs, such as maintenance? • Does this project overlap with other current city/agency projects which could help fund the work?
Ease of Implementation
• How easy will it be to implement this solution?
• Is there one lead agency involved, or will it require coordination among multiple jurisdictions and/or agencies?
• How well does this project correspond to existing planning projects and goals? • Is this achievable within a reasonable timeframe?
Each of these criteria is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with a 1 rating for those projects which would provide the least benefit and/or hardest to achieve, and 5 for those projects which would provide the most
benefits and/or easiest to achieve.

An average of these criteria has been
calculated and included in the CBTP
projects table on page 123.

Proposed Transportation Strategies and Projects
This section provides a brief description of each proposed strategy and set of projects based upon the needs and recommendations of community members. It also provides an initial feasibility assessment of each proposed project. Please note that these are proposed projects, and implementation of any of these is subject to interagency coordination, technical review, city and/or agency approval and funding availability.

Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

162 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 69

STRATEGY A

IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN

SAFETY AND

COMMUNITY ACCESS
Improve pedestrian safety
and access by installing
more crosswalks and safety
enhancements to reduce traffic
collisions, improve safety, and
expand neighborhood accessibility.

163 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 70 |

PROJECT
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno Avenue, San Mateo
Avenue, Herman Street and Kains Avenue, and on Angus
Avenue near Third Avenue.

A
Description
Several community members said they feel unsafe walking along dark stretches of San Bruno streets mentioned above. Linden Avenue in South San Francisco was also mentioned by community members as a street in need of lighting--since our outreach activities, the city of South San Francisco has completed an upgrade to LED fixtures to enhance lighting along Linden which addresses the lighting concerns in South San Francisco.

Community benefits
This will improve how safe pedestrians feel while walking along several San Bruno streets in EPC communities.

Increased mobility and access
This may also improve mobility options for neighborhood residents if they feel safer walking along lighted sidewalks.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk n Bike Plan includes pedestrian-scale lighting for San Bruno Avenue, east of El Camino Real. The city also recently finished the first phase of a street lighting replacement project. The city’s San Mateo Avenue Streetscape Plan includes recommendations for pedestrian-level pole-mounted light fixtures and lighting to improve illumination along San Mateo Avenue. South San Francisco’s recently completed lighting upgrades to LED fixtures on Grand and Linden Avenues was partly funded by Peninsula Energy. South San Francisco has no additional downtown lighting projects programmed in their CIP.

Financial feasibility
Adding new lighting is an expensive project, and it will have ongoing additional maintenance and energy costs. Potential funding sources in addition to Peninsula Energy include the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation Grants program, and the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program.

Ease of implementation
San Bruno city staff will look to include these streets in upcoming lighting project programming. Adding new streetlights will need time for planning and design, for parts and equipment acquisition and installation crew time. It may also require coordination with PG&E or other regional utility providers.

164 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 71
Description
Community members in the neighborhood to the east of the San Bruno BART station say it is hard to access the bus depot and BART station on foot without a protected crosswalk.

Community benefits
A protected crossing would provide a safer connection to the BART station, especially for residents who live directly to the east of the station.

Increased mobility and access
This may provide increased access for community residents to the San Bruno BART station and buses which stop there, and support mobility of local residents, especially those who live in the neighborhood bounded by Tanforan and Huntington Avenues and by Caltrain to the east.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes streetscape improvements to Huntington Ave between BART and Caltrain stations.

Financial feasibility
Funding for a raised crosswalk could come from the city’s Measures G or Q city maintenance funds, or from countywide Measure A and W funding. Additional federal sources, like Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) might be available fund this work as part of a larger program or project.

Ease of implementation
This project could be added to the next phase of maintenance work related to the Huntington cycle track, and/or as part of upcoming city crosswalk and pavement maintenance projects.

PROJECT
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at Pacific Ave for community members to safely access San Bruno BART station.

165 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 72 |
Description
Many community members mentioned the difficulty of crossing El Camino Real (ECR), as it is a major thoroughfare through San Bruno and South San Francisco. The city of San Bruno has recently enhanced many crosswalks and intersections along ECR, but residents suggest additional improvements at the intersection with San Bruno Avenue, given traffic volumes and ongoing safety concerns.

Community benefits
Additional enhancements to the busy intersection at San Bruno Avenue and ECR may lead to improved safety outcomes for residents, many of whom currently perceive the street as unsafe to cross. It would also provide more widespread benefits to others who travel through the area, whether by car, bus, or other means.

Increased mobility and access
This project may provide additional mobility access if residents feel safer crossing ECR to get around their neighborhood and beyond.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes considerations for corner bulbouts at the intersection. SamTrans’ Grand Boulevard Initiative aims to improve bus travel and reliability along ECR, with streetscape improvements planned to begin in 2030.

Financial feasibility
Curb extensions are expensive to install, and this would be a complex project, with redesign and potential construction time to make changes to this intersection and to nearby bus stop locations.

Funding options might include SS4A or SHOPP.

Ease of implementation
Given Caltrans’ jurisdiction over ECR, work at this intersection would require planning and coordination among several agencies including Caltrans, SamTrans for bus stops and the City of San Bruno.

Implementation is subject to interragency coordination, technical reviews of the intersection and funding availability.

| 72
Image capture: Apr 2025 © 2026 Google
San Bruno, California
Google Street View
Apr 2025 See more dates
599 San Bruno Ave W

PROJECT
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb extensions) and
adjust SamTrans bus stop locations at the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue intersection.

166 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 7373 |
Description
Several community members and survey respondents mentioned feeling unsafe when trying to traverse the area underneath Interstate 380, and recommended enhancements to these underpasses, including lighting, walkways and bicycle lanes to make safer connections to Huntington Ave and the San Bruno BART station.

Community benefits
Providing lighting and designated pedestrian and bicycle pathways may help to improve safety outcomes for those who need to travel under I-380 to reach Huntington Ave and the BART station.

Increased mobility and access
This would provide a safe connection to and from the BART station, the cycle track and to the Tanforan Mall for San Bruno EPC residents who live south of I-380 and would expand both access and mobility options for community members who live both north and south of these underpasses.

Existing plans and projects
The City of San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes pedestrian- scale lighting, sidewalk enhancements and a separated bikeway along Huntington Ave between the San Bruno BART and Caltrain stations. Work on the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, funded by San Mateo County’s Measure W, has been completed south of the I-380 overpass. The second phase of the Cycle Track is funded and will be under construction this summer.

Financial feasibility
San Bruno could potentially connect some of this work to its enhancements and bikeway development along Huntington
Ave south of the BART station, which should include the I-380 underpass. Other potential funding sources include the statewide Active Transportation Program (ATP), and California Climate Investments STEP Program which funds accessibility improvements in disadvantaged communities.

Ease of implementation
This project would require coordination between Caltrans and the City of San Bruno. This is potentially a complex project, with implementation subject to interagency coordination, technical review of issues and potential enhancements, and funding availability.

PROJECT
Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and pedestrian-friendly walkways to the I-380 underpasses at Huntington and San Mateo Avenues, including visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave cycle track and to San Bruno BART station.

167 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 74 |
Description
Lomita Park residents and community members mentioned feeling unsafe when trying to cross the street to school, and recommended speed humps and enhancements to crossings at intersections near the school. The City of San Bruno will need to coordinate with the City of Millbrae and Millbrae Elementary School District, as the streets and school are along the border between the cities of San Bruno and Millbrae.

Community benefits
This project would provide safety enhancements for students and their families, as well as others who live and walk in this EPC’s neighborhood.

Increased mobility and access
This project would enhance access to a key destination in the Lomita Park neighborhood, and safer crosswalks and intersections may provide additional access for neighbors in the EPC.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes traffic management measures for some schools—adding Lomita Park Elementary to this plan would provide access to a potential funding source for these improvements.

Financial feasibility
Other potential sources include SS4A, STEP, San Mateo County’s Measures A and W, and when it becomes available, MTC-CARE funding.

Ease of implementation
In addition to funding availability and city approval, an intersection study may be needed to implement this project, as well as time for design and construction.

PROJECT
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and the Millbrae Elementary School District to implement traffic management measures, such as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary School in San Bruno, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian crossings.

168 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 75
Description
Community members mentioned that there have been several instances when the sidewalks near Belle Air Elementary School have flooded, making it difficult for students and parents to access the school safely.

Community benefits
This project would remove a significant barrier that students are experiencing trying to get to school. This would potentially provide improved health and safety outcomes for those walking to school, and for the larger neighborhood.

Increased mobility and access
This project would enhance access to a key destination in the Belle Air neighborhood, part of one of San Bruno’s EPCs.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes sidewalk construction and extensions around Belle Air Elementary School.

Financial feasibility
The City of San Bruno’s recent funding Measures G and Q extend its ability to cover the cost of urgent maintenance and infrastructure repairs, and these should be able to help fund this project. Other potential sources include SS4A, Safe Routes to School funding, and CCI STEP funding.

Ease of implementation
This project will need to be included and prioritized when scheduling the city’s future maintenance and infrastructure work.

PROJECT
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian infrastructure from
flooding near Belle Air Elementary School and determine the feasibility of design features and stormwater management that could reduce impacts to this infrastructure.

169 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 76 |
Description
Several community members said they felt unsafe walking on the Centennial Way Trail (CWT) and requested safety and security enhancements, benches, and marked lanes to reserve separate space for pedestrians and bicyclists. Some safety enhancements have already been completed, such as trail widening and improved lighting on the segment between South Maple and Spruce Avenues.

Community benefits
The CWT is a shared-use path that provides benefits to local residents both as open space and as a connection to key locations along its route. Enhancing the trail could potentially provide improved health and safety benefits to those who live in nearby EPCs.

Increased mobility and access
Increased use among local residents could enhance their access and mobility as well.

Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Centennial Way Trail Master Plan, which governs improvements to the trail, indicates opportunities for additional lighting and seating, location-specific signage tied to 911 dispatch, and signage for separation between transportation types.

Centennial Trail Park South opened in Fall 2024 and included a widened trail and improved lighting on the CWT section between South Maple and Spruce Avenues.

Financial feasibility
The City of South San Francisco has recently been awarded federal funds to support upgrades and park development along the CWT.

Additional enhancements suggested here could be funded by state grant funds like STEP or through San Mateo County’s Measures A and W. There may be ongoing staffing and maintenance needs that will need to be budgeted for as well.

Ease of implementation
Many of these enhancements are already part of recommendations in the CWT Master Plan. Crossings or major modifications would require a case-by-case evaluation.Portions of the trail are on BART and SFPUC property with PG&E easements requiring agency approvals.

Time may be needed for design, planning, procuring equipment, construction and any coordination needed with emergency services.

PROJECT
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements to the
Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting, emergency call boxes, benches, and marking lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians.

