"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 SPECIAL MEETING
June 23, 2026
5:30 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/89413431794?
pwd=DZaDc6gaFxDOgJ2oe4DhPh3gbrCaGv.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 894 1343 1794
Webinar Password: 820329
*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. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: City Manager
Employee Organizations: Teamsters Local 856, IBT Public Safety MidManagement
4. STUDY SESSION
Public comment will be requested after each topic in this section a. 2026 Ballot Measures: Revenue Measure Options, Height Ordinance (Ord. No. 1284), and Safe and Sane Fireworks Ban
5. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on June 23, 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 June 18, 2026, by 8:00 pm. 1 of 69
"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 SPECIAL MEETING
June 23, 2026
5:30 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/89413431794?
pwd=DZaDc6gaFxDOgJ2oe4DhPh3gbrCaGv.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 894 1343 1794
Webinar Password: 820329
*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. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: City Manager
Employee Organizations: Teamsters Local 856, IBT Public Safety MidManagement
4. STUDY SESSION
Public comment will be requested after each topic in this section a. 2026 Ballot Measures: Revenue Measure Options, Height Ordinance (Ord. No. 1284), and Safe and Sane Fireworks Ban
5. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on June 23, 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 June 18, 2026, by 8:00 pm. 2 of 69
City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report
CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: June 23, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Joseph D. Toney, Assistant City Manager
Peter Gilli, Community Development Director
Brian Adam, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: 2026 Ballot Measures: Revenue Measure Options, Height Ordinance (Ord. No. 1284), and Safe and Sane Fireworks Ban
BACKGROUND:
Presented for City Council consideration are three potential ballot measures for the November 2026 Consolidated Gubernatorial Election. Each measure addresses a distinct area of City policy and fiscal management. Together, they represent an integrated strategy to strengthen San Bruno’s long-term financial position, remove regulatory barriers to economic development, and respond to community concerns about public safety.
1. Revenue Measure Options (Parcel Tax and/or Business License Tax Restructure) The City’s Revenue Subcommittee has evaluated a range of revenue tools and identified two viable ballot measure options: a commercial parcel tax projected to generate approximately $5.6 million annually and a restructured Business License Tax estimated to generate $3–4 million annually. Community polling indicates the commercial parcel tax has 70.5% support among likely voters—above the two-thirds supermajority threshold required for passage. A restructured Business License Tax would require only a simple majority vote. The community was not polled on the Business License Tax option.
2. Height Ordinance No. 1284 Rescission or Amendment
San Bruno Ordinance No. 1284 (1977) requires voter approval for building heights exceeding three stories or 50 feet, among other land use changes. Due to the evolution of State housing law, the Ordinance now primarily constrains commercial and economic development rather than housing. Documented lost opportunities—including the Crossings Hotel and the Google/YouTube Bayhill master plan—illustrate the Ordinance’s ongoing cost to San Bruno’s fiscal base. November 2025 polling shows majority support for both full rescission (53.2%) and a targeted geographic amendment (51.4%).
3. Safe and Sane Fireworks Ban
San Bruno and Pacifica are the only cities in San Mateo County that permit the sale of “Safe and Sane” fireworks. The City’s fireworks program became a net cost to the City in FY 2024–25 following a fee cap adopted by Council. In addition, much of San Bruno is located within State-designated high fire hazard severity zones. 3 of 69
Item 4a.
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
Staff seeks City Council direction on all three potential ballot measures. Each item is addressed in full detail in the sections below.
DISCUSSION:
SECTION 1: REVENUE MEASURE OPTIONS
The City Council’s Adopted Budget Principles promote sound financial management and long- term stability. The City Council appointed a Revenue Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”) to review the City’s revenue options and report their findings. As part of that effort, staff evaluated potential revenue measures for a future ballot election with the Subcommittee. Staff from the City Manager’s Office, City Attorney’s Office, and Finance Department have supported the Subcommittee’s work throughout this process.
The Subcommittee first met on March 23, 2026, and reviewed both the City’s potential revenues at risk and the full range of potential revenue ballot measure options. The Subcommittee evaluated the following options:
General Obligation (G.O.) Bond: The City pursued a G.O. Bond measure in 2024. The Subcommittee determined that returning to voters with another G.O. Bond so soon would not be appropriate and did not recommend this option. Sales Tax: San Bruno’s current combined sales tax rate is 9.875%, the maximum rate permitted under State law. This option is therefore not available. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT): San Bruno’s TOT is currently 14%. A survey of San Mateo County jurisdictions found that only Half Moon Bay (15%) and Menlo Park (15.5%) impose a higher TOT rate. While a modest increase may be possible, the Subcommittee noted limited upside revenue potential relative to the political and business community considerations involved.
Charter City/Documentary Transfer Tax: San Bruno is a General Law city. Becoming a Charter City would enable the City to impose a Documentary Transfer Tax at a locally- set rate. The Subcommittee identified this as an option warranting further exploration but ultimately did not recommend it, citing that San Mateo is the only other San Mateo County city with an above-standard Documentary Transfer Tax, legal risk from a pending statewide initiative that could eliminate such taxes, and revenue projections significantly below those of a parcel tax.
Parcel Tax: A special tax levied on parcels of real property at a fixed rate, requiring two- thirds (2/3) voter approval. The Subcommittee identified this as an option warranting further exploration.
Following its review, the Subcommittee recommended that staff further analyze and develop the Parcel Tax and Charter City/Documentary Transfer Tax options. The Subcommittee reviewed polling results at its June 3, 2026, meeting. Key findings (margin of error ±4.8%) included:
A parcel tax applied to all property types received support from 54.6% of respondents- below the two-thirds (66.7%) threshold required for approval. A parcel tax limited to commercial and non-residential properties, including multi-family residential of five or more units, received support from 70.5% of respondents, indicating viability for reaching the required supermajority threshold.
Given that polling results pointed toward a measure targeting the business and commercial property sector, staff also presented a Business License Tax (BLT) restructuring option. A restructured BLT as a general tax would require only a simple majority (50%+1) vote, a
4 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
meaningfully lower bar than the two-thirds threshold required for a parcel tax. Based on initial estimates, projected annual revenues are as follows:
Commercial Parcel Tax: Estimated to generate approximately $5.6 million annually. Business License Tax Restructure: Estimated to generate approximately $3-4 million annually.
Commercial Parcel Tax
A parcel tax is a special tax imposed on parcels of real property, charged as a fixed amount rather than based on assessed value. Because parcel taxes are classified as special taxes under California’s Proposition 13 (1978) and Proposition 218 (1996), they carry strict constitutional requirements: they must fund specific, identifiable public purposes; require two- thirds (2/3) voter approval; and must include a 75-word ballot question, a dedicated special revenue fund, and annual public reporting.
Community polling tested at $0.50 per square foot for non-residential properties showed 70.5% support after voters heard additional information about the measure—above the 66.7% supermajority threshold, with a margin of error of ±4.8%. This suggests the measure is viable but competitive. The difficulty of achieving two-thirds voter approval is further illustrated by the recent track record in San Mateo County: over the past five years, no new non-school parcel taxes have been passed in the County.
