Agenda, first session — San Bruno City Council, August 25, 2026

"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
August 25, 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*
TELECONFERENCE MEETING CONNECTION
Zoom Link
https://sanbrunocagov.zoom.us/j/88424368488?
pwd=yoHSDMKPoHgEGmuaX9fPIpXspEkTA1.1
Phone Line: 16465588656
Webinar ID: 884 2436 8488
Webinar Password: 031944
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. Under the Brown Act, the City is only obligated to allow public comment on topics that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. If a speaker is commenting on a topic that is not within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to pause the timer and ask the speaker to comport his or her comments consistent with the Brown Act’s requirements. If a speaker is unable to do so, the City reserves the right to consider the speaker disruptive and remove them from 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]
.

PUBLIC RECORDS: Any public writings related to an open session item on a special meeting agenda and distributed by the City to at least a majority of the City Council less than 24 hours prior to this 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. STUDY SESSION
Public comment will be requested after each item in this section a. Hold a Study Session to Review the Senior Nutrition and Transportation Programs Including Alternative Models for Discussion and Direction b. Transition to a ProgramOriented Budget for Fiscal Year 202728: Framework, Draft Citywide Programs and Services Inventory, and Milestones

4. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on August 25, 2026 at 7:00 pm.
1 of 18
POSTING: I declare a copy of this agenda was posted at City Hall, 567 El Camino Real, San B runo, among other locations in the city limits of San Bruno, on August 20, 2026, by 8:00 pm.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

4. ADJOURNMENT – The next Regular City Council Meeting will be held on August 25, 2026 at 7:00 pm.
2 of 18

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: August 25, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Meghan Rosin, Senior Services Manager
Travis M. Karlen, Community Services Director
SUBJECT: Hold a Study Session to Review the Senior Nutrition and Transportation Programs Including Alternative Models for Discussion and Direction BACKGROUND:

The San Bruno Senior Center has operated the Senior Nutrition and Transportation Program since 2004, delivered through the San Mateo County Area Agency on Aging under a County grant-funded model. This funding is tied to the Older Americans Act and provides partial reimbursement for congregate nutrition and transportation services for adults aged 60 and older.

Since the program's inception, service delivery models have varied, including an in-house chef model and a catered meals model.

In FY 2025-26, the program served averaged approximately 2,084 meals per month totaling just over 25,000 meals annually and provided approximately 3,086 one-way rides for the year.

Because of the Center's regional draw, 51% of annual meal recipients are non-residents.

Eligible participants are asked to provide a suggested voluntary contribution of $4 per meal and $1 per one-way ride. Participants are not denied service due to inability to contribute, and all contributions must remain anonymous under grant requirements. These suggested contributions are increasing to $6 per meal and $2 per on-way ride on October 1, 2026. Even with grant funding, subsidies for these programs have continued to grow, and staff project the General Fund annual subsidy will exceed $750,000 by the end of the grant cycle in 2030.

The purpose of this study session is to provide an overview of the current Senior Nutrition and Transportation Programs, present the Council with information regarding the current operations and what it means to enter into a grant agreement for the next term. Additionally, staff will be presenting alternative models that may help with the long-term sustainability of the program for Council feedback and direction.

Should the City Council have consensus to stay with the current model, signing of the grant agreement is within the City Manager’s authority. The goal is to ensure the Council has the information needed to discuss key policy tradeoffs before moving forward. The programs serve more than 100 meals each weekday and provide an average of 10 one-way rides daily, both connected to the same County grant structure.

At the June 16, 2026, Senior Advisory Board meeting, staff presented information along with alternative service delivery models and sought board feedback on the program's long-term 3 of 18 Item 3a.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 2 of 8 ends

direction. Board members expressed clear support for evaluating alternative models, affirming that the program's longevity and sustainability warrant further study.

While certain models were not presented or discussed at the meeting, staff believes additional models merit Council-level discussion given the City's current financial risks and the growing General Fund subsidy required to sustain the program. Staff is bringing these additional options forward to ensure Council has a complete picture of the available alternatives before providing direction.