170 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 77
Description
Community members said that sidewalks are in need of repair on East and West San Bruno Avenue in San Bruno, and Maple Street in downtown South San Francisco. Some of the responsibility for these repairs may fall to local property owners.

Community benefits
Sidewalks free of cracks and breaks provide safe opportunities for community members to get around and are especially important for older adults and residents with disabilities.

Increased mobility and access
This would potentially improve mobility and expand access for EPC residents who live and walk or roll along San Bruno Ave and Maple Street in South San Francisco.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes sidewalk construction along parts of West San Bruno Avenue, west of Interstate 280, and sidewalk enhancements with landscaping east of ECR before July 2026.

Financial feasibility
Sidewalk repairs are usually the responsibility of local property owners, if not caused by a city tree or city-owned utilities. Property owners can take part in city sidewalk repair programs, where city contractors do needed repairs, paid for by the owner. When the cities may be responsible for sidewalk repaids, funding from local measures, such as Measures G and Q in San Bruno and local funding Measure W in South San Francisco extend the pool of funds these cities have to provide maintenance and repair to sidewalk infrastructure.

Ease of implementation
City sidewalk repair programs may take longer than repairs done through private contractors. Both cities have sidewalk maintenance schedules which may include portions of these streets.

PROJECT
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and West San Bruno Avenue in San Bruno and along Maple Street in downtown
South San Francisco.

171 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 78 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno Ave, San Mateo Ave, Herman St, Kains Ave, and on Angus Ave near Third Ave.
5 3 1 3
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at Pacific Ave for community members to safely access San Bruno BART station. 5 5 3 5
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb extensions) and adjust SamTrans bus stop locations at the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue intersection. 5 5 3 1 Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and pedestrian walkways to the I-380 underpasses at Huntington and San Mateo Avenues, including visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave cycle track and to San Bruno BART station. 5 5 3 1
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and the Millbrae Elementary School District to implement traffic management measures, such as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary School, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian crossings.
5 5 5 5
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian infrastructure from flooding near Belle Air Elementary School and determine the feasibility of design features and stormwater management that could reduce impacts to this infrastructure. 5 5 5 3
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements to the Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting, emergency call boxes, benches, and marking lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians.
5 3 5 5
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and West San Bruno Ave in San Bruno and along Maple Street in Downtown South San Francisco. 5 5 3 3 Figure 32: Improve Pedestrian Safety and Community Access, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

172 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan

STRATEGY B

EXPAND BICYCLE

NETWORK

CONNECTIVITY,

SAFETY,

AND AMENITIES
Provide bicycle connectivity to
existing shared-use paths such as
the Centennial Way Trail, on critical
corridors such as El Camino Real
and San Mateo Avenue. Create
safe, comfortable bikeways on
streets with high vehicle volumes
and speeds. Provide repair stations
and additional bike parking at
transit stations.
| 79

173 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 80 |
Description
Community members have mentioned the need for safer and more reliable travel options along El Camino Real (ECR). This project would provide a safe, continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks for travel on or along ECR for community members to reach their homes, schools, and other key destinations.

Community benefits
This project could provide widespread benefits for pedestrians and bicyclists in South San Francisco and regionally.

Increased mobility and access
Providing a safe, protected bikeway may increase bicycle ridership.

The bikeway may also connect to a proposed Class IV bikeway in Colma, would would expand access to the countywide bicycle network.

Existing plans and projects
The City of South San Francisco is currently preparing an El Camino Real Mobility Plan which will propose a multimodal vision for El Camino Real. The recommendations in the plan will fold into the countywide Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI). As a part of the initial recommendations for ECR in South San Francisco, bikeways with links to the existing Centennial Way Trail are proposed in the designs, either as an on-street Class IV bikeway or as a Class I shared-use path. As a part of this project, the City of South San Francisco is also considering widening sidewalks and improving transit speed and efficiency, in alignment with adopted city policies. The City of San Bruno is also participating in the GBI and is participating in a C/CAG study with the City of Millbrae to develop a multimodal street section on ECR.

Financial feasibility
Funding for this project could come from the Countywide Measure W, or state/federal sources such as ATP, SHOPP, STEP or SS4A.

Ease of implementation
El Camino Real is a state-owned street, so coordination with Caltrans will be needed. However, Caltrans is generally supportive of bicyclist and pedestrian facilities on state-owned streets to increase safe, multimodal options for communities. In addition to interagency coordination, mplementation will also depend upon analysis from the ECR Mobility Plan, and the availabilty of funding for the project.

PROJECT
Design a multimodal El Camino Real in South San Francisco, incorporating a continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks.

174 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 81
Description
Community members have talked about the lack of east-west bicycle routes in San Bruno. Developing a protected bike lane or multi-use path on San Bruno Avenue East would connect riders and San Bruno Park residents to the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track and the San Bruno Caltrain station, to the SFO airport, and provide a regional connection to the San Francisco Bay Trail, a 500-mile multi-use trail around the entire Bay, which currently has a segment that starts just east of the 101 on San Bruno Avenue East.

Community benefits
This project would provide community and transit connections and provide more regional connectivity. It would also make walking and biking safer along San Bruno Ave, especially across the long unprotected crossings for the 101 on and off ramps.

Increased mobility and access
This bicycle route would provide additional east-west access for residents in the San Bruno Park EPC, and potential access to SFO and the San Francisco Bay Trail for the broader community.

Existing plans and projects
This proposed route is suggested in San Bruno’s Transit Corridors Plan, to help meet the plan’s goal of enhancing bicycle connectivity among transit corridors such as the one on San Bruno Ave near the Caltrain station. It also proposes a potential road diet to make the San Bruno Avenue East segment safer for bicyclists and pedestrians, and a pedestrian and bicycle overcrossing south of the Highway 101/I- 380 interchange. SMCTA’s Active 101 Plan (January 2026) lists the San Bruno Ave interchange and this part of San Bruno Avenue as a priority pedestrian safety project and proposes options with Class I or Class IV bike lanes and intersection upgrades.

Financial feasibility
Funding for this project could come from the Countywide Measures A and W, or state/federal sources such as ATP, STEP or SS4A.

Ease of implementation
This would take several years to plan and implement, if approved by the city, and need coordination with Caltrans. However several potential early designs have been developed as part of the Active 101 Plan. Additional design, alternatives analysis and community engagement will be needed.

PROJECT
Develop a protected bicycle lane on San Bruno Avenue East which connects the San Bruno Caltrain station at Huntington Avenue to the San Francisco Bay Trail.

175 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 82 |
Description
Community members in South San Francisco mentioned it would be helpful to have a bicycle route that links Old Town to the San Bruno BART station, which is easier to reach than the South San Francisco station. South San Francisco has a Class III bicycle route on Spruce Avenue from Hillside (in the Paradise Valley EPC) to Railroad Avenue.

Community benefits
This would provide additional connectivity to the BART station for South San Francisco EPC residents and potentially provide a safer means to bike to the station.

Increased mobility and access
This would provide a needed link for bicyclists from Old Town to the San Bruno BART station.

Existing plans and projects
The Active South City Plan includes a recommendation for a Class IV separated bikeway on Spruce from Railroad Ave to El Camino Real.

The city has a complete street concept for the segment of South Spuce Ave, from Canal to ECR, which includes an alternative option for Class I bike paths.

Financial feasibility
It would cost several million dollars to implement a bikeway on Spruce Avenue, and a separated path may not be feasible on this street, given its size. Potential funding sources include ATP, SS4A, STBG and STEP grant programs.

Ease of implementation
This may take five or more years to implement, if and when a project like this is approved. In addition to approval time, it would require time for planning coordination and community consideration given that Spruce Avenue is a narrow street with parking that is used by many residents.

PROJECT
Extend the planned Spruce Avenue bicycle route south beyond Railroad Avenue to connect to the San Bruno BART station.

176 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 83
Description
Community members have called for a safe crossing to the San Bruno BART station from the south terminus of the Centennial Way Trail (CWT) at Huntington Avenue. Currently there is no marked crossing to get across Huntington Avenue, where it turns west around the BART station. The City of San Bruno’s Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, when completed will end to the north at San Bruno BART station. This crossing would connect the Cycle Track to the CWT.

Community benefits
This project would provide a safer connection for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue.

Increased mobility and access
This could potentially improve transit access for residents in all EPCs.

The second phase of construction of the Huntington Cycle Track, which will begin in 2026, includes a plan for adding signals to cross Huntington Avenue and connect the Cycle Track with the CWT.

Financial feasibility
San Bruno was recently awarded Measure W funding to complete the second phase of the Huntington Avenue Cycle Track, which will provide connections for bicyclists to the San Bruno BART station.

The city plans to include a north side connection across Huntington Avenue to the BART station.

Ease of implementation
These crossing improvements should be integrated into the next phase of Huntington Cycle Track project, which will begin in 2026.

PROJECT
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue in San Bruno, which links the south end of the Centennial Way Trail to the San Bruno BART station.

177 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 84 |
Description
Community members and advocates say that they need access to emergency repair stations at transit hubs.

Community benefits
This project could potentially provide widespread benefits for bicyclists and new riders across the region.

Increased mobility and access
Expanding amenities like on-the-go bike repair may encourage more residents to use their bicycles.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes a goal to pursue funding for a public bike repair station at the BART station.

Financial feasibility
These repair hubs usually provide the essential tools for minor bike repairs and cost about $1,000 to $5,000. Funding may be available through San Mateo County Measures A and W, or ATP or STEP grants.

Ease of implementation
There are several jurisdictions and agencies involved, which may complicate the planning and implementation. However, the cities may be able to install these in other locations through regular operational programs.

PROJECT
Install bicycle repair stations at the South San Francisco and San Bruno Caltrain stations and at the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART stations.

178 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 85 | 85
Description
Community members who want to ride their bicycles say they need additional and secure places to store and lock their bikes in San Bruno.

Community benefits
Additional parking and storage would provide benefits to bicycle riders and potential new riders. Locations are within San Bruno EPC areas and might support residents who live there.

Increased mobility and access
Additional places to lock and store bicycles may encourage more residents to travel by bike.

Existing plans and projects
BART’s Bicycle Program Capital Plan includes plans for “incremental increases” in bike parking at South San Francisco and San Bruno stations.

Financial feasibility
Funding for bike racks and lockers might be available through San Mateo County Measures A and W, or ATP or STEP grants.

Ease of implementation
Many of these enhancements are already part of recommendations in the CWT Master Plan. Time may be needed for design, planning, procuring equipment, construction and any coordination needed with emergency services.

PROJECT
Provide additional bike parking, racks and secure bike lockers along San Mateo Avenue, at 1st Avenue and Angus Avenue, and in downtown San Bruno.