A commercial parcel tax is projected to generate approximately $5.6 million annually. Unlike transaction-dependent revenue sources, parcel tax receipts are stable and forecastable year to year. Revenue must be restricted to the specific purposes identified in the measure, such as fire and emergency services, street maintenance, or other capital needs consistent with the City’s unfunded infrastructure gap.
Business License Tax Restructure
A business license tax is an annual tax levied on businesses operating within the incorporated area of the City of San Bruno. San Bruno’s current business license tax rate schedule was last comprehensively updated years ago and may not reflect current economic conditions or rates in comparable San Mateo County jurisdictions. The current schedule is structured such that the marginal tax rate declines at higher gross receipts levels, meaning smaller businesses bear a proportionally greater relative tax burden than larger ones. A restructured schedule could achieve a more equitable distribution of the tax burden.
A restructured business license tax designed as a general tax requires only a simple majority vote (50%+1), a materially lower threshold than the two-thirds requirement for a parcel tax.
Revenue from a general tax is unrestricted, giving the City flexibility to direct proceeds to any lawful municipal purpose. Based on initial estimates, a restructured BLT could generate approximately $3–4 million annually.
5 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
Comparison of Options
Attribute Commercial Parcel Tax Business License Tax
Restructure
Tax Base Square footage of non-residential
buildings and multi-family (5+
units)
Gross receipts of businesses
operating in San Bruno
Voter Approval Two-thirds (2/3) supermajority Simple majority (50%+1) if structured as general tax
Est. Annual
Revenue
~$5.6 million ~$3–$4 million
Revenue Use Restricted to specific purposes
named in measure
General fund (if general tax);
restricted if special tax
Revenue
Stability
High — consistent and
forecastable year to year
Moderate — dependent on
business activity and economic
conditions
Who Pays Owners of commercial, industrial,
and multi-family (5+ unit)
properties
Businesses operating in San Bruno
Polling Support 70.5% after hearing more
information (±4.8% margin of error)
Not polled
Administration San Mateo County Tax Collector
(billed with property taxes)
City Finance Department (existing
infrastructure)
Key Challenge Competitive margin above 66.7%
threshold; outreach critical
Rate schedule redesign requires
analysis of current revenue
baseline (in process)
The two options are not mutually exclusive. However, staff does not recommend placing both measures on the same ballot simultaneously, as competing ballot measures often reduce the likelihood of either passing. The Subcommittee directed staff to provide Council with each option to determine how to proceed.
SECTION 2: HEIGHT ORDINANCE NO. 1284 – RESCISSION OR AMENDMENT San Bruno Ordinance No. 1284 was adopted by the voters in 1977 and codified in the San Bruno Municipal Code. The Ordinance was enacted at a time of significant concern about rapid growth and development pressure throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Its stated purpose was to give San Bruno residents direct decision-making authority over the most consequential land use changes affecting the character of their community.
Under Ordinance No. 1284, a public vote is required before the City may approve or authorize any of the following:
Buildings or structures exceeding three (3) stories or fifty (50) feet in height; Increases in unit counts or density for residentially zoned properties beyond what existing zoning allows;
6 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
Construction of free-standing parking structures; and
Widening of designated segments of Crystal Springs Road and Sneath Lane.
These requirements apply citywide and cannot be waived by the City Council acting alone.
State Housing Law Impacts
In the nearly five decades since Ordinance No. 1284 was adopted, the California Legislature has enacted a broad array of State housing laws that override local zoning regulations, including voter-approved height and density limits. As a result, many of the development scenarios that Ordinance No. 1284 was designed to subject to voter approval may now proceed under State law regardless of local voter sentiment. Key examples of State law pre-emption include:
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): State law mandates that every residential parcel may accommodate up to two ADUs without any parking requirement—without a public vote, directly contrary to the policy intent of Ordinance No. 1284. SB 9 (2021) – Two-Unit Development and Lot Splits: Requires local governments to ministerially approve two residential units on a single-family parcel and, in many cases, approve a lot split, pre-empting the Ordinance for these projects. State Density Bonus Law: Allows developers of qualifying affordable housing projects to exceed local height and density limits without City authority to require changes, resulting in approved projects at 732 El Camino Real (6 stories) and 850 San Bruno Avenue (10 stories) with limited on-site parking and that exceed local zoning limits (5 stories) without a public vote.
SB 79 (2025) – Transit Oriented Development: Establishes minimum height and density standards for parcels within one-half (0.5) mile of Caltrain and BART stations.
Ironically, adopting an alternative plan to protect residential neighborhoods from this upzoning would itself trigger a vote under Ordinance No. 1284, causing the Ordinance to operate against its original intent.
Lost Economic Development Opportunities
The practical effect of Ordinance No. 1284 on San Bruno’s economic development has been documented through several high-profile cases:
The Crossings Hotel (1999): A ballot measure to allow a 10-story hotel development received only 46% of the vote. A revised 7-story project was subsequently approved by voters, but the lost time and reduced project value contributed to the hotel deal falling through. The estimated present-day revenue of the lost hotel opportunity is between $3 and $4 million annually.
Google/YouTube - Bayhill Business Park: Google has advised the City that it has no current intention of completing or implementing its Bayhill campus master plan due, in part, to the constraints imposed by Ordinance No. 1284. The company has redirected its expansion planning to other jurisdictions, representing a significant foregone opportunity for commercial property tax revenue, business license tax, and associated economic activity.
City Council Initiatives
The City Council’s FY 2025-26 priority called for a fiscal analysis of the Transit Corridors Plan area, which confirmed that San Bruno’s current development regulations—combined with state laws—limit the City’s ability to attract revenue-generating private investment. As neighboring communities allow taller buildings without requiring ballot measures, developers seeking to build market-rate housing, offices, or hotels reasonably choose those cities instead. This results in
7 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
San Bruno missing out on tax revenues needed to maintain desired service levels, while property owners here find that 100% affordable housing projects are often their only viable development option, even though those projects do not generate property tax revenue for schools or City services.
To address this, the City Council established an FY 2026-27 priority to strengthen the City’s fiscal base and launched the Elevate San Bruno initiative in January 2026. This multi-year effort seeks to make the City more competitive for private investment through targeted General Plan, Specific Plan, and Municipal Code updates, as well as new Objective Design Standards.
Implementing the initiative’s vision under the current ordinance would require zoning changes that trigger a ballot measure in 2028 or later and could delay major investment opportunities. A 2026 ballot measure to rescind or amend Ordinance No. 1284 would remove this added procedural step, enabling the City Council to advance economic development on a timeline aligned with San Bruno’s fiscal needs and long-term goals Public Opinion and Options
In November 2025, the City commissioned polling to assess voter attitudes toward Ordinance No. 1284 and potential ballot measure options:
Ballot Question / Scenario Support
Full rescission of Ordinance No. 1284 (repeal of voter-approval requirement for all height and density changes)
53.2%
Targeted geographic amendment applying to specified corridors (El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue, San Bruno Avenue) while
retaining voter approval for single-family residential neighborhoods
51.4%
Both options polled above a simple majority threshold, suggesting that a 2026 ballot measure in either form has a reasonable prospect of success. The targeted geographic amendment received slightly lower support (51.4% versus 53.2%), likely reflecting the additional complexity of the geographic distinctions. Both options remain viable, and the Council's direction will inform the specific ballot question language to be developed.