DISCUSSION:

The City is approaching a decision point regarding whether to enter into a year 1 agreement of a four-year grant cycle with San Mateo County or consider an alternative City-operated model. It should be noted that the draft agreement has a termination clause that would allow the City to terminate the agreement at any time without a requirement of good cause upon thirty days’ advance written notice. Decisions about this program have significant implications for program access, fiscal sustainability, staff capacity, resident and non-resident participation, and transportation services. They will also affect service delivery during the tentative renovation closure.

For FY 2026-27, the County grant reimbursement combined for both programs is estimated at a not-to-exceed amount of $198,491, while total expenditures are projected to exceed $800,000.

Although the grant provides partial support, it does not cover the full cost of operating the programs. Notably, a significant portion of the grant reimbursement is offset by staffing costs associated with required grant reporting. Program costs are expected to continue rising due to catering, staffing, food, transportation, and general operational expenses.

Due to the trajectory of rising costs, staff will be presenting four models for Council to consider moving forward:

Model 1: San Mateo County Area Agency on Aging (Current Model) Model 2: Independent City Funded Model – Fee Based
Model 3: Independent City Funded Model – Fee Based/Resident Only Model 4: Discontinue the Nutrition and Transportation Program Each model carries its own benefits and challenges, and this direction goes beyond dollars and cents. City Council is being asked to weigh access for older adults, affordability, use of City resources, resident prioritization, regional service expectations, staff capacity, and the ability to adapt services during the upcoming Senior Center renovation closure. Broader policy considerations include:

1. How to balance fiscal sustainability with affordability and access for older adults.

2. Given the City's financial risks, whether to prioritize San Bruno residents over continued service to the broader regional senior community.

3. Whether to continue with the current lowest-barrier access model, which offers limited program flexibility and a growing General Fund subsidy.

4. Whether to introduce required fees or resident/non-resident pricing to reduce the General Fund subsidy.

5. How the programs should be structured during the upcoming renovation closure.

4 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 3 of 8 ends

6. What level of service, subsidy, and local control best supports the long-term needs of the San Bruno senior community.

7. Whether providing senior meal services should continue to be a core City function going forward.

Model 1: Status Quo: Continue with the San Mateo County Area Agency on Aging Grant Under this model, the City would accept the grant, enter into the first year of the four-year grant cycle with San Mateo County, and continue operating the programs under the current structure with a substantial General Fund subsidy of approximately $516,000 for FY 2026-27.

This option preserves the voluntary contribution model, maintains continuity for participants, and continues San Bruno’s alignment with the broader County senior services network. It also allows the City to continue serving eligible seniors regardless of ability to pay or residency.

Benefits of Model 1
Continuing with the grant model would:
Make the City eligible for up to $198,491 in annual grant reimbursement. Maintain continuity for seniors, particularly those who rely on services regardless of ability to contribute.
Preserve the current low-barrier, donation-based model. Avoid immediate disruption for participants, volunteers, and staff. Maintain San Bruno's connection to the countywide senior nutrition network. Continue County program standards for nutrition, eligibility, meal quality, and reporting.

Potential Limitations of Model 1
Continuing with the grant model:
Requires the City to enter a four-year grant cycle with the County; while the agreement does include a termination clause, exercising it after committing to the cycle could raise concerns about the City's reliability as a grant partner. Limits the City's ability to restructure the program while under the agreement. Precludes the City from restricting service or prioritizing based on residency. Precludes the City from requiring payment from eligible participants (donation only). Requires significant staff time for grant compliance.
Leaves the City in a position where grant funding does not keep pace with rising program costs, resulting in an increasing General Fund subsidy over time. Limits the City's flexibility to redesign service delivery during the tentative renovation closure.

Model 2: Independent City Funded Model – Fee Based
Under this model, the City would opt out of the new four-year grant commitment and instead operate the programs independently, without County funding or oversight. Staff would continue to uphold the same food safety, handling, and nutrition standards currently in place, ensuring no reduction in the level of care and protection provided to San Bruno's senior participants. This model also gives the City greater control over program structure, fees, eligibility, resident and non-resident participation, menus, staffing, branding, and service delivery.