179 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 86 | 86 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Design a multimodal El Camino Real in South San Francisco, incorporating a continuous bikeway and wider sidewalks. 5 5 3 3
Develop a protectedbicycle lane on San Bruno Avenue East which connects the San Bruno Caltrain station at Huntington Avenue to the San Francisco Bay Trail. 5 5 1 3 Extend the planned Spruce Avenue bicycle route south beyond Railroad Avenue to connect to the San Bruno BART station. 5 5 1 1
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and pedestrians across Huntington Avenue in San Bruno, which links the south end of the Centennial Way Trail to the San Bruno BART station.
5 5 3 5
Install bicycle repair stations at the South San Francisco and San Bruno Caltrain stations and the South San Francisco and San Bruno BART stations. 5 3 5 1 Provide additional bike parking, racks and secure bike lockers along San Mateo Avenue, at 1st Avenue and Angus Avenue, and in downtown San Bruno. 5 3 5 5 Figure 33: Expand Bicycle Network Connectivity, Safety, and Amenities, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

180 of 537

| 87

STRATEGY C
Improve local street
infrastructure and
safety
Repair damaged street pavement
and implement traffic management
strategies to facilitate
safer travel for everyone.

181 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 88 |
Description
Several community members mentioned feeling unsafe walking in Old Town due to street racing taking place along Cypress and Linden Avenues. The city recently completed the traffic calming improvements along Linden Avenue, adding crosswalks, curb ramps, bulb-outs and safety features to reduce speeds and improve pedestrian access. Additional signage and an RRFB have also been installed at Cypress and Grand Avenues.

Community benefits
Traffic calming measures such as speed humps or curb extensions may lead to lower vehicle speeds and safer streets and crossings.

Increased mobility and access
Pedestrians and active transportation users may feel safer walking and traveling along Cypress and Linden if traffic is moving at slower speeds. This may encourage and support more walking and active transportation use.

Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Active South City Plan included road diet improvements along Linden Ave, which have been completed, and advance yield markings/signs at Cypress and Grand. The city has installed an RRFB at Cypress and Grand.

Financial feasibility
Additional traffic calming measures, if needed, could be funded through local Measure W funding or grants from programs such as Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants.

Ease of implementation
This project may require a traffic study to determine if sections of these streets may need any additional calming measures. It may also require review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine if any further appropriate treatments are needed, and approve installation.

PROJECT
Add traffic calming measures to Cypress and Linden Avenues in Old Town South San Francisco to address street racing.

182 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 89
Description
Community members described safety concerns from sharing the sidewalk with young people riding scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and along Maple Avenue in South San Francisco. Installing a multi-use path on the existing sidewalk with signage, along with education and policy updates if needed regarding sidewalk use may help make travel safer for everyone.

Community benefits
Increased signage, paired with an educational outreach program would provide safety benefits to young riders and make sidewalks safer for all users. This would provide benefits that would reach beyond the cities’ EPCs.

Increased mobility and access
Pedestrians and active transportation users may feel safer walking and moving along these sidewalks, and education about alternative mobility options may encourage residents to try new modes of travel.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Walk ‘n Bike Plan includes wayfinding signage for cyclists to reach key destinations, and the city’s Safe Routes to School Plan includes bicycle safety education as a non-infrastructure recommendation to improve biking around schools.

Financial feasibility
These existing programs could be extended to include safe use signage and education through funding from SRTS, Road to Zero or similar grant programs.

Ease of implementation
Both cities have existing Safe Routes to School programming, and work with community partners who could help with outreach during education efforts. Implementation would require working with partners and securing funding and staff time.

PROJECT
Install a multi-use path with educational and safe use
signage for users of scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple Avenue in South San Francisco. Pair installation with a safe use educational outreach campaign.

183 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 90 |
Description
Several community members mentioned safety concerns near the Cypress and Pine intersection. A park sits on the northwest corner, and residents said they need safer crossings for pedestrians on the streets here.

Community benefits
Additional safety enhancements would potentially support safety and health outcomes of residents in this EPC.

Increased mobility and access
These improvements may make residents feel safer walking/traveling through and near this intersection. It may encourage more walking and use of the park.

Existing plans and projects
A recent transportation analysis done by Hexagon Transportation Consultants includes alternatives for installing speed tables or varying levels of street closures on Pine Avenue between Linden and Cypress Avenues.17 The city just added an accessible route to the park on 8th Lane, and added curb ramps at all intersections. The proposed park on Linden Ave is moving forward with changes to the street network.

Financial feasibility
Funding for street safety enhancements could come from the city’s Measure W funding or grants from programs such as Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants. Adding marked crossings could be done without additional grant funding.

Ease of implementation
Adding marked crosswalks could be done relatively quickly, after project approval and programmed into the CIP project calendar.

This might require review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine appropriate treatments and approve installation.

PROJECT
Install safety improvements such as speed humps, curb
extensions, zebra crosswalks, and a stop sign (at Pine Ave) at or near the intersection of Cypress and Pine Avenues in South San Francisco.
17 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Transportation Analysis for Linden Park in South San Francisco, California, p,2. Accessed from www.ssfca.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/parks-and- recreation/documents/capital-projects/lp-transportation-analysis.pdf?

184 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 91
Description
Community members mentioned that the street pavement along El Camino Real was in disrepair, and potholes made it especially unsafe for those on scooters and bicycles, with smaller wheels. Others said that their comfort was affected when riding the bus.

Community benefits
Repairing El Camino Real may positively affect safety and health outcomes of EPC and other San Bruno and South San Francisco residents who drive, bike, ride the bus, or otherwise travel down the roadway.

Increased mobility and access
Smoother pavement may convince more community members to use the street, and additional improvements to pedestrian crossings may make it safer for those on foot.

Existing plans and projects
Caltrans plans to repair the pavement on ECR and make additional pedestrian improvements through its ten-year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).

Financial feasibility
These projects are funded by the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and SB 1 state transportation funding.18
Ease of implementation
This project is currently in the design phase and is set for completion in FY 2028/29.

PROJECT
Repair and repave the roadway along
El Camino Real.
18 Caltrans. SHOPP Ten-Year Project Book, FY 2024/25 Q4, accessed from https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/asset-management/documents/2025-q4-project-book-combined- a11y.pdf

185 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 92 |
Description
Community members mentioned several places where the streets in San Bruno are in need of repair.

Community benefits
Additional safety enhancements would potentially support safety and health outcomes of residents in this EPC.

Increased mobility and access
Smoother pavement may reduce potential accidents and vehicle damage and may provide more access for EPC residents if they feel safer using the street.

Existing plans and projects
San Bruno’s Paving Program includes proposed paving on 2nd and Kains Avenues, and parts of Easton, Green, and Hensley Avenues.

Financial feasibility
The city of San Bruno’s local funding Measures G and Q provide funding toward street repairs.

Ease of implementation
Much of this work is already scheduled into the city’s Street Repaving Program, to be completed within the next five years.

PROJECT
Repair and repave the roadway on 2nd, Easton, Green,
Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno.

186 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 93
Description
Community members in Paradise Valley mentioned that vehicle speeds along Park Way made it unsafe for walking and biking and asked for speed humps to be implemented.

Community benefits
Reducing traffic speeds may make it safer for other EPC residents to travel along Park Way.

Increased mobility and access
It may increase mobility and access, if current speeds prevent residents from getting where they need to go.

Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Parkway Heights Walk Audit Report recommends curb extensions and sidewalk widening at the intersection of Park Way and Eucalyptus Ave.

Financial feasibility
Potential funding sources for speed humps, curb extensions or other traffic calming measures might be the city’s Measure W, Safe Streets for All (SS4A) or Road to Zero’s Community Traffic Safety Grants.

Ease of implementation
This would need review by the city’s Traffic Advisory Committee to determine appropriate treatments and approve installation.

PROJECT
Study and implement traffic calming measures such as speed humps along Park Way in South San Francisco.

187 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 94 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add traffic calming measures to Cypress and Linden Avenues in Old Town South San Francisco to address street racing. 5 3 3 3
Install educational and safe use signage and provide safe spaces for users of scooters and bicycles on First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple Avenue in South San Francisco.
5 5 5 5
Install safety improvements such as speed humps, zebra crosswalks, stop sign at or near the intersection of Cypress and Pine Avenues in South San Francisco. 5 5 3 3 Repair and repave the roadway along El Camino Real. 5 3 5 3 Repair and repave the roadway on 2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley Avenues in San Bruno. 5 3 3 3
Study and implement traffic calming measures such as speed humps along Park Way in South San Francisco. 5 3 3 3
Figure 34: Improve Local Street Infrastructure and Safety, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

188 of 537

STRATEGY D
Improve transit
amenities
Maintain and expand bus stop
amenities such as shelters,
benches, restrooms at transit
stations, and improve pedestrian
and bicycle connectivity to bus
stops and transit centers to
enhance the rider experience and
encourage new ridership.
| 95

189 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 96 |
Description
Community members say that there are many bus stops they use which need shelters that protect riders from weather, and lighting to make stops safer at nighttime.

Community benefits
Shelters help to ease the burden of waiting on riders, especially in bad weather or after dark.

Increased mobility and access
Enhancing comfort and lighting at bus stops may help to encourage more residents to use the bus.

Existing plans and projects
South San Francisco’s Active South City Plan emphasizes bus shelters as part of its design guidelines. SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan (2024) includes shelters as a near-term improvement to 22 bus stops in South San Francisco and 13 bus stops in San Bruno. SamTrans was recently awarded 2025 TDM Cycle 3 funding for construction and amenities installation at several bus stop locations, including those listed here along Airport Blvd and El Camino Real.

Financial feasibility
At each of these locations, adding a shelter with lighting might cost approximately $10,000 or more, for equipment and installation.

Continued maintenance costs will also need to be considered.

Ease of implementation
SamTrans is planning for an upcoming round of bus shelter installation, which will include weatherization and lighting, and it should look to include this list of stops where feasible.

PROJECT
Add bus shelters with weather protection and lighting at the following locations:

Airport Blvd stops at Baden Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave, Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd; bus stops along El Camino Real; bus stops on South Linden Ave; and bus stops near the Spruce Ave/ Tanforan Mall intersection.

190 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 97
Description
Community members have asked for additional bus stops on current routes 41 and 292.

Community benefits
These routes serve residents in EPCs in both cities. Additional bus stops may ease the amount of walking/traveling to and from current bus stops.

Increased mobility and access
These stops may make it easier for residents to get to bus stops and routes that may currently be out of reach due to distance or personal mobility issues.

Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans (2019-2022) proposed increasing daytime frequency to every 15 mins for Route 292.

Financial feasibility
SamTrans should determine if current ridership levels could support additional bus stops on these routes.

Ease of implementation
This project would require a review of route ridership data, potential planning time for route changes/additions, and if warranted, new bus stop installation and related equipment (such as signage, shelter, and lighting).

PROJECT
Study and implement if feasible new SamTrans bus stops
at the following locations: Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and Walnut Street, San Bruno; and Route 292: Airport Boulevard and Pine Avenue, South San Francisco.

