1 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
August 8, 2022 7:00 P.M.
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both in -person at City Hall and virtually via Zoom. Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.
In-Person Participation:
Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.
Masks are no longer required, but are still highly recommended in accordance with California Dept of Health Guidelines. To maintain public health and safety, please do not attend in person if you are experiencing symptoms associated with COVID-19.
Provide Public Comment. To address the City Council on any item on the posted agenda, fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the back of the Council Chambers and submit it to the City Clerk; or, you may raise your hand when the Mayor calls for public comments.
Remote Participation:
Observe via:
- Zoom. https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88256140939; or call 1-669-900-9128 and enter the Meeting ID #: 882 5614 0939
- Meeting Webportal. www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda
- Local TV. Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Uverse Channel 99
Provide Public Comment. If you plan to make a public comment on any item on the posted agenda, please o bserve the meeting via Zoom (see above access inf ormation), and during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address, use the “raise hand” feature. If joining Zoom by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”.
Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.
MAYOR: Sara McDowell
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Laura Parmer-Lohan, Adam Rak
2 1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
4. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Communications and Announcements are brief items from members of the City Council regarding upcoming events in the community and correspondence that they have received. They are informational in nature and no action will be taken on these items at this meeting.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.
Each speaker is limited to two minutes. If there are more than five individuals wishing to speak during public comment, the M ayor may choose to allow the first five speakers to speak during this time, and the balance of the Public Comment speakers will be called upon at the end of the Council Meeting.
If the item you are speaking on is not listed on the agenda, please be advise d that the City Council may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed as allowed under the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54954.2). The City Council's general policy is to refer items to staff for attention, or have a matter placed on a fut ure City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting. c. Approve Minutes of June 13, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting. d. Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards. e. Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $18,750 from the Unassigned Balance in Gas Tax Fund (Fund 16) to Project C9465 in Fiscal Year 2022-23; Awarding the 2023 On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project C9465; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Public Projects Agreement with VNH Builders of Burlingame, CA in an Amount Not-To-Exceed $138,750.
f. Deny Claim of Searight.
g. Adopt a Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of the Fiscal Year 2021 -2022 Fire Inspection Report in Compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4.
3 h. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Sign an Amendment to the Agreement with Hyla nd Software, Inc for Disk Encryption for OnBase and Authorize the On -Going Annual Maintenance and Additional Subscription Costs Until the System is Replaced Sometime in the Future.
i. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for On -Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services Not to Exceed $200,000 Annually with the Firms Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG.
j. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Rem ote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. k. Adopt Ordinance 1585 Adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code Establishing a Child Care Development Impact Fee for New Nonresidential Developments in the City of San Carlos.
7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Establishing 15 Miles Per Hour Prima Facie Limit Along Qualified City Streets in School Zones When Children Are Present.
b. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 9.30 Noise Control - Section 9.30.070 Exempt Activities, (B) Construction Activities.
c. Consideration of Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter Urging Sutter Health to Reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis a nd Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool in San Mateo.
d. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving a Relocation Agreement, an Assignment and Assumption of Ground Lease Agreement, and a Sublease Agreement for a Digital Billboard at 611 Industrial Road (APN 046-090-370). e. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 2.24 Commissions by Repealing Section 2.24.300 Transportation and Circulation Commission, Removing References to the Commission, and Amending Section 2.24.140 Planning Commission – Powers and Duties.
8. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.
a. Consideration of Agendizing an Item to Review Fines and Penalties for Illegal Fireworks.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request. 4 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI, if you need special assistance or translation services to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 802 -4222 or via email at [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
May 23, 2022 1
San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Regular Meeting
Council Chambers, City Hall – 600 Elm Street, San Carlos May 23, 2022, 7:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember
John Dugan, Councilmember
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor
Staff Present: Kristina Bell, Police Captain
Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager
Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Andrea Mardesich, Principal Planner
Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Amy Newby, Parks & Recreation Director
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Al Savay, Community Development Director
Chris Valley, Building Official
Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Senior Planner
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Mayor Sara McDowell.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor McDowell.
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
None.
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation and Lifesaving Award to Stephon Flowers, Samantha Vandyke and Lance Scheetz; and a Proclamation and Sheriff's Commendation Certificate to Deputies Joseph Venikov and Daniel Johnson for Their Actions in San Carlos on March 12, 2022.