Staff has identified the following options for Council consideration:
Option A - Full Rescission (Staff Recommendation): Place a measure on the November 2026 ballot to repeal Ordinance No. 1284 in its entirety. This approach would restore full City Council authority to approve land use changes, including height and density increases, without a separate public vote. This option received the highest polling support (53.2%) and would provide the greatest flexibility for economic development and the Elevate San Bruno initiative.
8 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
Option B - Targeted Geographic Amendment: Place a measure on the November 2026 ballot to amend Ordinance No. 1284 to remove the voter-approval requirement for development along designated commercial corridors (El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue, and San Bruno Avenue), while retaining voter approval for height and density changes in single-family residential neighborhoods. This option received 51.4% support in polling. However, it would limit the City’s ability to adopt alternative SB 79 plans to protect single-family neighborhoods within a half-mile of transit stations. Option C - No Action at This Time: Continue operating under Ordinance No. 1284 as currently in effect. Under this option, staff would anticipate that a ballot measure would be needed in 2028 or later to authorize the heights and densities envisioned in the Elevate San Bruno initiative.
SECTION 3: SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS BAN
In 2005, San Bruno voters approved a ballot measure permitting the sale and use of state- approved “Safe and Sane” fireworks during the Independence Day holiday. On June 24, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2008-67, establishing Chapter 6.50 in the City code, which provided for the regulation and sale of “Safe and Sane” fireworks.
Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 12635.5, on May 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-37, which capped cost recovery fees for permittees at 7% of their gross fireworks sales for the 2023 and 2024 Independence Day holidays and waived the collection of prior application fees. Since FY 2015-16, the number of permittees for temporary fireworks stands has fallen from 17 to 10 permittees in FY 2025-26.
9 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
On June 9, 2026, the City Council approved agendizing a discussion of the foregoing resolutions and whether to ask voters to consider prohibiting the sale of “Safe and Sane” fireworks in San Bruno during the November 2026 Consolidated Gubernatorial Election.
Bay Area Context
San Bruno and Pacifica are the only cities in San Mateo County which permit the sale of “Safe and Sane” fireworks. Some Bay Area cities chose to phase out “Safe and Sane” fireworks in recent years, Petaluma and Rohnert Park both did so in 2020 and 2021, respectively. In 2022, Pacifica voters defeated Measure Q, which would have banned all fireworks in the city.
Table 1, “Bay Area Cities and Counties that permit Safe and Sane Fireworks” City Name County Name
San Bruno San Mateo
Pacifica San Mateo
Dublin Alameda
Newark Alameda
Union City Alameda
Hollister San Benito
San Juan Batista San Benito
Gilroy Santa Clara
Watsonville Santa Cruz
Dixon Solano
Rio Vista Solano
Suisun City Solano
Cloverdale Sonoma
Fireworks Revenues and Costs
The City of San Bruno allows permittees to open temporary fireworks stands to sell state- approved “Safe and Sane” fireworks within a select window surrounding the Independence Day holiday. The program had a net neutral financial impact until FY 2024-25 when it became a net negative after Resolution No. 2024-37 went into effect. Between FYs 2016-24, average yearly total application fees collected were $12,538 (approximately $600–$1,000 per permittee). After the cap, the average total collected for FY 2025-26 is $1,045 (approximately $100 per permittee). The average annual program costs by department are displayed in Figure 1 below, with 83% related to public safety.
10 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
Figure 1, “Average yearly Firework program costs by department” *City Manager costs are related to mailers and cable tv public service announcements. Since FY 2023-24, these have all been handled by the Police and Fire departments.
Fire and Public Safety Concerns
The State Fire Marshal released updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps in 2025. Much of San Bruno includes high hazard severity zones, which requires property owners to “harden” their properties against potential fires and for the City Fire Department to perform routine inspections of these parcels. Fireworks-related fires in recent fiscal years are summarized below:
FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26
Total Fires 8 9 11 5
Exterior 8 7 10 5
Structural 0 2 1 0
Both “Safe and Sane” fireworks and illegal fireworks carry potential fire risks that cannot be fully mitigated or prevented. Previous staff reports have highlighted significant fireworks-related property damage, including an estimated $200,000 in damage for a single resident.
The City issues an average of 23 citations each year for dangerous fireworks at a fine of $1,000 each (Chapter 6.51). The city generally collects about 51% of these fines. Staff does not recommend using citations to backfill lost revenues from the application fee cap, as citations are focused on changing resident or visitor behavior rather than serving as a revenue source. $42,777, 63%$13,264, 20%
$3,662, 5%
$4,711, 7% $1,131, 2% $1,961, 3%
Police Fire Community Services Public Works Other City Manager* Average Fireworks program expenditures by department
11 of 69
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
June 23, 2026
SECTION 4: NEXT STEPS
Following tonight’s meeting should the City Council direct staff to return with resolutions introducing ballot measure(s), staff will return to the July 14 Regular City Council Meeting with resolutions to place the measure(s) on the November 3, 2026, General Election Ballot. The resolutions must be adopted and finalized by the end of July in order to submit the measure(s) to the County by the deadline of August 7, 2026.
Date Item
March-April Develop options & legal review
June City Council Direction
July City Council Adopts Resolution Calling the Election August 7, 2026 FINAL DEADLINE (88 days before election) August Argument & Rebuttal Windows
September County Ballot Production
October Ballots Mailed; Outreach Continues
November 3, 2026 Election Day
FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimated election costs are included in the FY 2026-27 budget, however, the final costs will be determined by the County and depend on the number of ballot measures.
The County of San Mateo manages the election and will recoup the associated costs from the City as estimated in the table below. The City may have additional translation and legal costs that will be nominal and that the City will expend directly.
On the Ballot $/Registered
Voters Low
$/Registered
Voters High County Low County High
Mayor/Council Seats only $ 4.52 $ 5.42 $ 118,000.00 $ 141,600.00 Mayor/Council +1 Measure 5.05 6.06 131,000.00 157,200.00 Mayor/Council +2 Measures 5.57 6.69 145,000.00 174,000.00 Mayor/Council +3 Measures 6.48 7.78 165,000.00 198,000.00 M easures are 5 pages per in the V oter Information Pamphlet 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:
Receive the 2026 Ballot Measures Report and Provide Direction on November 3, 2026, General Election Ballot Measure(s)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. (Revenue) 2026 City of San Bruno Revenue Measure Feasibility Survey Presentation
2. (Height) San Bruno Ordinance No. 1284 (1977) [https://ecode360.com/44258077]
3. (Height) November 2025 Community Priorities Survey, January 13, 2026
4. (Fireworks) Resolution No. 2008-67
5. (Fireworks) Resolution No. 2024-37
12 of 69
May 2026
City of San Bruno:
2026 Revenue Measure Feasibility Survey
May 2026
13 of 69 ATTACHMENT 1
May 2026
Overview and Research Objectives
The City of San Bruno commissioned Godbe Research to conduct a survey of local voters with the following research objectives:
➢ Gauge the public’s rating of quality of life, perceptions of the City’s provision of services, and perceptions of the City’s use of taxpayer funds; ➢ Assess potential voter support for two revenue measures to maintain city services;
➢ Prioritize projects and programs to be funded with the proceeds; ➢ Test the influence of informational and critical statements on potential voter support; and
➢ Assess opinion on the future direction of the economy. ➢ Identify demographic and behavioral characteristics to ensure that the sample is representative of the likely voter in the City of San Bruno.