191 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 98 |
Description
Community members voiced concerns about personal safety when waiting for transit in poorly lit or isolated areas and suggested adding lighting to bus shelters to make them more visible after dark.

Community benefits
This project would make EPC bus riders feel safer when waiting for the bus after dark and may enhance visibility along the street for all sidewalk users.

Increased mobility and access
Enhancing residents perceived and actual safety while waiting for the bus may support their mobility and may also encourage others to use the bus.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans plans to add lighting during an upcoming round of bus shelter installations but has not planned to retrofit existing shelters.

The City of San Francisco recently completed upgrades to street-level lighting in Old Town, which now have brighter LED fixtures.

Financial feasibility
There are lighting systems, like those that use solar power, that are designed for retrofitting existing shelters with new lights, without the need for a utility power connection. Solar lighting kits to retrofit existing shelters or bus stop poles equipment costs are approximately $1,500 each. These might be funded through FTA or TDA grants, or potentially San Mateo County Measures A and W.

Ease of implementation
There are approximately 16 bus stops in Old Town (on SamTrans Routes 130/130B and 141) which may be in need of lighting retrofits.

SamTrans current focus is on installing new shelters with lighting, which may extend the time period to implement this project. This work should include coordination with the City of South San Francisco to see if there are other potential street lighting improvements which could provide nearby lighting to bus stops, like the LED lighting upgrades recently completed along Linden and Grand Avenues.

PROJECT
Improve lighting inside existing bus shelters and at bus stops in Old Town South San Francisco.

192 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 99
Description
Community members say they need more community safety officers at the Caltrain and BART transit stations in San Bruno.

Community benefits
Additional personnel may make residents feel safer and more willing to use transit.

Increased mobility and access
Improved perceptions of safety at transit stations may make residents more willing to ride BART and Caltrain. This would potentially enhance access to transportation services to EPC residents.

Existing plans and projects
Both BART and Caltrain have safety staff who patrol stations. BART’s ongoing Ambassador Program includes unarmed members of the BART Police Department who have received de-escalation and anti-bias training to patrol BART stations. The Transit Police Bureau on behalf of SamTrans and Caltrain is responsible for the safety and security of Caltrain stations and facilities.

Financial feasibility
The cost of this project would potentially include funding additional hours for safety staff to patrol the transit stations. Potential funding sources might be through TDA grants or San Mateo County Measures A and W.

Ease of implementation
Project implementation will be dependent upon interagency coordination between Caltrain, BART and the city of San Bruno. It will also be dependent upon availability of personnel and funding to cover additional work time.

PROJECT
Provide more community safety patrols at the San Bruno
Caltrain station and around the San Bruno BART station.

193 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 100 |
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Add bus shelters with weather protection and lighting:
• At Airport Blvd stops at Baden Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave, Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd
• At bus stops along El Camino Real
• At bus stops on South Linden Ave
• At stops near Spruce Ave/ Tanforan Mall intersection
5 5 3 3
Study and implement if feasible new SamTrans bus stops at the following locations of interest: :
• Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and Walnut, San Bruno
• Route 292: Airport and Pine, South San Francisco
5 5 3 3
Improve lighting inside existing bus shelters and at bus stops in Old Town South San Francisco. 5 5 3 1
Provide more community safety patrols at the San Bruno Caltrain station and around the San Bruno BART station. 5 3 3 1
Figure 35: Improve Transit Amenities, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

194 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 101

STRATEGY E
Extend and adjust
transit service routes
and frequencies to
reflect the needs of
older adults, students,
and essential workers
Adjust transit and shuttle routes,
timing and frequency to reflect the
needs of community members who
need travel options in the evenings
and on the weekends.

195 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 102 |
Description
Community members in the Paradise Valley EPC say they need additional bus service and connections to area BART stations.

Community benefits
An additional route connecting Paradise Valley to the South San Francisco BART station would serve an EPC community which does not have a lot of access to SamTrans bus routes, or easy access to transit stations. A route that goes from the BART station through Paradise Valley to Oyster Point would also serve a wide swath of communities in South San Francisco.

Increased mobility and access
This route would improve access to jobs in Oyster Point and provide a bus route to neighborhoods along Sister Cities Boulevard, Hillsdale Boulevard, and Chestnut Avenue that do not currently have access to SamTrans service.19
Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed a new Route 126 which would run every 15 minutes during morning/evening peak from SSF BART to Oyster Point via Paradise Valley. Free South City Shuttle’s Green and Blue Routes provide service during peak hours along the west half of this proposed route, from the SSF BART station to Linden Ave, along Hillside in Paradise Valley.

Financial feasibility
This would be a brand-new service; SamTrans would need to consider potential ridership revenues to help cover costs of operation.

Ease of implementation
Implementing this project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule. Determining residents’ needs for service availability beyond Free South City’s current shuttle service and times would also be important.

PROJECT
Consider new route (Route 126) to provide additional bus service to BART stations and service in Paradise Valley.
19 Reimagine SamTrans, page 364-365.

196 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 103
Description
Community members in Old Town South San Francisco say they need bus service that is more frequent and extends into the evenings.

Community benefits
This would provide additional service to residents who live in South San Francisco EPCs.

Increased mobility and access
Additional and more frequent service would potentially provide more opportunities for residents to travel to key destinations.

Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed extending service to midnight on weekends for Route 130.

Financial feasibility
This additional service may be dependent upon ridership or other sources of SamTrans funding which focuses on service to essential riders and/or residents in disadvantaged communities.

Ease of implementation
Implementing this project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time, if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule.

PROJECT
Consider increasing frequency and extend evening service on bus routes that serve Old Town South San Francisco, such as Route 130.

197 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan Description
Several community members mentioned an ongoing need for additional east-west bus service which would connect downtown San Bruno and the BART and Caltrain stations with residential neighborhoods to the west and to Skyline College.

Community benefits
Increasing Route 141’s frequency would provide more bus service through several South San Francisco EPCs and provide additional service for residents on the route west to Skyline College.

Increased mobility and access
This would provide access to additional bus services to residents who live in South San Francisco and San Bruno.

Existing plans and projects
Reimagine SamTrans proposed increasing frequency on Route 141 to every 15 minutes.

Ease of implementation
This project would require a review of route ridership data, and potential planning time, if approved, for changes to the route’s schedule.

PROJECT
Consider increasing frequency on SamTrans Route 141 to every 15 minutes, to expand service options for east-west connections to Skyline College, downtown and transit hubs, as well as key destinations for older adults and low-income residents.

E
104 |

198 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 105
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Consider new route (Route 126) to provide additional bus service to BART stations and service in Paradise Valley. 5 5 1 1
Consider increasing frequency and extend evening service on bus routes that serve Old Town South San Francisco, such as Route 130. 5 5 3 3 Consider increasing frequency on SamTrans Route 141 to every 15 minutes, to expand service options for east-west connections to Skyline College, downtown and transit hubs, as well as key destinations for older adults and low-income residents.
5 5 3 3
Figure 36: Extend and Adjust Transit Service, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

199 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 106 |

STRATEGY F
Improve transit
reliability and
connectivity
Improve on-time performance of
existing transit services and ensure
riders in need of multi-route or
regional travel options can make
efficient connections between
transit routes and regional transit
systems.
106 |

200 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 107
Description
Community members talked about missed connections and unreliable bus service on El Camino Real (ECR), which in part is due to traffic congestion given its role as a major thoroughfare in the area. Signal policy changes could improve transit reliability and speed on ECR, and help the buses run on time. SamTrans has an existing signal priority pilot project on ECR, and has recently begun an evaluation of its use so far.

Community benefits
SamTrans’ bus route on El Camino Real accounts for 25 percent of the agency’s ridership, and most riders are from low-income households.

Enhancing the reliability of service on ECR would benefit many EPC residents, as well as others who live in the 13 cities along the route.

Increased mobility and access
This would potentially expand mobility for EPC residents and provide benefits to all bus riders along ECR.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans’ ECR Bus Speed Reliability Study, funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Grant, provides recommendations for advancing bus lanes throughout South San Francisco and San Bruno.

Additional studies of ECR by led by the city of South San Francisco, and by C/CAG for San Bruno and Millbrae are taking place as part of the larger Grand Boulevard Initiative, which is a process to reimagine the ECR.

Financial feasibility
The Reliability Study found that implementing changes that make service faster and more reliable would potentially allow SamTrans to maintain its service frequency and expand ridership while using fewer buses. Signal coordination would be far less costly to implement than other potential options such as priority bus lanes.

Ease of implementation
Implementing improvements via signal coordination would require ongoing coordination between SamTrans and Caltrans.

PROJECT
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El Camino Real.

F
20 SamTrans. El Camino Real Bus Speed and Reliability Study. Accessed from: www.samtrans.com/ECRStudy

201 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 108 |
Description
Many community members shared frustrations about consistently missing their connections between SamTrans buses, or between buses and trains. EPC residents who use the bus cannot afford to miss their scheduled connections, and some resort to expensive car shares to get to work on time. They suggested SamTrans review and adjust routes and transfer connection times so riders can make their connections to other routes or systems.

Community benefits
This project supports an urgent need among low-income riders, across communities served by SamTrans, who are struggling to get to work and other key destinations.

Increased mobility and access
This project would allow residents in EPCs and beyond to make more efficient use of their time and get to work, school, and appointments without worrying about incurring extra travel costs.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans is currently assessing the impacts of Reimagine SamTrans, and building a framework for the agency’s next comprenhesive operational analysis based upon need gaps and opportunities identified during the Reimagine SamTrans evaluation.

Financial feasibility
This could potentially be funded as part of SamTrans’ regular operations and service reviews.

Ease of implementation
This project would include a review of service data and connection windows, planning to determine route updates, and implementing any adjusted schedules, which could take several months to more than a year. Changes to connections are typically grouped into SamTrans’ August service change.

PROJECT
Consider a review of transfer locations and times on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows support riders making connections.

202 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 109
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El Camino Real. 5 5 3 3 Consider a review of transfer locations and times on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows support riders making connections. 5 5 3 3 Figure 37: Improve Transit Reliability and Connectivity, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40 on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

203 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 110 |

STRATEGY G
Expand options
for low- or no-cost
transportation services
Expand programs which reduce the
financial burdens of transit on low-
income residents.
110 |

204 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 111
Description
Programs like the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program offer prepaid cards for qualifying residents to use for public transit, paratransit, bikes and scooters, as well as for tolls and express lanes costs. C/CAG and partners should encourage and help community members apply for these programs.

Community benefits
In addition to encouraging mode shift, this provides a service to low-income residents who often experience the greatest barriers to mobility.

Increased mobility and access
This allows for additional transportation access and expands mobility options for transit dependent residents.