5 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 4 of 8 ends

Unlike the current donation-based structure, this model shifts to fee-based pricing. In the scenario presented, the resident senior rate is set at $6.50 per meal, reflecting a 50% City subsidy, while non-residents would pay $13.00 per meal, reflecting full cost recovery of the catered meal cost. The annual general fund subsidy is projected at approximately $374,000 for this model.

It should also be noted that the City incurs approximately $8 per meal in supplemental costs which include milk, fresh produce, and other supplies. In this model, those costs remain subsidized for both residents and non-residents. The Transportation Program would continue to serve San Bruno residents only, with a required payment of $2.00 per one-way ride. All fees would be reviewed annually through the City's Master Fee Schedule process.

Benefits of Model 2
Transitioning to an independently fee-based model would:
Provide the City full control over program.
Allow the City to structure the program to prioritize San Bruno residents. Create the ability to set fees rather than rely on voluntary contributions. Provide full flexibility to structure meal pricing as the City sees fit, including offering a greater subsidy to San Bruno residents and setting non-resident rates up to full cost recovery.
Reduce the projected General Fund subsidy.
Eliminate grant-related administrative and reporting requirements, reducing the staff time currently required for County compliance, meal monitoring documentation, and reporting. Free up staff capacity for other departmental priorities. Allow flexibility to adjust the program annually based on budget, participation, staffing, and community needs.
Provide flexibility during the renovation closure, including boxed meal options, alternate meal locations, multiple community-based sites, and other service delivery models.

Potential Limitations of Model 2
Transitioning to an independently funded City model:
Eliminates eligibility for County grant funding for FY 2026-27 and removes San Bruno from the current grant cycle, with the next anticipated application opportunity not expected until 2030.
Shifts a greater portion of cost recovery directly to participants by requiring seniors to pay a fee for their meal, which may potentially create barriers for those on fixed incomes. May reduce participation if participants are unable or unwilling to pay the set fee. Would require thoughtful outreach so participants understand how services would continue.
May require implementation of a dedicated assistance fund, or a free and reduced meal option.
Would require further discussion with the Nutrition Site Council regarding their financial support under a new model.

6 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 5 of 8 ends

Model 3: Independent City Funded Model – Fee Based/Resident Only Model 3 mirrors Model 2 in structure. The City would opt out of the new four-year County grant cycle and operate the programs independently, maintaining existing safe handling and nutrition standards while gaining full control over program design, fees, menus, staffing, and branding.

The key distinction is that Model 3 would limit program participation to San Bruno residents only, eliminating non-resident access entirely. The annual general fund subsidy is projected at approximately $222,000 for this model.

Additional Benefits of Model 3 to Model 2
Concentrates limited subsidy dollars entirely on San Bruno taxpayers and residents, aligning cost with the population the program is intended to serve. Reinforces the program as a dedicated resident benefit, which may strengthen public support and perceived value among San Bruno taxpayers.
Reduces the risk of capacity constraints (e.g., limited seating, meal counts, or ride availability) being consumed by non-resident participants.

Additional Potential Limitations of Model 3 to Model 2
May be perceived as less regionally collaborative, particularly if neighboring jurisdictions lack comparable programs and their seniors have historically relied on San Bruno's services.
May disrupt existing social bonds formed between resident and non-resident participants, as many seniors have built friendships and routines through shared meals and transportation over time.

Model 4: Discontinue the Senior Nutrition and Transportation Programs Under this scenario, the City would opt out of the new four-year County grant agreement and would discontinue the programs in any form. Participants would need to seek meal and transportation services through other providers. This model has not been formally recommended or adopted and is presented for discussion only.

Benefits of Model 4
Discontinuing the programs would:
Eliminate the City's General Fund subsidy entirely (projected at approximately $516,000 under Model 1, or a lesser but still significant amount under Models 2 or 3). Eliminate staff time currently dedicated to program administration, compliance, meal monitoring, documentation, and County coordination freeing that capacity for other departmental priorities and/or reducing the overall General Fund expenditures associated with operating the program.
Simplify service delivery planning during the upcoming Senior Center renovation closure, since no meal or transportation service would need to be relocated or restructured.