14 of 69
May 2026
Methodology Overview
➢ Data Collection Landline (4), cell (85), text to online (268), and email to online interviewing (47)
➢ Universe 18,371 Likely November 2026 Voters
➢ Fielding Dates April 27 to May 7, 2026
➢ Interview Length 25 minutes
➢ Sample Size n=404
➢ Margin of Error November 2026 Voters ± 4.82%
The data have been weighted to reflect the actual population characteristics of likely voters in the City of San Bruno in terms of their gender, age, and political party type.
15 of 69
May 2026
Key Findings
16 of 69
May 2026
Q1. Rating of the Quality of Life in the City of
San Bruno
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Likely
November
2026 Voters
12.8% 56.9% 25.1% 5.2%0.0%
Excellent Good Just fair Poor DK/NA
69.7%
9/23 Survey 11/25 Survey 5/26 Survey
11/24 Voters 11/26 Voters 11/26 Voters
Total Excellent + Good 64.2% 70.0% 69.7%
Total Poor 5.8% 6.5% 5.2%
Ex + Good / Poor 11.7 10.8 13.4
17 of 69
May 2026
Q2. Satisfaction with the Job the City of San
Bruno is Doing to Provide Community Services
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Likely
November
2026 Voters
17.4% 47.5% 20.5% 8.5% 6.0%
Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied DK/NA
64.9%
3/20 Survey 5/22 Survey 9/23 Survey 11/25 Survey 5/26 Survey 11/20 Voters 11/22 Voters 11/24 Voters 11/26 Voters 11/26 Voters Total Satisfaction 63.9% 58.8% 60.1% 65.6% 64.9%
Total Dissatisfaction 20.2% 31.4% 31.6% 27.7% 29.1%
Ratio Sat to Dissat 3.2 1.87 1.9 2.37 2.23
18 of 69
May 2026
Q3. Favorability Rating of the Job the City of
San Bruno is Doing to Effectively Manage and
Spend Taxpayer Dollars and Public Funds
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Likely
November
2026 Voters
6.7% 41.4% 29.4% 13.0% 9.5%
Very favorable Somewhat favorable Somewhat unfavorable Very unfavorable DK/NA
48.1%
19 of 69
May 2026
Q4. Initial Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample A
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency
response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and
gang intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 9¢ per single family
residence square foot tax annually
(rates for other land uses as
specified in the ordinance), until
ended by voters, providing
$7,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits and senior exemptions?
Probably No
20.1%
DK/NA
8.3%
Definitely No
23.4%
Definitely Yes
19.7%
Probably Yes
28.5%
Total Support
48.2%
20 of 69
May 2026
Q5. Initial Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample B
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency
response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and
gang intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 50¢ per commercial
building square foot tax annually,
until ended by voters, providing
$5,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits?
Probably No
14.7%
DK/NA
9.8%
Definitely No
15.7%
Definitely Yes
26.7%
Probably Yes
33.1%
Total Support
59.8%
21 of 69
May 2026
Q6. Features of the Measure I
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
G. Attract and retain qualified police officers
Q. Improve neighborhood parks, ballfields and
playgrounds
B. Maintain parks and recreation facilities
L. Maintain neighborhood police patrols
P. Maintain storm drains and provide flood protection
M. Maintain parks and open space
N. Maintain library programs for children, teens, adults and seniors
J. Provide rapid response to 9-1-1 emergency calls
A. Fix potholes and city streets
0.66 0.66
0.69 0.69
0.71 0.72
0.73 0.87
1.04 Much More
Likely
Tier 175.0%
Tier 2
63.0%
66.9%
64.0%
22 of 69
May 2026
Q6. Features of the Measure II
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
H. Support and retain local businesses with job training programs and other assistance
I. Maintain library hours and programs including
multilingual collections and courses
F. Enhance wildfire prevention
D. Maintain senior recreation programs
C. Provide senior health and wellness programs
K. Enhance youth crime prevention and gang
intervention programs
O. Attract and retain local businesses
E. Maintain crime prevention and gang suppression
programs
0.35 0.50
0.55 0.56
0.58 0.59
0.62 0.64
Much More
Likely
61.9%
Tier 2- Cont’d
48.6%
55.7%
Tier 3
57.1%
23 of 69
May 2026
Q7. Informational Statements I
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. 0 1 2
C. If the measure fails, the City would have to cut
firefighters and police officers that provide valuable
services to San Bruno residents
O. The proposal would not impact residential single
family homes, only non-residential buildings and
multifamily residential buildings would be assessed
based on building size
A. The measure requires independent citizen oversight,
mandatory financial audits, and yearly reports to the
community to ensure that all funds are spent as promised J. None of the money raised by the measure would be
used for City administrator salaries
I. Large commercial properties, owned by big
corporations, will pay their fair share based on the larger size of the buildings
1.11 1.17
1.17 1.20
1.26 No Effect Somewhat
More Likely
Much More
Likely
73.7%
Tier 1
68.3%
■ Entire Sample
■ Sample A
■ Sample B
24 of 69
May 2026
Q7. Informational Statements II
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. 0 1 2
G. The measure will help San Bruno be self-reliant during difficult times
E. The measure will help the City attract and retain high quality police officers
H. The measure's police funding will help make San
Bruno neighborhoods safer places to live, work and play K. The measure will continue to give San Bruno local
control over local funds for local needs. The measure
reduces the impact of State take-aways and the local
funding cannot be taken by the state and is not…
F. This measure is needed to maintain current levels of fire protection and police services, including
neighborhood patrols, crime prevention and fire
prevention programs
1.00 1.00
1.01 1.07
1.09 No Effect Somewhat
More Likely
Much More
Likely
69.3%
67.2%
Tier 1- Cont’dTier 2
65.5%
66.2%
■ Entire Sample
■ Sample A
■ Sample B
25 of 69
May 2026
Q7. Informational Statements III
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. 0 1 2
N. San Bruno has been fiscally responsible and now we
need to enhance essential funding to prevent devastating cuts
L. The measure will help maintain the quality of life and distinctive character of San Bruno
B. The measure will help the City be better prepared to quickly respond to wildfires like those in Los Angeles last year
D. Safe neighborhoods help protect our property values
M. Enhancing neighborhood police patrols and fire
prevention programs is vital to protecting San Bruno's
quality of life
0.84 0.90
0.96 0.98
0.99 No Effect Somewhat
More Likely
Much More
Likely
65.0%
Tier 2- Cont’d
57.6%
■ Entire Sample
■ Sample A
■ Sample B
26 of 69
May 2026
Q8. Interim Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample A
Probably No
16.9%
DK/NA
6.5%
Definitely No
22.0%
Definitely Yes
21.2%
Probably Yes
33.4%
Total Support
54.6%
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency
response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and
gang intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 9¢ per single family
residence square foot tax annually
(rates for other land uses as
specified in the ordinance), until
ended by voters, providing
$7,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits?