Existing plans and projects
The San Mateo 101 Express Lanes Go Card Program helps cover transportation costs for San Mateo County residents whose individual annual income is at or below 60% of countywide median income.

Commute.org provides free shuttle services (Free South City Shuttle) in South San Francisco and offers free transit tickets to eligible San Mateo County residents who are riding transit for the first time (Try Transit Program).

Financial feasibility
This program is covered by revenues from the 101 Express Lanes.

Funding for coordination may come from this source as well.

Ease of implementation
C/CAG coordinates this effort, and with community and city partners can expand promotion and access to equity mobility programs.

PROJECT
Develop implementation strategies for equity mobility
programs that encourage mode shift, such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program.

205 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 112 |
Description
Several community members shared their frustrations at having to pay multiple fares for a bus trip which should have been covered by a free transfer. Many EPC residents who ride the bus have limited incomes and cannot cover the expense of paying multiple fares per one-way trip.

Community benefits
This would provide a needed benefit to low-income EPC residents, and all bus riders, who cannot afford to pay for additional fares.

Increased mobility and access
Wider transfer windows and fare limits could potentially expand mobility for residents, especially if they can travel farther on one fare.

Existing plans and projects
Regionally, there is an MTC-funded effort to coordinate transfers through the regional transit Clipper Card, which has recently been rereleased as Clipper 2.0. MTC is launching a pilot program for inter- agency transfers.

Financial feasibility
Clipper introduced reduced transfer fares and fare capping via Clipper 2.0 on Dec. 10, 2025. All transit riders will have access to a transfer window of two hours. For SamTrans, this would be about reducing double payment of fares, which might have a minimal effect on ridership revenues.

Ease of implementation
SamTrans may want to consider additional efforts such as regular service reviews to help prevent local bus riders from paying more than one fare due to missed connections.

PROJECT
Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare capping on SamTrans routes to prevent riders from paying multiple times due to missed connections.

206 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 113

Description
Many San Bruno community members suggested additional free or affordable shuttle services to help residents and employees travel to work, the airport and other San Bruno destinations.

Community benefits
Additional shuttle service, whether sponsored by the city, employers, or as a private-public partnership, would provide service to EPC and San Bruno residents who say they need more affordable local options to help get to key destinations.

Increased mobility and access
This project would provide additional transportation access and potentially expand mobility for low-income workers and transit dependent residents in San Bruno EPCs and other neighborhoods.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans has a bus route that runs from downtown San Bruno to SFO Airport, that runs every 7 minutes. SamTrans recently operated the Bayhill shuttle, no longer in service, between the San Bruno BART station and San Bruno Business Park, jointly funded by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, San Mateo County Transit District and area employers.

Financial feasibility
Shuttles such as South San Francisco’s Free South City Shuttle (funded in part by San Mateo County Measure A and the city’s local Measure A) offer an affordable local service which boosts access for residents living in neighborhoods not well served by SamTrans or other transit agencies. While San Bruno may not be able to operate its own shuttle service, recent services like SamTrans’ San Bruno Employer shuttle show that there is both a need and desire among local employers to help their workers and potential customers get to their locations. The coming Tanforan development and other local employers may be interested in helping to fund new shuttle services.

Ease of implementation
Implementation of this project will be dependent upon finding partners willing to share financing responsibility, and whether the route or routes serve enough riders to make it sustainable.

PROJECT
Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop service for workers and residents to access local commercial areas and the airport.

207 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 114 |
Description
Community members, especially older adults and residents who do not speak English well, say they need more information and support to apply for and use transit discount programs. Developing a series of trainings with community partner organizations who can assist with curriculum development and recruitment ensures that residents in EPCs will have access to the support they are looking for to apply for transit discount programs.

Community benefits
This training series would support EPC residents who experience some of the greatest barriers to transportation use. These trainings, if recorded and posted on SamTrans and community partner websites, could reach many potential riders beyond the borders of the EPCs.

Increased mobility and access
This project would provide additional transportation access and expand mobility for transit dependent residents who may not understand, due to language or complexity, how to apply for and use transit discount programs.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans Mobility Ambassador Program trains volunteers to work one-on-one or in small groups with seniors and veterans on expanding their awareness of available transit options and navigating through a transit trip.

Financial feasibility
This is a project which could be funded through MTC’s new CARE program grants to community organizations, working to improve mobility in EPCs.

Ease of implementation
SamTrans potentially has trainings already available and could partner with community advocates to facilitate multilingual trainings at key neighborhood locations. This project may take some planning and coordination time but could be something implementable in the near future.
| 114

PROJECT
Develop a multilingual training session series with trusted community partner organizations such as Rise South City to promote transit discount programs and educate EPC residents on how to apply for and use transit discount programs such as Clipper START, and Y outh and Senior Clipper cards.

208 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 115
Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Develop implementation strategies for equity mobility programs that encourage mode shift, such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits Program. 5 3 5 3 Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare capping to prevent riders from paying multiple times due to missed connections. 5 3 5 3 Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop service for workers and residents to access local commercial areas and the airport.
5 5 3 3
Develop a multilingual training session series with trusted community partner organizations such as Rise South City to promote transit discount programs and educate EPC residents on how to apply for and use transit discount programs such as Clipper START, and Youth and Senior Clipper cards.
5 5 3 5
Figure 38: Expand Options for Low- or No-Cost Transportation Services, Project Evaluation Criteria Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

209 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 116 |

STRATEGY H
Expand awareness
of transit and
transportation services
Promote transportation services
that are already available to
residents through ongoing
campaigns to grow awareness
among potential riders and
encourage mode shift.
116 |

210 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 117
Description
Community members and advocates mentioned an ongoing need for additional information about available transit services, available in paper, translated into multiple languages and accessible at locations where EPC residents frequently use.

Community benefits
Additional accessible information about available services will support residents in EPCs with some of the greatest barriers to mobility, and it will provide widespread benefits beyond EPCs.

Existing plans and projects
South City Shuttle has an extensive and ongoing campaign to promote its services. SamTrans provides ambassador and how to ride services.

Financial feasibility
MTC’s CARE funding, and other sources can potentially be used to help expand promotional activities to reach more EPC residents.

Ease of implementation
Much of this promotional work already takes place; South San Francisco has an extensive list of outreach methods and activities it uses to promote the Free South City Shuttle. Working with key partners who are aware of the transit needs of their members and how best to reach the community will ensure this benefits transit- dependent residents in EPCs in need of more information.

PROJECT
Partner with Rise South City and the YMCA Resource Center to develop a promotion and outreach program about existing transit and shuttle services, including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride” programs, focusing on older adults, non-English speakers, seniors, students and families who use transit.

211 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 118 |
Description
Several responses and questions from community members about available shuttle services highlight a need for more information about local on-demand shuttle services in San Bruno. The city should work with community partners and institutions which offer shuttles to collaborate on promotional activities to expand awareness about existing shuttle services.

Community benefits
Many residents without access to vehicles are in need of other means to get to local destinations in the city of San Bruno. Additional community shuttle services may also help to alleviate some of the parking congestion residents are experiencing in neighborhoods near downtown San Bruno, if workers and visitors can use a shuttle instead of driving.

Increased mobility and access
This has the potential to improve transportation access and expand mobility for those who need access to affordable transit services but are not currently aware of available programs or who need education on how to use them.

Existing plans and projects
The City of San Bruno’s website includes information about the on-demand Senior Center Bus service and pick up times.21 The Senior Center Bus runs solely for Seniors to get to and from home and activities at the Senior Center. Residents may be looking for information about additional shuttle services which would provide access to other key destinations in the city, like the Free South City shuttle does in South San Francisco. The Peninsula Rides website has information about local services. Commute.org has several shuttles with routes from area BART and Caltrain stations into neighborhoods in South San Francisco, and is funded in part by C/CAG’s congestion relief program.

Financial feasibility
MTC’s CARE funding, San Mateo County Measures A and W, can potentially be used to help expand access to information.

Ease of implementation
The city could supplement existing service promotions by providing additional publicity about existing shuttle services, and ensure information is available at community events.

PROJECT
Promote and provide more information about San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available community shuttle services in San Bruno.

H
21 City of San Bruno. Transportation. Accessed from: sanbruno.ca.gov/340/Transportation

212 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 119
Description
Community members across all EPCs and outreach events mentioned the need for more and better access to real-time information about local transit services, for both SamTrans buses and local city shuttles.

Community benefits
Additional accessible information about timeliness of available services will support residents in EPCs with some of the greatest barriers to mobility, and it will provide widespread benefits beyond EPCs.

Increased mobility and access
Better access to information about routes and times may make it easier for more residents to use transit and shuttle services.

Existing plans and projects
SamTrans, through its Reimagine SamTrans plan, is working to improve real-time bus tracking information on its website and in trip planning apps used by riders. It is also exploring how to add information at bus stops.

Financial feasibility
This project may include costs to procure, install and maintain any digital signage at stops. Additional costs for printing signage and information about routes at key destinations may be an expansion of current efforts SamTrans and the cities already have to print route informational booklets and posters.

Ease of implementation
SamTrans and Free South City Shuttle already provide this information via their website and in trip planning apps. SamTrans is looking into displaying digital live information at key locations along routes.

Providing digital signage at bus stops, transit locations and key destinations may extend the timeframe of this project, however posting paper materials about routes and timetables at more locations where riders will see them could be an immediate step.

PROJECT
Provide real-time tracking and access to information about transit and shuttle routes, including multilingual printed information at stops and key community locations.

213 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 120 |
Figure 39: Expand Awareness of Transit and Transportation Services, Project Evaluation Criteria Project Community
Benefit
Mobility and
Access
Financial
Feasibility
Ease of
Implementation
Expand promotion and outreach about existing transit and shuttle services, including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride” programs, focusing on older adults, non-English speakers, seniors, students and families who use transit. 5 5 3 5
Promote and provide more information about San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available community shuttle services in San Bruno. 5 5 3 5 Provide real-time tracking and access to information about transit and shuttle routes, including multilingual printed information at stops and key community locations.
5 3 3 3
Note: These four criteria are rated on a scale of 1, 3 or 5. The average of these is used to create a Project Priority Assessment Score, which is listed in the CBTP Projects Table, Figure 40, on page 123.Legend:
1 2 3 4 5
Least Benefit/
Hardest to Achieve
Greatest Benefit/
Easiest to Achieve

214 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 121
CBTP Project Matrix and
Implementation Plan

215 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 122 |
CBTP Project Matrix and Implementation Plan
This CBTP Projects table lists all of the recommended projects described in the previous chapter. These suggested projects are organized by strategy and by average project score, from highest to lowest, which is the average of the four evaluation criteria used to assess each project (Community Benefit, Increased Access and Mobility, Financial Feasibility, and Ease of Implementation). These evaluation criteria ratings are listed in the tables at the end of each strategy section in the last chapter, which begins on page 67.