7 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 6 of 8 ends

Potential Limitations of Model 4
Discontinuing the programs would:
Eliminate a long-standing service that supports the health, independence, and well-being of San Bruno's older adults, including approximately 100+ participants served each weekday.
Disproportionately impact seniors on fixed or limited incomes who rely on the program for daily nutrition and cannot easily afford or access private alternatives. End transportation services relied upon by residents who may otherwise be unable to reach the center for meals programs and services offered. Eliminate San Bruno's eligibility for County grant reimbursement and remove the City from the Countywide senior nutrition network, with reentry not anticipated until the next grant cycle in 2030.
Potentially disrupt existing social bonds and community connections built through the program among both participants.
Generate public concern and opposition from current participants, the Nutrition Site Council, and the Senior Advisory Board, which has expressed support for continuing to evaluate, not eliminate the program.
Shift the burden of service provision to other agencies or nonprofits, which may not have capacity to absorb San Bruno's current participant base.

In summary, the City's Senior Nutrition Program currently operates under a County grant that provides funding but limits the City's flexibility, requires significant staff time for compliance and reporting, and prohibits prioritizing residents (who make up only ~49% of participants) over non- residents.

The City Council is being presented with three alternative models to the current Model 1 for discussion: Model 2, which would serve both residents and non-residents with tiered fees; Model 3, which mirrors Model 2's structure and pricing but limits participation to San Bruno residents only; and Model 4, which would discontinue the Nutrition and Transportation Programs entirely.

Models 2 and 3 would give the City greater control over fees, menus, staffing, and service delivery. Both would also free up staff capacity currently dedicated to grant compliance. The key trade-off between them is one of reach versus efficiency.

Model 2 preserves regional access and existing social connections between residents and non- residents. However, it introduces a required fee in place of the current voluntary donation.

Model 3 simplifies administration and concentrates City subsidy on residents, but it risks disrupting long-standing relationships and straining regional goodwill.

Model 4 would eliminate the General Fund subsidy and staff burden altogether. This option, however, would come at the cost of ending a service that supports the health and independence of San Bruno's older adults.

Council is being asked to weigh these financial and social trade-offs alongside questions of program access, equity, and flexibility during the upcoming renovation. While Models 3 and 4

8 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 7 of 8 ends

were not presented at the Senior Advisory Board's June 16, 2026, meeting, staff believes both merit Council-level discussion given the City's current financial risks.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Impact of each model is illustrated in the table below. It should be noted that a large part (Approximately $121,000) of the grant funding is allocated to staffing that is directly related to grant reporting and compliance. This means that approximately $77,000 is remaining for the other staffing, materials, supplies and catering for the program. It should also be noted that this chart does not consider the $75,000 in Nutrition Site Council contributions and future contributions are unknown.

The fiscal analysis presented for each model does not account for the capital costs, deferred maintenance, or future replacement costs associated with the facility or kitchen used to operate the Nutrition Program. Additionally, this analysis does not evaluate the opportunity cost of dedicating this space to the program, including potential displacement of other Senior Center programming or activities, nor does it quantify the revenue the City could otherwise generate by renting the space to outside groups at the Facility Rental Fee rate. A more comprehensive financial analysis incorporating these factors may be warranted as part of any future decision regarding long-term facility use and program delivery.

Note: Model 4 is not shown below as there are no fees or revenue associated with divesting of the program.

Model 1
Current Model
(25,008 Meals)
Model 2
Fee Based/No
Grant
(25,008 Meals)
Model 3
Fee Based/No
Grant /Residents
Only
(12,360 Meals)
Annual Catered Meals $325,104 $325,104 $160,680
Produce & Misc. $200,064 $200,064 $98,880
Personnel $291,750 $171,160 $96,664
Total Expenditures $816,918 $696,328 $356,224
Cash Donations and
Booklets
$102,600 $0 $0
Fees $0 $322,277 $134,415
OAA Grant $198,491 $0 $0
Total Revenue $301,091 $322,277 $134,415
General Fund
Subsidy
$515,827 $374,051 $221,809
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.

9 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 8 of 8 ends

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend that the City Council receive the presentation and report, discuss the policy options presented, and provide general feedback and direction to staff regarding the various models.