27 of 69
May 2026
Q9. Interim Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample B
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency
response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and
gang intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 50¢ per commercial
building square foot tax annually,
until ended by voters, providing
$5,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits?
Probably No
9.1%
DK/NA
5.2%
Definitely No
15.3%
Definitely Yes
35.6%
Probably Yes
34.9%
Total Support
70.5%
28 of 69
May 2026
Q10. Critical Statements I
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. 0 1 2
B. The measure is a forever tax that will never end
D. With residents and businesses struggling with high gas prices, tariffs, high grocery prices, high mortgage rates, and overall inflation, now is not the time for another tax increase
H. Despite passing a sales tax increase in 2019, a property tax increase in 2024, now they want to charge the average homeowner $180 more a year
G. The City hasn't kept its word about using taxes in the past and can't explain how it spent the money
1.09 1.13
1.18 1.18
No Effect Somewhat
More Likely
Much More
Likely
Tier 1
67.4%
63.8%
■ Entire Sample
■ Sample A
■ Sample B
29 of 69
May 2026
Q10. Critical Statements II
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, and “No Effect” = 0. 0 1 2
C. The City has too much debt already and would just use the measure to borrow even more
E. People in San Bruno are also being asked to increase sales taxes for BART and increase property taxes for the community college
A. If the City learns to manage money and assets properly, limit out-of-control salaries, benefits and pensions, and spend within its means, we would not have to pay more in taxes
F. The City has too many highly paid administrators
1.00 1.00
1.04 1.07
No Effect Somewhat
More Likely
Much More
Likely
Tier 1
62.3%
59.6%
■ Entire Sample
■ Sample A
■ Sample B
30 of 69
May 2026
Q11. Final Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample A
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Final
Ballot
Interim
Ballot
Initial
Ballot
17.3%
21.2%
19.7%
28.3%
33.4%
28.5%
18.4%
16.9%
20.1%
25.7%
22.0%
23.4%
10.3%
6.5%
8.3%
Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No DK/NA
48.2%
54.6%
45.6%
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and gang
intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 9¢ per single family
residence square foot tax annually
(rates for other land uses as
specified in the ordinance), until
ended by voters, providing
$7,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits and senior exemptions?
31 of 69
May 2026
Q12. Final Support for the Residential &
Commercial Parcel Tax
Sample B
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Final
Ballot
Interim
Ballot
Initial
Ballot
24.7%
35.6%
26.7%
34.4%
34.9%
33.1%
13.4%
9.1%
14.7%
18.5%
15.3%
15.7%
8.9%
5.2%
9.8%
Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No DK/NA
59.8%
70.5%
59.1%
City of San Bruno Local Services
Measure. Shall the measure be
adopted to maintain the following
city services
• rapid 9-1-1 emergency response,
• wildfire prevention,
• neighborhood police patrols,
• youth crime prevention and gang
intervention programs, and
• storm drains and flood
protection,
by levying 50¢ per commercial
building square foot tax annually,
until ended by voters, providing
$5,600,000 annually, with
independent citizen oversight and
audits?
32 of 69
May 2026
Q9. Individual and Organizational Favorability
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
Favorable
Somewhat
Unfavorable
Very
Unfavorable
-2 -1 0 1 2
F. Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association
C. Large companies
A. San Bruno Mayor and City Council
D. City watchdog groups
E. San Bruno police
G. Local small business owners
B. San Bruno Firefighters
0.12 0.14
0.18 0.54
1.00 1.19
1.39 Very
Favorable
80.4%
Tier 1
15.1%
41.2%
Tier 3Tier 4 Tier 2
35.5%
70.0%
72.7%
33 of 69
May 2026
Q14. Opinion on Future Economy
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Likely
November
2026 Voters
16.5% 26.6% 50.4% 6.5%
Better About the same Worse DK/NA
34 of 69
May 2026
www.godberesearch.com
California and Corporate Offices
1220 Howard Avenue, Suite 250
Burlingame, CA 94010
Nevada Office
59 Damonte Ranch Parkway, Suite B309
Reno, NV 89521
35 of 69
CHAPTER 12.26
VOTER APPROVAL FOR HIGH-RISE, HIGH DENSITY, SCENIC
CORRIDOR, AND OPEN-SPACE DEVELOPMENTS
§ 12.26.010. Introduction—Reproduction of notice of intent to circulate petition.
Editor's Note: Pursuant to section 4 of Ordinance 1284, the "Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition" for the initiative entitled "Initiative Measure to Require an Affirmative Vote of the Voters of the City of San Bruno Prior to the Issuance of any Permits or Other Approvals for High-Rise or High-Density Developments and Projects Encroaching Upon Scenic Corridors and Open Spaces" is reproduced below.
The petition was certified by the city clerk on May 23, 1977, and adopted by the city council on June 1st, 1977, pursuant to Sections 4010 and 4011 of the 1977 California Elections Code [2005 Government Code Sections 9200 et seq.] Notice is hereby given of the intention of the persons whose names appear hereon to circulate the petition within the city of San Bruno for the purpose of assuring referral to the qualified electors of San Bruno certain planning and zoning enactments proposed by the City Council which may establish new precedents in planning and zoning policies:
substantially affect air and noise pollution; substantially encroach upon scenic corridors; and any other enactments which may threaten the community, its quality of life or its interaction with neighboring communities.
A statement of the reasons of the proposed action as contemplated in said petition is as follows:
Air pollution, noise pollution, traffic congestion, energy shortages, depletion of open space and flora and fauna, and aggravation of attendant storm drainage and waste disposal problems—all associated with planning and zoning policies which promote high densities, breaking of existing height limits and dilution of increasingly scarce community resources—are rapidly approaching emergency proportions in a community further deluged by major highway and freeway systems and airport operations. The peace, comfort and enjoyment of suburban living of the very recent past is rapidly being displaced by pollution, clamor and depletion of community environmental resources.
Unless these accelerated trends are halted quickly, San Brunans will be irreversibly plunged into the problems of central-city despair which heretofore have been avoided or kept at controlled minimal levels.