The other columns in the CBTP Projects table below include the EPC location(s) where this project would take place; an estimated cost range, estimated implementation timeframe and suggested lead agency, which are all described here; potential funding sources, which are discussed in the next section after the table, and related plans and planned improvements, which are described in detail in each project section in the previous chapter.

Suggested Lead Agency
Each project has a suggested designated lead agency or agencies who would need to serve as “project champion” to lead the work toward implementing the recommended project or program. Draft versions of these recommended project and program lists have been shared with local jurisdictions and SamTrans to get their feedback on the likelihood of projects or programs, potential timeframes for implementation, and possible funding sources. A few of these projects and programs are already in City of San Bruno or City of South San Francisco Capital Improvement Project (CIP) plans for the coming years or have been identified as priority projects through related planning efforts, as described in the previous chapter. All of these recommended projects will require City Council or other jurisdiction/agency approval and coordination and obtain funding before implementation can begin. Members of the City of San Bruno’s Complete Streets planning committee suggested looking first at projects which have a high average rating of these criteria and low potential cost estimates (see CBTP Projects table columns 4 and 5), to provide EPC communities with some early and visible mobility improvements.

Estimated Cost Range
The project team assessed the likely estimated cost of each type of project, looking at both the current estimated construction and material costs for each type of project, as well as any other costs that might be needed to implement the project, such as design and construction management.

Projects are organized by an estimated cost range in the chart below, of lowest cost ($) to highest ($$$$$), in the following range:
$ refers to projects that may cost approximately $25,000 or less; $$ projects with estimated costs of approximately $100,000 or less; $$$ projects with estimated costs from $100,000 to $300,000; $$$$ projects with estimated costs from $300,000 to $1,000,000; $$$$$ projects with estimated costs greater than $1,000,000.

Estimated Project Implementation Timeframe
The project team has also included an estimated implementation timeframe for each project, which estimates the range of time that a type of project may take to be completed, once a project is approved by local jurisdictions. Many of these are potential short-term projects, which are implementable within 1 to 2 years, or medium-term projects, implementable within 2 to 3 years. A few may take five years or more to fulfill.

216 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 123
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy A: Improve pedestrian safety and community access A1
Coordinate with the City of Millbrae and
the Millbrae Elementary School District to
implement traffic management measures, such
as speed humps near Lomita Park Elementary
School, along Santa Helena, San Antonio and
San Anselmo Avenues to slow traffic near the
San Anselmo/Santa Helena and San Antonio/
Santa Helena intersections and pedestrian
crossings.

Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno
5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; STEP
San Bruno Safe Routes to
School Plan
A2
Create a raised crosswalk across Huntington at
Pacific Ave for community members to safely
access San Bruno BART station.

Near San Bruno
EPCs

4.5 $-$$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; SS4A;
STBG
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
A3
Evaluate the impacts to pedestrian
infrastructure from flooding near Belle
Air Elementary School and determine the
feasibility of design features and stormwater
management that could reduce impacts to this
infrastructure.

Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno

4.5 $$$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; CDBG;
SRTS; STBG; STEP
San Bruno Safe Routes to
School Plan
A4
Provide safety and quality of life enhancements
to Centennial Way Trail, including more lighting,
emergency call boxes, benches, and marking
lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Lindenville/
Orange Park 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP
South San Francisco
Centennial Way Trail
Master Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects

217 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 124 |
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy A: Improve pedestrian safety and community access (continued) A5
Coordinate sidewalk repairs along East and
West San Bruno Ave in San Bruno and along
Maple Street in Downtown South San Francisco.

All EPCs 4 $$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; San
Bruno Measures G and Q;

CDBG, STBG, STEP
A6
Enhance crosswalks with bulbouts (curb
extensions) and adjust bus stop locations at
the El Camino Real and San Bruno Avenue
intersection.

Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno; San
Bruno Park

3.5 $$$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans;
SamTrans
MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan; San Bruno Transit
Corridors Plan; SamTrans
Grand Boulevard Initiative
A7
Enhance lighting, bicycle facilities and
pedestrian walkways to the I-380 underpasses
at Huntington and San Mateo Aves, including
visible pathway connections to Huntington Ave
cycle track and to San Bruno BART station.

San Bruno Park 3.5 $$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans; City of
San Bruno
MTC-CARE; SS4A; STEP San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
A8
Add pedestrian-scale street lighting to enhance
pedestrian safety in San Bruno along San Bruno
Ave, San Mateo Ave, Herman St, Kains Ave, and
on Angus Ave near Third Ave.

San Bruno Park 3 $$$$ 3 to 5 years City of San
Bruno
SS4A; Peninsula
Clean Energy Grant,
Strengthening Mobility
and Revolutionizing
Transportation
Grants (USDOT);
Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Block Grant
(USDOE)
San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan; San Mateo Ave
Streetscape Improvements
Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

218 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 125
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Im-plemen-
tation Time-
line
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy B: Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety and amenities B1
Provide additional bike parking, racks
and secure bike lockers along San
Mateo Avenue, 1st Avenue and Angus,
and in downtown San Bruno.

Lomita Park/ Downtown
San Bruno, San Bruno
Park
5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan
B2
Install a safe crossing for bicyclists and
pedestrians across Huntington Avenue
in San Bruno, which links the south
end of the Centennial Way Trail to the
San Bruno BART station.

San Bruno Park 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
Connecting project funded
by SMCTA through San
Mateo County Measures A
and W; ATP; SS4A
San Bruno Walk ‘n Bike
Plan
B3
Design a multimodal El Camino Real
in South San Francisco, incorporating
a continuous bikeway and wider
sidewalks.

Lindenville/ Orange Park 4 $$$ 3 to 5 years City of South San Francisco
San Mateo County Measure
W; SS4A; STEP
South San Francisco El
Camino Real Mobility
Plan; Grand Boulevard
Initiative
B4
Develop a protected bicycle lane
on San Bruno Avenue East which
connects the San Bruno Caltrain
station at Huntington Avenue to the
San Francisco Bay Trail.

San Bruno Park 3.5 $$$$$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County Measure
W; SS4A; STEP
San Bruno Transit
Corridors Plan; San
Bruno Walk n’ Bike Plan;
SMCTA’s Active 101 Plan;
SFO Bay Trail Gap Study
B5
Install bicycle repair stations at the
South San Francisco and San Bruno
Caltrain stations and at the South
San Francisco and San Bruno BART
stations.

San Bruno Park 3 $$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco; BART;
Caltrain
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan; BART's Bicycle
Program Capital Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

219 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 126 |
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy B: Expand bicycle network connectivity, safety and amenities (continued) B6
Extend the planned Spruce Avenue
bicycle route south beyond Railroad
Avenue to connect to the San Bruno
BART station.

West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
3 $$$$$ 5 or more years City of South San
Francisco
MTC-CARE; ATP; SS4A;
STBG; STEP
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan
Strategy C: Improve local street infrastructure and safety C1
Install a multi-use path with
educational and safe use signage
for users of scooters and bicycles on
First Avenue in San Bruno and Maple
Avenue in South San Francisco. Pair
installation with a safe use educational
outreach campaign and policy
updates.

San Bruno Park; West
Downtown/ Old Town
South San Francisco
5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno; City
of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; SRTS;
YATSG
San Bruno Walk 'n Bike
Plan; San Bruno Safe
Routes to School Plan
C2
Install safety improvements such as
speed humps, zebra crosswalks, stop
sign at intersection of Cypress and
Pine Avenues in South San Francisco.

Paradise Valley 4 $ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; SS4A;
STEP
Recent transportation
analysis conducted on
Pine between Linden
and Cypress
C3
Repair and repave the roadway along
El Camino Real.

Lindenville/ Orange
Park; Lomita Park/
Downtown San Bruno;
San Bruno Park

3.5 $$-$$$ 2 to 3 years Caltrans San Mateo County Measure W; SB1; SHOPP
Caltrans California
Transportation Plan
2050
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

220 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 127
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy C: Improve local street infrastructure and safety (continued) C4
Repair and repave the roadway on
2nd, Easton, Green, Kains and Hensley
Avenues in San Bruno.

Lomita Park/ Downtown
San Bruno; San Bruno
Park

3.5 $$-$$$ 2 to 5 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County Measure
W; Measures G and Q; SB1
San Bruno Paving
Program
C5
Study and implement traffic calming
measures such as speed humps along
Park Way.

Paradise Valley 3.5 SS 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W; South
San Francisco Measure W;
SS4A
South San Francisco
Parkway Heights Walk
Audit Report
C6
Add traffic calming measures to
Cypress Avenue and Linden Avenue
in Old Town South San Francisco to
address street racing.

West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
3 $$ 1 to 2 years City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A & W; South San
Francisco Measure W; Road
to Zero; SS4A
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

221 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 128 |
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy D: Improve transit amenities
D1
Add bus shelters with weather
protection and lighting:
• At Airport Blvd stops at Baden
Ave, California Ave, Armour Ave,
Grand Ave and at 200 Airport Blvd
• At bus stops along El Camino Real
• At bus stops on South Linden Ave
• At stops near Spruce Ave/
Tanforan Mall intersection.

All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans Project has been funded:

SMCTA TDM (Transportation
Demand Management)
Funding, Cycle 3 (2025)
South San Francisco
Active South City Plan;
SamTrans Bus Stop
Improvement Plan
D2
Study and implement if feasible new
SamTrans bus stops at locations of
interest such as:
• Route 41: at San Mateo Ave and
Walnut, San Bruno
• Route 292: Airport and Pine, South
San Francisco.

All EPCs 4 $ 1 to 2 years SamTrans MTC-CARE; San Mateo
County Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
D3
Improve lighting inside existing bus
shelters and at bus stops in Old Town
South San Francisco.

West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco

3.5 $$ 2 to 3 years SamTrans MTC-CARE South San Francisco Shape SSF Mobility
Policy Framework;
SamTrans Bus Stop
Improvement Plan
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

222 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 129
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy D: Improve transit amenities (continued)
D4
Provide more community safety
patrols at San Bruno Caltrain Station
and around San Bruno BART station.

San Bruno Park 3 $$ 1 to 2 years Caltrain, City
of San Bruno
(BART)
TDA; San Mateo County
Measures A and W; BART,
Caltrain
BART’s ongoing
Ambassador Program;
The Transit Police
Bureau on behalf of
SamTrans and Caltrain
Strategy E: Extend and adjust transit service routes, times and frequencies to reflect the needs of older adults, students and essential workers E1
Consider increasing frequency and
extend evening service on bus routes
that serve Old Town South San
Francisco, such as Route 130.

West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$$ 2 to 3 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W; STEP
Reimagine SamTrans
E2
Consider increasing frequency on
SamTrans Route 141 to every 15
minutes, to expand service options
for east-west connections to Skyline
College, downtown and transit hubs,
as well as key destinations for older
adults and low-income residents.