Specifically, staff is seeking Council feedback and direction on the following:
Should the City remain aligned with the County's grant-funded model (Model 1), or move toward an independent City-operated program?
If Council directs staff to remain with Model 1, the following questions do not apply, as the grant does not permit these program changes. If Council directs staff toward an independent model, staff would like discussion on the following items:
Should the City prioritize San Bruno residents over the broader regional senior community, given the growing General Fund subsidy and fiscal risk of continuing to serve non-residents at the same level? Note: This will be particularly important if the senior center closes for renovations this year as the capacity may be limited. Should the program move from voluntary contributions to required fees (and if so, resident/non-resident tiered pricing), or should the City preserve the current lowest- barrier, donation-based access model despite its rising cost? How should the programs be structured during the upcoming Senior Center renovation closure, and how much should that flexibility factor into the model decision now? If moving to a fee-based model, what affordability protections should be built in; such as sponsorships, partnerships, a dedicated assistance fund, or a free/reduced meal option to protect seniors on fixed incomes?
Whether providing senior meal services should continue to be a core City function going forward.

ALTERNATIVES:

None.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

10 of 18

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: August 25, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Joseph D. Toney, Assistant City Manager
Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director & CFO
SUBJECT: Transition to a Program-Oriented Budget for Fiscal Year 2027-28:

Framework, Draft Citywide Programs and Services Inventory, and Milestones
BACKGROUND:

On June 24, 2026, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27 City budget, a $329 million spending plan across all funds and purposes. The General Fund is a portion of that total at $75.2 million, or 22 percent of the overall budget, yet it provides nearly all daily services to the community, such as police, fire, streets maintenance, senior programs, parks, and general administration. The General Fund budget is balanced and incorporates a loss of $3 million resulting from the State's inaction on fixing the broken Vehicle License Fee (VLF) in-lieu backfill formula.

In August, the County advised all San Mateo County cities that the initial VLF in-lieu backfill formulas were understated based on final assessed values for the various school agencies throughout the county. For San Bruno, the VLF in-lieu backfill shortfall increased from an estimated $3.0 million to $5.6 million, resulting in a potential funding gap of $2.6 million remaining in FY 2026-27, absent proactive legislation by the State Legislature and Governor.

The Council took action at its July 28 meeting to move forward with a revenue measure for voter consideration on the November 2026 ballot. The measure, if approved by more than 50 percent of votes cast, would modernize the City's business license tax ordinance, generating unrestricted funding estimated at $4.0 million to support essential services provided to the public.

On June 25, the City Executive Team kicked off consideration of a process to better position the City for discussions of changes in revenues, whether increases under the revenue measure or decreases under the State's inaction, as part of the FY 2027-28 budget. That effort followed immediately on the heels of FY 2026-27 budget adoption, in recognition of the consequential impacts of revenue threats on the City's long-term fiscal stability.

The purpose of this report is to introduce a strategic approach underway at the staff level so that the City is well positioned for the City Council's annual goal setting session on January 29, 2027. Because budget development follows a short timeframe, traditionally beginning with that session, staff will work over the balance of this calendar year to assemble financial information 11 of 18
Item 3b.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

in a manner that focuses on programs and services rather than departments and line items, supporting more impactful conversations.

DISCUSSION:

The City's budget is, and historically has been, presented on a department basis. That approach defines the resources allocated to a function but provides little transparency into how those resources are allocated to programs or services. The City's current departments are City Council, City Attorney, City Manager's Office, Administrative Services, Community Development, Community Services, Fire, Police, Public Works, and, separately, the Capital Improvement Program. The current presentation answers the question of who spends the money. It does not readily answer the question residents and the Council ask most often: what services does the City provide, at what level, and what does each one cost? Which services, and at what level, is the fundamental policy consideration of a budget, and staff is working to present the FY 2027-28 budget in a manner that facilitates internal and Council-level discussion, which then informs development of a balanced budget.

For FY 2027-28, City staff is adding a second and third dimension to the budget communication:
program and service. This approach adds another way to read the same dollars, moving beyond the current department presentation to a presentation organized around programs and the services they deliver. This is a presentation and management framework, not a reorganization or an accounting system conversion. Departments, divisions, funds, and reporting relationships remain unchanged. The department budget continues to exist and continues to be an important consideration in the annual appropriations process.