It is essential to adopt this initiative proposal so that San Bruno citizens may have the opportunity to make for themselves the final decisions on these types of crucial, turning- point planning and zoning enactments proposed by the City Council. We citizens of San Bruno, and we alone, should decide the ultimate direction and character of this community which we who live here love and wish to preserve. /s/ Terri Rasmussen
/s/ Dr. Louis Maraviglia
/s/ Rose Urbach
City of San Bruno, CA
§ 12.26.010 § 12.26.010
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/SA5001 on 2026-06-17 36 of 69
ATTACHMENT 2
/s/ Lawrence Lucero
/s/ Gary Mondfrans
(Ord. 1284, § 4, 1977)
§ 12.26.020. Election required—Specification of project types.
Unless and until approved by a majority of the voters of the city, voting at a general or special election, no building permits, grading permits or other approvals shall be issued to allow or authorize the initiation or construction of buildings, other structures, land development projects or land uses described below:
(Ord. 1284 § 1, 1977)
§ 12.26.030. Pre-election hearings.
A. Buildings or other structures exceeding fifty feet in height; B. Buildings or other structures exceeding three stories in height; C. Buildings or other structures, modifications or redevelopment thereof in residential districts which increase the number of dwelling units per acre or occupancy, within each acre or portion thereof, in excess of limits permitted on October 10, 1974, under the then existing zoning chapter of the city of San Bruno; D. Multistory parking structures or buildings;
E. Buildings or other structures, modifications or redevelopment thereof which encroach upon, modify, widen or realign the following streets designated as scenic corridors: Crystal Springs Road between Oak Avenue and Junipero Serra Freeway; and Sneath Lane from El Camino Real to existing westerly City limits.
A. In voting upon this initiative ordinance and subsequent referrals thereunder, the People hereby find and declare that this ordinance and subsequent referrals are crucial legislative policy-making decisions by the voters of San Bruno necessary to adequately protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens under present and future conditions.
B. To provide a knowledgeable basis for voter decisions and adequate opportunity to property owners who may be adversely affected to present their viewpoints to the planning commission, city council and voters, it is essential that the city council should provide for the following prior to election on this initiative ordinance and subsequent referrals thereunder:
1. Compliance with Section 4017 of the Elections Code providing for proponent and opponent arguments in the Voters Pamphlet and Sections 65854 et seq., of the Government Code providing for public hearings before the planning commission and city council.
2. Town-hall type of hearing whereby experts, proponents and opponents may be heard and questioned by voters in attendance; and availability to voters for City of San Bruno, CA
§ 12.26.010 § 12.26.030
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/SA5001 on 2026-06-17
37 of 69
(Ord. 1284 § 2, 1977)
§ 12.26.040. Appeals—Election expenses—Deposit required.
Any owner-applicant may appeal denial of his application to the voters by accompanying such request with a sufficient deposit to cover entire expense of such election. (Ord. 1284 § 3, 1977)
loan or review at city hall of summaries of hearings and EIR proceedings before the planning commission and city council and all other relevant materials.
City of San Bruno, CA
§ 12.26.030 § 12.26.040
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/SA5001 on 2026-06-17
38 of 69
January 13, 2026
City of San Bruno:
2025 Community Priorities Survey
January 13, 2025
39 of 69 ATTACHMENT 3
January 13, 2026
Overview and Research Objectives
The City of San Bruno commissioned Godbe Research to conduct a survey of local voters with the following research objectives:
➢ Gauge overall perceptions of quality of life in San Bruno, direction of the City; ➢ Gauge overall satisfaction with the City’s provision of services; ➢ Assess importance of and satisfaction with current and potential future City services and facilities;
➢ Assess potential voter support for hypothetical parcel tax and land use measures;
➢ Prioritize information about the parcel tax and land use measures; ➢ Identify any differences in voter support due to demographic and/or voter behavioral characteristics.
40 of 69
January 13, 2026
Methodology Overview
➢ Data Collection Landline (2), cell (114), and text to online (287) interviewing
➢ Universe 18,514 likely November 2026 voters in the City of San Bruno
➢ Fielding Dates November 10-18, 2025
➢ Interview Length 25 minutes
➢ Sample Size n=403
➢ Margin of Error Likely November 2026 voters + 4.83%
The data have been weighted to reflect the actual population characteristics of likely voters in the City of San Bruno in terms of their gender, age, and political party type.
41 of 69
January 13, 2026
Key Findings
42 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q1. Opinion on Quality of Life in San Bruno
Likely November 2026 Voters
Excellent
12.5%
Good
57.5%
Just fair
23.4%
Poor
6.5%
DK/NA
0.1%
9/23 Survey 11/25 Survey
11/24 Voters 11/26 Voters
Total Excellent + Good 64.2% 70.0%
Total Poor 5.8% 6.5%
Ex + Good / Poor 11.7 10.8
43 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q2. Satisfaction With the City’s Provision of
Services
Likely November 2026 Voters
Very satisfied
19.8%
Somewhat
satisfied
45.9%
Somewhat
dissatisfied
16.0%
Very dissatisfied
11.7%
DK/NA
6.6%
3/20 Survey 5/22 Survey 9/23 Survey 11/25 Survey
11/20 Voters 11/22 Voters 11/24 Voters 11/26 Voters
Total Satisfaction 63.9% 58.8% 60.1% 65.6%
Total Dissatisfaction 20.2% 31.4% 31.6% 27.7%
Ratio Sat to Dissat 3.2 1.87 1.9 2.37
44 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q3. Importance of City Services & Facilities I
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Extremely Important” = +4, “Very Important” = +3, “Not Too Important” = +2, and “Not at All Important” = 0. 0 1 2 3
A. Maintaining neighborhood police patrols
P. Encouraging more stores, restaurants, and other
entertainment venues downtown
S. Maintaining parks and open space
Q. Providing safe pedestrian sidewalks and
crosswalks
U. Maintaining storm drains and provide flood
protection
W. Supporting the local economy, including
increasing local jobs
I. Attracting and retaining local businesses
X. Maintaining city streets and roads, and repairing
potholes
E. Rapidly responding to 9-1-1 emergency calls
2.21 2.23
2.20 2.16
2.21 2.19
2.33 2.52
2.61 2.11
2.15 2.15
2.16 2.17
2.23 2.29
2.44 2.55
2026
2024
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
Tier 1
92.5%
Not Too
Important
Not at All
Important
Tier 2
91.2%
86.2%
77.5%
45 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q3. Importance of City Services & Facilities II
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Extremely Important” = +4, “Very Important” = +3, “Not Too Important” = +2, and “Not at All Important” = 0. 0 1 2 3
T. Improving neighborhood parks, ballfields and
playgrounds
B. Managing traffic on City streets
D. Maintaining the San Bruno senior programs
M. Maintaining youth and teen services
V. Improving street lights
N. Providing adequate parks and recreation facilities