Lindenville/ Orange
Park; Paradise Valley;
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
E3
Consider new route (Route 126) to
provide additional bus service to BART
stations and service in Paradise Valley.

Lindenville/ Orange
Park, Paradise Valley,
West Downtown/
Old Town South San
Francisco
4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

223 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 130 |
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy F: Improve transit reliability and connectivity F1
Consider a review of transfer locations and times
on all area SamTrans bus routes to ensure windows
support riders making connections.

All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans SamTrans MTC Plan Bay Area 2050+
F2
Consider transit-friendly signal policy changes on El
Camino Real.

Lindenville/
Orange Park,
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno, San
Bruno Park
4 $ 1 to 2 years City of South
San Francisco;
SamTrans;
Caltrans
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;
SHOPP; STEP
SamTrans ECR Bus
Speed Reliability
Study
Strategy G: Expand options for low- or no-cost transportation services G1
Develop a multilingual training session series with
trusted community partner organizations such
as Rise South City to promote transit discount
programs and educate EPC residents on how to
apply for and use transit discount programs such as
Clipper START, and Youth and Senior Clipper cards.

All EPCs 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans; MTC;
C/CAG
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;

MTC-CARE
SamTrans Mobility
Ambassador Program
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

224 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 131
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy G: Expand options for low- or no-cost transportation services (continued) G2
Expand San Bruno shuttle service partnerships with
area employers to provide an additional shuttle loop
service for workers and residents to access local
commercial areas and the airport.

Lindenville/
Orange Park,
Paradise
Valley, West
Downtown/ Old
Town South San
Francisco
4 $$$ 2 to 3 years City of San
Bruno;
SamTrans
San Mateo County
Measure A; potential
private employer
partnerships;
STEP; Silicon Valley
Community Foundation
Previous CBTP
mentioned the
relocated San Bruno
Caltrain station would
include off-street
shuttle loading zones
for shuttles
G3
Develop implementation strategies for equity
mobility programs that encourage mode shift,
such as the 101 Express Lanes Community Benefits
Program.

All EPCs 4 $ 2 to 3 years C/CAG;
Commute.org
101 Express Lanes Toll
Funds; San Mateo
County Measures A
and W
San Mateo 101
Express Lanes Go
Card Program;
Commute.org
provides free shuttle
services and the Try
Transit Program
G4
Expand free transfer time frames and automatic fare
capping to prevent riders from paying multiple times
due to missed connections.

All EPCs 4 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Clipper Executive
Board introduced
reduced transfer fares
via Clipper 2.0, in
December 2025
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

225 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 132 |
Strategy/
Project
Number
Project EPC
Location(s)
Average
Project
Score
Estimated
Cost
Range
Estimated
Project
Implemen-
tation
Timeline
Suggested
Lead
Agency or
Agencies
Potential Funding
Sources
Related Plans,
Programs, and
Studies
Strategy H: Expand awareness of transit and transportation services H1
Partner with Rise South City and the YMCA Resource
Center to develop a promotion and outreach
program about existing transit and shuttle services,
including Transit Ambassadors and “how to ride”
programs, focusing on older adults, non-English
speakers, seniors, students and families who use
transit.

All EPCs 4.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans; City
of San Bruno;
City of South
San Francisco;
Rise South City;
YMCA Resource
Center
San Mateo County
Measures A and W;
MTC-CARE; YATSG
SamTrans Mobility
Ambassador Program
H2
Promote and provide more information about
San Bruno Senior Center Bus and other available
community shuttle services in San Bruno.

San Bruno Park;
Lomita Park/
Downtown San
Bruno

4.5 $ 1 to 2 years City of San
Bruno
San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Peninsula Rides
hosted by SMCTD
H3
Provide real-time tracking and access to information
about transit and shuttle routes, including
multilingual printed information at stops and key
community locations.

All EPCs 3.5 $$ 1 to 2 years SamTrans, City
of San Bruno,
City of South San
Francisco
San Mateo County
Measures A and W
Reimagine SamTrans
Figure 40: CBTP Projects (continued)

226 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 133
Available Funding Opportunities
This section describes some of the funding programs that C/CAG and jurisdictions use or might use to help fund CBTP and related projects and programs.

MTC Funding Sources
Lifeline Transportation Program.22 One of the key sources of funding for past CBTP projects, MTC uses both state and federal funds to provide grants for projects that meet mobility and accessibility needs in Equity Priority Communities across the Bay Area. MTC has funded more than 300 projects throughout the region, from fixed-route bus service and community shuttles to pedestrian and bicycle access improvements and transit stop enhancements. MTC has announced a new funding program, the Community Action Resource and Empowerment (CARE) program, which will replace its Lifeline program in the coming months. CARE includes several rounds of funding, totaling $23 million of local, state and federal funds to support community-based transportation projects that have been identified as high priority by community members and organizations.23
One Bay Area Grant (OBAG).24 MTC uses this program to distribute Federal Highway Administration funding to help meet regional goals related to improving safety, encouraging economic development addressing climate change and improving air quality. This round (OBAG 3) includes more than $750 million in federal funding for projects from 2023 to 2026, including approximately $37 million for C/CAG nominated projects in San Mateo County.25 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grants. Distributed by MTC, FTA provides several types of State of Good Repair grants, which in San Mateo and South San Francisco can support transit capital investment projects and transit operations (FTA 5307: Urbanized Areas), Bus Rapid Transit system maintenance (FTA 5337: Transit Maintenance) and replacement, rehab and purchase of buses and related equipment or to build bus-related facilities (FTA 5339: Buses).26 FTA also provides several types of Transit Expansion Grants, including Rehab & Modernization (FTA 5307) which can be used for vehicle replacement and rehabilitation; planning and evaluation; security equipment, and bicycle-related projects and investments to comply with ADA and Clean Air Act FTA 5310: Mobility of Seniors & People with Disabilities provides grants for nonprofit agencies that provide transportation services to older adults or people with disabilities. FTA 5311: Rural Area Grants provides funding for transit capital projects and for transit operations in non-urban areas.

Additional State and Federal Funding Sources
Active Transportation Program. This California program draws from both state and federal funding sources to provide $320 million annually for bicycle and pedestrian projects, such as building bicycle/pedestrian paths, installing bike racks, and other projects and programs to make walking or biking easier, safer and more convenient.27
California Climate Investments Program.28 This program uses “Cap and Invest” auction proceeds to support projects which improve public health and the environment, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, provide economic 22 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Lifeline Transportation Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/access-equity-mobility/lifeline-transportation-program 23 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Community Action Resource & Empowerment (CARE) Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/funding-opportunities/community-action-resource-empowerment-care- program
24 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. One Bay Area Grant 3 (OBAG 3). Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/federal-funding/federal-highway-administration-grants/one-bay-area-grant-obag-3 25 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. MTC Resolution No. 4505, OBAG 3 Revisions. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-04/OBAG-3-Call-for-Projects-Guidance-MTC-Resolution-4505- Appendix-A-1.pdf
26 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grants. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/federal-funding/federal-transit-administration-fta-grants 27 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Active Transportation Program. Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/investment-strategies-commitments/climate-protection/active-transportation-program 28 California Climate Investments. Accessed from www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov

227 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 134 |
benefits and support disadvantaged communities and low-income communities and households. The CCIP funds clean mobility options such as care shares, bike shares, van pools, and zero-emission transit vehicles. Through the STEP program (see below) CCI funds neighborhood accessibility improvements. All of the EPCs are within areas that are eligible for CCI funding.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG).29 This is another potential federal funding source to help cover the cost of sidewalk projects, especially those that improve accessibility for local residents. San Mateo County uses CDBG funds to help make capital improvements in low-income neighborhoods.

Safe Streets and Roads for All Grant Program (SS4A).30 This is federal grant assistance funded through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act for local safety planning and implementation projects such as pedestrian crossing improvements, traffic and streetlight updates and bicycle facilities safety improvements. Funding is available for one more year, through FY2026.31 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).32 This program funds “fix-it-first” repairs, preservation, safety improvements and operational improvements on the state’s highways. SHOPP works on a four-year planning schedule.

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).33 The State of California administers a five-year plan identifying specific projects for receipt of State transportation funds for State highway improvements, intercity rail, and regional highway and transit improvements. C/CAG coordinates the local call for projects for these funds.

Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG).34 This federal funding program provides funds to states and local governments to preserve and improve the conditions of street, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. It can be used to fund sidewalk construction and accessibility improvements, as well as maintenance of existing recreational trails, projects to enhance travel and tourism and develop EV charging infrastructure.

Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP).35 Coordinated by the California Air Resources Board with California Climate Investment financing, this project, provides grants to low-income communities to support active transportation projects such as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and multi- use paths; zero-emission fixed route transit and school bus service, including service improvements, expansion and subsidies for riders; and zero-emissions shared mobility projects, including bikeshare, ride-hailing, shuttles and microtransit. All six of the EPCs in San Bruno and South San Francisco qualify as CCI priority population areas for STEP grant funding, according to California Climate Investments Priority Populations mapping tool.36 Transportation Development Act (TDA).37 This California state funding source has two parts, Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance 29 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Community Development Block Grant Program. Accessed from: https://www.hud.gov/hud-partners/community-cdbg#eg 30 US Department of Transportation. Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant Program. Accessed from www.transportation.gov/grants/SS4A 31 National League of Cities. Best Infrastructure Grants for Small Cities. Accessed from www.nlc.org/article/2022/06/14/best-infrastructure-grants-for-small-cities 32 Caltrans. State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Accessed from: dot.ca.gov/programs/financial-programming/state-highway-operation-protection-program-shopp-minor-program-shopp 33 California Transportation Commission. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Accessed from https://catc.ca.gov/programs/state-transportation-improvement-program 34 Federal Highway Administration. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Fact Sheet. Accessed from www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure-investment-and-jobs-act/stbg.cfm 35 California Air Resources Board. Sustainable Transportation Equity Project, Accessed from ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable-transportation-equity-project 36 California Climate Investments. Priority Populations Mapping Tool 4.0. Accessed September 2025 from https://gis.carb.arb.ca.gov/portal/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=5dc1218631fa46bc8d340b8e8254 8a6a&page=Priority-Populations-4_0

228 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 135
(STA) funds. LTF is funded through ¼ cent of the general sales tax statewide and returns revenues to counties based on how much sales tax is collected. These help to finance transit operations, bus and rail projects, special transit services for riders with disabilities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and transportation planning. STA funds are given to MTC to coordinate regional support for transit operations and capital projects and may be used to help fund transit and pedestrian related projects.

Youth Active Transportation Safety Grants.38 The National Road Safety Foundation and the Governors Highway Safety Association have provided funding through State Highway Safety offices to community organizations to promote safe walking, biking and using a scooter among young people. Recent grants h ave been used to support Safe Routes to School and youth ambassador training programs.