A new budget lens
In preparation for FY 2027-28 budget development, staff has completed the process of establishing a draft listing of programs and services, which sets the foundation for further analysis and budget development. This initial articulation of the City's programs and services is a critical step that will continue to be refined over the course of the next several months. Every department has identified its programs and the services within them, resulting in the draft Citywide Programs and Services Inventory included as Attachment 1. The remainder of the work, through March 2027, refines that inventory, attaches cost and staffing to it, and carries the structure into the FY 2027-28 budget document.

Why this approach?
A department budget is organized around who supervises whom. It changes every time the organization changes, and it does not describe what the community receives. A program- oriented budget is organized around the services the City delivers. It holds steady through reorganization, it allows the same service to be seen even when the work crosses several departments, and it supports policy conversations at the level where choices are made.

Development review is a useful example. To applicants, the City provides one service:
entitlements to use their land in a manner consistent with zoning codes. Internally, that work runs through Planning, Building, Engineering, Fire, and the City Attorney's Office, across more than one fund. A department budget cannot show the Council what development review costs.

A program view can.

The new lens is focused on transparency that translates dollars into tangible outcomes. With that information, an inventory of services prepares the City for a discussion of what happens if

12 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

the City increases or decreases the desired service level based on revenue projections in the upcoming fiscal year. It is built to make tradeoffs visible, not to propose eliminations.

Departments and divisions stay as they are, while the added granularity improves budget communication and engagement.

The vocabulary: program, service, and service level
Three terms carry the framework, and consistent use of them is what allows costs and staffing to roll up citywide. A program is funded. A service is delivered. A service level is decided. Of the three, the service level is the one the Council can adjust incrementally.

Term The question it answers Example
Program What the City funds as a single
decision
Building Permits and Inspection
Service What the City delivers, and for
whom
Building inspections, roughly 12,500 a year
Service level The standard the City commits to
holding
Next-day inspections, 90 percent on time
Service levels are dials to adjust, not keep/cut switches Budget conversations stall when every service is framed as keep it or cut it, because almost nothing the City does can simply be switched off. The more useful question is what happens if the City does less, and what capacity is required to hold a given level. That framing makes tradeoffs visible before any discussion of priority.

Service levels also show that the same percentage change is not the same operational decision in every department. In contract-based recreation programming, the smallest workable change may be a single class or a single hourly shift. In fire suppression and emergency medical response, the smallest workable change is a staffed company while minimum staffing, apparatus standards, and mutual aid obligations set a floor below which the dial cannot move.

The program view is what makes those differences legible rather than assumed.

Milestones
The following schedule carries the work from this introduction through budget adoption in June 2027. Staff will return to the Council at the points noted.

Phase Timeframe What is delivered
Introduction August 2026 Council receives the framework, the vocabulary, and the draft citywide inventory. No service-level
decisions are requested.

Phase I: Definitions and
consistency
August - September
2026
Department training on identifying services and
service levels, followed by an alignment pass with
the Budget Team.

Phase II: Detail, plans,
and a model
September -
December 2026
Department action plans, deeper service-level and
impact detail, a proposed prioritization model.

Phase III: Into the budget January – March
2027
The FY 2026-27 budget is converted into the new
structure, service levels are aligned with available
capacity, departmental budgets are set, and the
structure is carried into the budget document.

Adoption June 2027 The FY 2027-28 budget is presented for adoption in the program-oriented format.

13 of 18

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 25, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

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:

Transition to a Program-Oriented Budget for Fiscal Year 2027-28: Framework, Draft Citywide Programs and Services Inventory, and Milestones
ALTERNATIVES:

1. Direct staff to modify the identified budgetary approach.

2. Direct staff to retain current budgetary processes.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. City Programs and Services Inventory