F. Enhancing youth crime prevention and gang
intervention programs
O. Upgrading and maintaining storm drains
1.95 1.90
1.95 2.04
1.75 2.11
2.22 2.15
1.92 1.92
1.94 1.95
1.98 2.00
2.06 2.08
2026
2024
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
79.0%
Not Too
Important
Not at All
Important
Tier 3
69.1%
46 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q3. Importance of City Services & Facilities III
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Extremely Important” = +4, “Very Important” = +3, “Not Too Important” = +2, and “Not at All Important” = 0. 0 1 2 3
G. Updating the Police Station
C. Building a new fire station
J. Building a new library
Y. Providing safe bike paths and routes
H. Maintaining San Bruno's unique community
character
L. Providing affordable housing
R. Providing recreation programs
K. Providing programs to reduce homelessness
1.27 1.37
1.36 1.52
1.66 1.84
1.84 2.02
1.22 1.38
1.40 1.52
1.73 1.79
1.83 1.88
2026
2024
Very
Important
Extremely
Important
T3 Cont’d
68.1%
Not Too
Important
Not at All
Important
66.5%
Tier 5 Tier 4
58.2%
52.2%
36.3%
40.9%
Tier 6
47 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q4. Satisfaction With City Services & Facilities I
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satified” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2. -2 -1 0 1 2
G. Update the Police Station
Q. Provide safe pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks
M. Maintain youth and teen services
T. Improve neighborhood parks, ballfields and
playgrounds
R. Provide recreation programs
S. Maintain parks and open space
D. Maintain the San Bruno senior programs
N. Provide adequate parks and recreation facilities
E. Rapidly respond to 9-1-1 emergency calls
0.37 0.37
0.27 0.44
0.39 0.56
0.60 0.58
0.77 0.47
0.47 0.53
0.57 0.68
0.70 0.73
0.77 0.90
2026
2024
Somewhat
Satisfied
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
40.2%
Very
Dissatisfied
63.9%
Tier 2 Tier 1
56.6%
55.1%
33.6%
Tier 355.1%
48 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q4. Satisfaction With City Services & Facilities II
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satified” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2. -2 -1 0 1 2
B. Manage traffic on City streets
F. Enhance youth crime prevention and gang
intervention programs
Y. Provide safe bike paths and routes
C. Build a new fire station
A. Maintain neighborhood police patrols
H. Maintain San Bruno's unique community character
U. Maintain storm drains and provide flood protection
O. Upgrade and maintain storm drains
0.39 0.16
0.28 0.26
0.23 0.33
0.37 0.29
0.27 0.31
0.33 0.36
0.39 0.39
0.43 0.43
2026
2024
Somewhat
Satisfied
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
45.5%
Very
Dissatisfied
Tier 3- Cont’d
44.2%
49 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q4. Satisfaction With City Services & Facilities III
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satified” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2. -2 -1 0 1 2
X. Maintain city streets and roads, and repair potholes P. Encourage more stores, restaurants, and other
entertainment venues downtown
L. Provide affordable housing
I. Attract and retain local businesses
K. Provide programs to reduce homelessness
J. Build a new library
W. Support the local economy, including increasing
local jobs
V. Improve street lights
-0.18
-0.26
-0.33
-0.12
-0.23
0.00 0.05
0.36 -0.23
-0.19
-0.17
-0.12
-0.09
0.03 0.04
0.26 2026
2024
Somewhat
Satisfied
Very
Satisfied
Tier 4
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
37.3%
Very
Dissatisfied
32.3%
Tier 6
29.3%
Tier 5
46.2%
24.9%
50 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q3 & 4. Importance-Satisfaction Comparison
Likely November 2026 Voters
Importance Satisfaction
3/4E. Rapidly responding to 9-1-1 emergency calls 2.55 0.90 3/4X. Maintaining city streets and roads, and repairing potholes 2.44 -0.23 3/4I. Attracting and retaining local businesses 2.29 -0.12 3/4W. Supporting the local economy, including increasing local jobs 2.23 0.04 3/4U. Maintaining storm drains and provide flood protection 2.17 0.43 3/4Q. Providing safe pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks 2.16 0.47 3/4S. Maintaining parks and open space 2.15 0.70
3/4P. Encouraging more stores, restaurants, and other entertainment venues downtown 2.15 -0.19 3/4A. Maintaining neighborhood police patrols 2.11 0.39 3/4O. Upgrading and maintaining storm drains 2.08 0.43
3/4F. Enhancing youth crime prevention and gang intervention programs 2.06 0.31 3/4N. Providing adequate parks and recreation facilities 2.00 0.77 3/4V. Improving street lights 1.98 0.26
3/4M. Maintaining youth and teen services 1.95 0.53
3/4D. Maintaining the San Bruno senior programs 1.94 0.73 3/4B. Managing traffic on City streets 1.92 0.27
3/4T. Improving neighborhood parks, ballfields and playgrounds 1.92 0.57 3/4K. Providing programs to reduce homelessness 1.88 -0.09 3/4R. Providing recreation programs 1.83 0.68
3/4L. Providing affordable housing 1.79 -0.17
3/4H. Maintaining San Bruno's unique community character 1.73 0.39 3/4Y. Providing safe bike paths and routes 1.52 0.33
3/4J. Building a new library 1.40 0.03
3/4C. Building a new fire station 1.38 0.36
3/4G. Updating the Police Station 1.22 0.47
51 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q4 & 5. Importance-Satisfaction Comparison
Likely November 2024 Voters
Importance Satisfaction
7/8E. Rapidly responding to 9-1-1 emergency calls 2.61 0.77 7/8X. Maintaining city streets and roads, and repairing potholes 2.52 -0.18 7/8I. Attracting and retaining local businesses 2.33 -0.12 7/8P. Encouraging more stores, restaurants, and other entertainment venues downtown 2.23 -0.26 7/8F. Enhancing youth crime prevention and gang intervention programs 2.22 0.16 7/8A. Maintaining neighborhood police patrols 2.21 0.23 7/8U. Maintaining storm drains and provide flood protection 2.21 0.37 7/8S. Maintaining parks and open space 2.20 0.56
7/8W. Supporting the local economy, including increasing local jobs 2.19 0.05 7/8Q. Providing safe pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks 2.16 0.37 7/8O. Upgrading and maintaining storm drains 2.15 0.29
7/8N. Providing adequate parks and recreation facilities 2.11 0.58 7/8M. Maintaining youth and teen services 2.04 0.27
7/8K. Providing programs to reduce homelessness 2.02 -0.23 7/8D. Maintaining the San Bruno senior programs 1.95 0.60 7/8T. Improving neighborhood parks, ballfields and playgrounds 1.95 0.44 7/8B. Managing traffic on City streets 1.90 0.39
7/8R. Providing recreation programs 1.84 0.39
7/8L. Providing affordable housing 1.84 -0.33
7/8V. Improving street lights 1.75 0.36
7/8H. Maintaining San Bruno's unique community character 1.66 0.33 7/8Y. Providing safe bike paths and routes 1.52 0.28
7/8C. Building a new fire station 1.37 0.26
7/8J. Building a new library 1.36 0.00
7/8G. Updating the Police Station 1.27 0.37
52 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q5. Support for Flat Rate Tax
Sample A
In order to maintain rapid 9-1-1
emergency response, enhance
wildfire prevention, neighborhood fire
protection, maintain neighborhood
police patrols, maintain parks and
open space, provide adequate
recreation facilities including
ballfields and playgrounds, and
maintain library services, would you
support or oppose a flat tax on all
parcels in San Bruno, including
single-family homes and business
parcels?