Local Funding Sources
Measure A and Measure W. The San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) coordinates funding in San Mateo County to support local transportation projects through Measure A and Measure W county sales tax measures. These measures generate revenue to help improve transit and relieve congestion and supports projects such as local street repairs and transit operations. SMCTA recently awarded $13.6 million to San Mateo County shuttle services as part of a broader funding program to support first- and last-mile connections, including Commute.org shuttles and the City of South San Francisco’s Free South City Shuttle.39 SMCTA also supports a shuttle to Skyline College through Measure A funding.

In recent calls for projects, the City of South San Francisco was recently awarded $4.9 million to make sidewalk and pedestrian safety improvements and add protect bicycle lanes at several schools. The City of San Bruno was awarded $2 million to complete construction of the Huntington Ave cycle track to provide connections for bicyclists to the San Bruno BART station.40 Commute.org (C/ CAG) bicycle educational programs was also a recent recipient of Measure A and Measure W funding.

Measure G. This is a one-half cent sales tax passed by voters in the City of San Bruno in 2019, to fund additional city services, including expansion of pothole and street hazard repair, and street maintenance.41
Measure Q. Approved by voters in 2024, Measure Q authorized the City of San Bruno to issue General Obligation bonds to fully fund the cost of maintenance and repair of city streets potholes, as well as other city stormwater and infrastructure repair needs. The city’s current year budget (FY2026) includes $20 million earmarked for streets and sidewalks.42
Measure W. This is a half-cent sales tax approved by City of South San Francisco residents in 2015 to fund local city services. Measure W funds many community services, including repairing potholes and streets, maintaining 37 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Transportation Development Act (TDA) & State Transit Assistance (STA). Accessed from mtc.ca.gov/funding/regional-funding/transportation-development-act-tda-state-transit- assistance-sta
38 National Road Safety Foundation. Grants. Accessed from www.nrsf.org/grants 39 San Mateo County Transportation Authority. TA awards more than $83 Million for transit and first/last mile improvements. June 2025. Accessed from https://www.smcta.com/news/ta-awards-more-83-million-transit- and-firstlast-mile-improvements
40 San Mateo County Transportation Authority. SMCTA 2025 Measure A & W Calls for Projects Look Ahead. Accessed September 2025 from https://www.smcta.com/media/SMCTA2025CFPs 41 City of San Bruno. Enhancing Your San Bruno: Measure G. Accessed from https://www.sanbruno.ca.gov/866/Enhancing-Your-San-Bruno-Measure-G 42 City of San Bruno. Investing in the Future: Measure Q. Accessed from https://sanbruno.ca.gov/2250/Investing-In-The-Future-Measure-Q

229 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 136 |
neighborhood police patrols, and providing programming for older adults, residents with disabilities and youth.43
Additional Sources of Funding
Road to Zero Community Traffic Safety Grants.44 This program supports traffic safety projects which include evidence-based “countermeasures” to prevent traffic injuries and fatalities and promotes the larger goal of ending all deaths due to collisions on roadways by 2050.

C/CAG and partners may need to look locally and consider other related sources of funding and partnerships, such as with organizations which work on community health and wellness issues, accessibility for older adults and residents with disabilities, and activities for young people. San Mateo County Health, area hospital systems such as Kaiser Permanente and Sutter Health, and community foundations such as the Sand Hill Foundation, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, and WITH foundation, may be able to provide or supplement funding from other sources for priority projects and programs in EPC neighborhoods.
43 City of South San Francisco. Measure W. Accessed from https://www.ssfca.gov/Government/Measure-W 44 National Safety Council. Community Traffic Safety Grants. Accessed from: www.nsc.org/road/resources/road-to-zero/road-to-zero-grants

230 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan | 137
Monitoring and Evaluating Progress
This CBTP update contains a diverse list of recommended projects, including capital improvements, programmatic studies, and informational campaigns. Each of these is associated with a unique set of funding challenges and opportunities. The manner in which the projects are integrated into local programming also differs, whether via inclusion in a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or adoption as local policy. Limited staff resources and multijurisdictional coordination are historic challenges to CBTP progress across the project spectrum.

Implementation of this plan will require ongoing commitment by the local jurisdictions included in the CBTP study area and partner agencies to move recommendations forward. Success will also depend on the ability of C/CAG to regularly monitor CBTP progress, maintain a record of project milestones, and offer support to responsible agencies.

In order to facilitate monitoring by C/CAG, this CBTP contains an Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Appendix D) to be completed by each CBTP study area jurisdiction each year (beginning with the adoption date of the CBTP) and submitted to C/CAG.

San Bruno and South San Francisco staff will also present an annual update on the progress of projects to their Complete Streets and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees.

The Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist will help to:
• Facilitate communication between CBTP jurisdictions and C/CAG. • Document individual project progress.
• Tally all “In Progress” CBTP projects.
• Evaluate overall CBTP implementation.

As shown in Appendix D, the Checklist begins with a summary of total recommendations in the CBTP. It allows staff to list all CBTP projects for which one or more milestones have been reached, “check” the category of each milestone, and briefly describe and date the milestone. The three categories of milestones are:

1. Funding. Examples of these milestones include grant submissions, receipt or allocation of funds, completion of detailed expenditure plans and others.

2. Local Adoption/Programming. Examples of these milestones include the addition of project(s) into a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) or budgetary document, formalization of a project as policy or action in a local planning document and others.

3. Implementation. These are milestones representative of upcoming or ongoing official use of project funds, such as RFP release; execution of outside contracts; and project kick-off, internal milestones and completion.

The Checklist closes with a tally of the total number of projects tracked for the year.

231 of 537

San Bruno/South San Francisco Community-Based Transportation Plan 138 |
Appendices
Appendix A: Community Assessment Report of San Bruno and South San Francisco EPCs
Appendix B: Review of Previous CBTP Plan Strategies and Implementation Appendix C: Community Engagement Summary
Appendix D: Annual CBTP Tracking Checklist (Sample)

232 of 537

San Bruno/South San
Francisco
Community-Based
Transportation Plan
Community Assessment
Report
November 2024
233 of 537
ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit B

Table of Contents
Community Assessment Report ................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Key Themes .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Demographic Summary ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Total Population, Households and Single Parent Families .................................................................................. 5 Income ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................................................................................................10 Age ..........................................................................................................................................................................................13 Residents with Disabilities ..............................................................................................................................................16 Language Proficiency .......................................................................................................................................................18 Vehicle Ownership .............................................................................................................................................................20 Travel Mode .........................................................................................................................................................................21 Work Location and Commute ......................................................................................................................................25 Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel and Barriers ......................................................................................................................26 Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................26 Existing Bicycle Network .................................................................................................................................................28 Physical Travel Barriers ....................................................................................................................................................28 Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans ..........................................................................................................32 Transit Service and Ridership ................................................................................................................................................35 Service Coverage................................................................................................................................................................35 Service Gaps .........................................................................................................................................................................39 Key Recommendations from Relevant Plans ..........................................................................................................39 Traffic Hotspots and Vehicle Volumes ...............................................................................................................................40 Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans .................................................................................40 Roadway Safety ...........................................................................................................................................................................43 Key Recommendations and Actions from Relevant Plans .................................................................................43 Appendix: CBTP Community Area Data Profiles ...................................................................... 46

234 of 537

List of Figures
Figure 1: Map of the CBTP Study Area’s Equity Community Priority Areas .................................................................. 3 Figure 2: Map of the San Bruno - South San Francisco CBTP Study Area ..................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Race/Ethnicity of Residents in South San Francisco and San Bruno CBTP Areas and San Mateo County, 2022 .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 4: Age of Residents in South San Francisco and San Bruno CBTP Areas and San Mateo County, 2022 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 5: Study Area Residents who Say they Speak English Less Than “Very Well,” by Language Spoken at Home, 2022................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 6: Workers Who Commute in the CBTP Community Areas and Related Geographies, by Travel Mode, 2022 ................................................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 7: Commute Mode Split, San Bruno and South San Francisco CBTP Equity Community Priority Areas, 2022 .................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 8: Travel Time (in Minutes) to Work for CBTP Area Residents .......................................................................... 25 Figure 9: Missing Sidewalks, South San Francisco CBTP Area ......................................................................................... 27 Figure 10: Existing Bicycle Networks in South San Francisco and San Bruno ........................................................... 29 Figure 11: Existing and Proposed Bike Network in San Bruno (2016) .......................................................................... 30 Figure 12: Travel Barriers in the CBTP Study Area ................................................................................................................ 31 Figure 13: Lindenville Specific Plan, Parks and Open Space Framework ..................................................................... 32 Figure 14: Proposed Pedestrian Projects, San Bruno Walk n Bike Plan ....................................................................... 33 Figure 15: Pedestrian Priority Areas, Active South City Plan ............................................................................................ 34 Figure 16: Transit Service in the CBTP Study Area ............................................................................................................... 36 Figure 17: SamTrans Bus Routes with Service in the CBTP Study Area ....................................................................... 37 Figure 18: SamTrans Transit Stops by Average Weekly Boardings, August 2024 ................................................... 38 Figure 19: Traffic Volumes in the CBTP Study Area ............................................................................................................. 41 Figure 20: Caltrans Transportation Equity Index (EQI) in the CBTP Study Area ........................................................ 42 Figure 21: City of South San Francisco, High Injury Network .......................................................................................... 44 Figure 22: City of San Bruno High Injury Network ............................................................................................................... 45

235 of 537

List of Tables
Table 1: Populations and Households, San Bruno and South San Francisco Equity Community Priority Areas and Total CBTP Study Area, 2022 ............................................................................................................. 5 Table 2: Change in Population of the CBTP Study Area and Related Geographies, 2012 and 2022 .................. 6 Table 3: Single Parent Families and Poverty Status, San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 4: Income in San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ................................ 7 Table 5: Single Parent Families and Poverty Status, South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 ................................................................................................................ 8 Table 6: Income in South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 .................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Table 7: Race/Ethnicity in San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ............... 11 Table 8: Race/Ethnicity in South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Table 9: Percent of Residents by Age in San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 10: Percent of Residents by Age in South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 .................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 11: Residents with Disabilities in San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Table 12: Race/Ethnicity in South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 13: Rates of Limited English Language Proficiency Among Residents in San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ................................................................................................... 19 Table 14: Rates of Limited English Language Proficiency Among Residents in South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 ........................................................ 19 Table 15: Households with Zero Vehicles, San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno, 2022 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Table 16: Households with Zero Vehicles, South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco, 2022 .................................................................................................................................... 20 Table 17: Means of Transportation to Work and Work Location, San Bruno CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of San Bruno ............................................................................................................................................. 23 Table 18: Means of Transportation to Work and Work Location, South San Francisco CBTP Area, CBTP Census Tracts and City of South San Francisco ............................................................................................ 24

236 of 537

Page 1 ends

San Bruno City CouncilMay 12, 2026

San Bruno City Council
May 12, 2026