14 of 18

DRAFT
City of San Bruno - Programs/Services Inventory
Department Program Service
Administrative Services
Budget Development &
Administration
Financial reporting and
analysis
Mandatory and best practice financial reporting and analysis Human resources
services and support
Employee lifecycle services (recruitment/hiring, benefits administration, leaves, accommodations, training and development)
Workforce management (engagement/retention, classification/compensation, performance management, investigations, discipline, grievances, negotiations)
Information technology
services and support
Network and technology equipment management and maintenance Business software management and maintenance
Procurement and
disbursements
Procurement oversight; vendor and employee payments, including payroll Risk management
Liability and workers' compensation administration
Treasury and revenue
management
Collection, management, and investment of all City funds City Attorney's Office
Comprehensive legal
services
Contract review
Legal counsel
City Manager's Office
Administration and
public engagement
Community and employee engagement and Citywide administration City Clerk services
Administer City elections
Agendas and notice for public meetings
Public records (management, requests, retention)
Strategic services
Economic development, legislative and policy advocacy, and budget management 1 Date prepared: August 19, 2026
15 of 18 ATTACHMENT 1
DRAFT
City of San Bruno - Programs/Services Inventory
Department Program Service
Community Development
Building inspections
Perform mandated inspections of new construction, provide certificates of occupancy, and inspect annual business licenses
Building permit
processing
Perform mandated review of building permit applications, including managing interdepartmental review Citizen oversight
Support the mandated Planning Commission for review of current, long-range and housing agenda items Current planning review
Manage the mandated review of applications for zoning compliance, including managing interdepartmental and environmental review
Long-range planning
and policy
Mandated management of the General Plan, preparation of new policy documents such as Specific Plans and Zoning Amendments with mandated environmental review
Code Compliance
Municipal Code education and enforcement
Public Information
Educational outreach, PRAs, counter services, and general communications Housing
Management of mandated housing policy, programs, and administration Community Services
Citizen oversight
Commissions, advisory boards, committees, citizens' academy Community events
City-run cultural and community engagement events
Library services
Reference and circulation services; collection development Parks maintenance
Parks maintenance, including parks facilities and picnic areas Permits and rentals
Special events permitting and rentals
Public programs
Provide for camps, classes, aquatics, educational and other programming Recreation and Aquatic
Center operations
RAC facility general use
Senior programs
Congregate nutrition and transportation for seniors
Capital and
infrastructure
Capital Improvement Program and facility improvement projects 2 Date prepared: August 19, 2026

16 of 18

DRAFT
City of San Bruno - Programs/Services Inventory
Department Program Service
Fire
Emergency response
services
Fire suppression and emergency medical services
Fire prevention services
Community risk reduction activities
Construction plan review
Fire incident investigations
Mandated and best practice building and facility inspections Fleet maintenance
services
Preventive and corrective maintenance of fire apparatus Personnel and
administration
Department administration (personnel, capital, policy, records, fiscal, interagency, special programs) Training services
Mandatory and best practice training for all operations Police
Communication
services
Dispatch and emergency (911) communications
Community safety
services
Behavioral health/crisis response (mental health clinician) Community engagement and neighborhood relations and programs Parking education and enforcement
School crossing guard program
School resource officer program
Traffic education and enforcement
Investigation services
Law enforcement investigations
Regulatory and investigative work (gambling/massage establishments) Special task force units
Patrol services
Patrol (Bayhill)
Patrol field services
Personnel and training
services
Background investigations for potential employees
Officer wellness program
Police Academy/Pipeline to Patrol
Records and property
management services
Evidence and property management
Records management
3 Date prepared: August 19, 2026

17 of 18

DRAFT
City of San Bruno - Programs/Services Inventory
Department Program Service
Public Works
Administration and
engineering services
Capital Improvement Program, land development, traffic engineering, and administration Clean-Up San Bruno
Administration and partnership of Clean-Up San Bruno program between Public Works, Police, Community Development, and Community Services departments2
Community serving
operations
Delivery of potable water
Management of solid waste contract
Stormwater and flood control
Street sweeping operations
Streets, sidewalks, and streetlight maintenance
Wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment
Downtown parking
program
Administration and management of the downtown paid parking program Internal service
operations
Management and maintenance of City facilities
Management and maintenance of the City's vehicle fleet
4 Date prepared: August 19, 2026

18 of 18

San Bruno City CouncilAugust 25, 2026

San Bruno City Council
August 25, 2026