Probably No
13.5%
DK/NA
7.8%
Definitely No
26.9% Definitely Yes
21.1%
Probably Yes
30.6%
Total Support
51.7%
53 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q6. Support for Tax on Non-Residential &
Multifamily Residential Buildings
Sample B
In order to maintain rapid 9-1-1
emergency response, enhance
wildfire prevention, neighborhood fire
protection, maintain neighborhood
police patrols, maintain parks and
open space, provide adequate
recreation facilities including
ballfields and playgrounds, and
maintain library services, would you
support or oppose a property tax on
non-residential buildings and
multifamily residential buildings
based on building size?Probably No
13.9%
DK/NA
9.0%
Definitely No
13.6%
Definitely Yes
23.8%
Probably Yes
39.8%
Total Support
63.6%
54 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q7. Features of the Measure I
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
D. The proposal would enhance wildfire prevention
G. The proposal would maintain parks and open space
A. None of the money raised by the proposal would be
used for City administrator salaries
C. The proposal would provide rapid response to 9-1-1
emergency calls
J. The proposal would not impact residential single family homes, only non-residential buildings and multifamily
residential buildings would be assessed based on building size
0.62 0.66
0.69 0.69
0.77 Much More
Likely
Tier 1
64.9%
57.9%
55 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q7. Features of the Measure II
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
B. With continued high inflation rates, high gas and
grocery prices, and high mortgage interest rates now is the wrong time to increase taxes on businesses
I. The rate would be the same for all parcels in San Bruno E. The proposal would enhance youth crime prevention
and gang intervention programs
F. The proposal would maintain neighborhood police
patrols
H. The proposal would maintain library programs for
children, teens, adults and seniors
-0.17
0.06 0.52
0.53 0.61
Much More
Likely
Tier 3 Tier 1-Cont’d57.8%
37.3%
30.3%
51.9%
Tier 2Tier 4
53.5%
56 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q8. Support for Height Limit Options
Sample A
Shall the City of San Bruno measure
be adopted rescinding the 1977
zoning ordinance that requires voter
approval of any new development that
exceeds specified height limits,
because it has been superseded by
state law which requires housing to
be approved regardless of height?
Probably No
14.2%
DK/NA
15.5%
Definitely No
17.2%
Definitely Yes
25.9%
Probably Yes
27.2%
Total Support
53.2%
57 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q9. Support for Height Limit Options
Sample B
Shall the City of San Bruno measure
be adopted amending the 1977 zoning
ordinance to remove the requirement
for voter approval for any
developments along El Camino Real,
San Mateo Avenue, San Bruno Avenue
east of Interstate 280, Sneath Lane
east of Interstate 280, and retain voter
approval for increasing heights in
single family home neighborhoods?
Probably No
14.4%
DK/NA
14.0%
Definitely No
20.1%
Definitely Yes
20.9%
Probably Yes
30.5%
Total Support
51.4%
58 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q10. Height Limit Options Information I
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
F. The measure would balance commercial and housing
development along commercial and transit corridors
I. The measure would protect the character of San Bruno neighborhoods
B. The measure facilitates new commercial projects that provide City revenue that can support pothole repair, fire station upgrades and neighborhood police patrols
K. The measure would restore control over local zoning
decisions
G. The measure facilitates new commercial projects that provide City revenue that can support pothole repair, fire station upgrades and neighborhood police patrols
0.51 0.56
0.59 0.63
0.79 Much More
Likely
Tier 2 Tier 1
65.0%
53.3%
52.1%
52.1%
59 of 69
January 13, 2026
Q10. Height Limit Options Information
Likely November 2026 Voters
Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes, and responses were recoded to calculate mean scores:
“Much More Likely” = +2, “Somewhat More Likely” = +1, “No Effect” = 0, “Somewhat Less Likely” = -1, and “Much Less Likely” = -2.
Somewhat
More Likely
Somewhat
Less Likely
Much Less
Likely
-2 -1 0 1 2
C. If the measure is approved voters would lose their
direct say in development decisions related to increasing heights in San Bruno
J. If the measure is approved voters would lose their direct say in development decisions related to increasing heights in San Bruno
D. The measure would eliminate State Law protections for neighborhoods and allow the City to bypass local City
voters in order to develop or acquire low income housing H. The measure would prevent the creation of new housing to meet the needs of the region
A. The measure aligns the City of San Bruno with other
cities in San Mateo County and provides more flexibility to approve non-residential and revenue generating projects E. The measure would restore control over local zoning
decisions
-0.62
-0.59
-0.44
-0.04
0.30 0.31
Much More
Likely
Tier 5 Tier 3
35.7%
23.0%
18.7%
35.2%
Tier 4
38.8%
60 of 69
January 13, 2026
www.godberesearch.com
California and Corporate Offices
1220 Howard Avenue, Suite 250
Burlingame, CA 94010
Nevada Office
59 Damonte Ranch Parkway, Suite B309
Reno, NV 89521
61 of 69
62 of 69
ATTACHMENT 4
63 of 69
64 of 69
65 of 69
66 of 69
67 of 69
68 of 69
RESOLUTION N0. 2024 - 37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO EST ABLISHING A
CAP ON THE FIREWORKS ST AND PERMIT COST RECOVERY FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF SEVEN PERCENT ( 7%) OF EACH PERMITTEE' S GROSS FIREWORKS SALES FOR THE 2023 AND 2024 INDEPENDENCE DAY HOLIDAYS AND WAIVE COLLECTION OF THE
NON- REFUNDABLE APPLICATION FEE FOR ALL PREVIOUS YEARS
WHEREAS, on June 28, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2008- 67 amending rules and regulations pertaining to temporary fireworks stands pursuant to San Bruno Municipal Code Section 6. 50. 060; and
WHEREAS, Section 4 of Resolution 2008- 67 sets forth a cost recovery fee requiring a non- refundable application fee and a requirement that permit recipient reimburse the City their pro rata portion of the costs incurred by the city for fireworks public education, enforcement of the requirements of San Bruno Municipal Code Chapter 6. 50 and Resolution 2008-67, and fireworks cleanup " Cost Recovery Fee"; and
WHEREAS, on September 26, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023- 105 to clarify that the cost recovery fee includes fire prevention and fire suppression costs; and WHEREAS, City Council adopted a non- refundable application fee on April 23, 2024; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered input from representatives of nonprofit groups who operate the fireworks stands regarding the local community benefit from capping the 2023 and 2024 Independence Day holiday Cost Recovery Fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby: ( i) establishes a cap on the Fireworks Stand Permit Cost Recovery fee in the amount of seven percent ( 7%) of each permittee' s gross fireworks sales for the 2023 and 2024 Independence Day holidays, and ii) directs staff to waive collection of the non- refundable application fee for all previous years. oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2024 - 37 was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 28, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Alvarez, Hamilton, M. Medina, Salazar, Mayor R. Medina NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
LupitlHuerta, City Clerk
69 of 69
ATTACHMENT 5