Mayor McDowell and Sheriff Carlos Bolanos recognized community members Stephon Flowers, Samantha Vandyke and Lance Scheetz and Deputies Joseph Venikov and Daniel Johnson for their heroic actions on March 12, 2022.
6.b
Packet Pg. 5
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 2
b. Present Proclamations Recognizi ng Anneliese Phillips and Lauren Wu for Their Leadership and Volunteer Efforts with the Industrial Arts Mural.
Mayor McDowell recognized Anneliese Phillips and Lauren Wu for their work on the “Protect What you Love” mural.
5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Dugan announced that the R otary Club recently funded a program for making child seats available in patrol vehicles.
The City Council thanked City staff and all its volunteers for hosting the first City -run Hometown Days.
Mayor McDowell thanked the community for participating in the mental health first aid training last weekend. She also commented on the increasing COVID -19 transmissions in the community and suggested Council consider setting certain triggers for when Council should transition back to remote meetings.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Jennifer and Bella Rosse and Emma , residents, requested the City honor the petition in support of the pilot program for a partial street closure in the east side and asked for it to be addressed at the next Council meeting.
Molly Ba rton, resident, thanked Council, City staff and committees for hosting a successful Hometown Days event.
Gina Vandellos, resident, spoke on the petition for partial street closures on the east side and requested Council move forward with this pilot program in a timely manner.
Dimitri Vandellos, resident, acknowledged the mural and events from the mental health awareness month and H ometown Days and spoke on the east side’s request for a partial street closure pilot program.
Greg Walker, resident, requested follow-through on the street closure request.
At Mayor McDowell's request, City Manager Jeff Maltbie outlined the next steps for the consideration of the partial street closures.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
RESULT: Adopted [Unanimous] Consent Calendar Items ‘a’ – ‘i’ and ‘k’ – ‘m’.
MOVER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting. c. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Specifications and Authorizing a Call for Bids for the 2023 On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project C9465. Resolution 2022-045
6.b
Packet Pg. 6
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 3
d. Adopt a Resolution Accepting the South Laurel Parking Lot Low Impact Development (LID) Improvements Project C1706; and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion. Resolution 2022- 046
e. Accept the Investment Report for the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021-22. f. Accept the Financial Report for the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2021-22. g. Adopt a Resolution Electing the Population and Price Adjustment Factors and Establishing the 2022-23 Appropriations Limit of the City of San Carlos, Pursuant to California Constitution Article XIIIB and Secti on 7900 Et Seq. of the California Government Code. Resolution 2022-047
h. Adopt a Resolution Setting the Tax Rate for Fiscal Year 2022 -23 with Respect to the General Obligation Refunding Bonds for the Library Project. Resolution 2022-048
i. Adopt a Resolut ion Awarding the Eucalyptus Tree Removal – Phase III Project C1722; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Public Projects Agreement with the Professional Tree Care Co. of Berkeley, CA in the Amount of $166,000 and Authorizing a Contingency of $49,800 f or a Total Project Cost of $215,800.
Resolution 2022-049
j. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Construction Documents and Authorizing a Call for Bids from Qualified Bidders for the Fire Station 16 Replacement Project C9823.
RESULT: Adopted [Unanimous] Resolution 2022-050 Approving the Construction Documents and Authorizing a Call for Bids
from Qualified Bidders for the Fire Station 16 Replacement Project C9823.
MOVER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak
RECUSE: McDowell
k. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Three -Year Agreement with Gartner, Inc. for Information Technology and Advisory Services in the Total Amount of $139,080. Resolution 2022-051
l. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Req uest to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for an Allocation of Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Project Funding of $400,000 for Fiscal Year 2022 -23 for the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III C1806. Resolution 2022-052
m. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Toll Facility Equipment License with the San Mateo County Express Lanes Joint Powers Authority for Long-Term Operation of the San Mateo County Express Lanes Facility Within the City Rig ht-Of-Way and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the License Agreement. Resolution 2022-053
6.b
Packet Pg. 7
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 4
8. NEW BUSINESS
a. Mayoral Report, Hearing and Consideration of Imposition of Sanctions After Code of Conduct and Ethics Investigation (City Treasurer).
City Attorney Greg Rubens reported on his investigation of the allegations that the City Treasurer may have violated the C ity’s C ode of Conduct and Ethics Policy and responded to Council questions.
City Treasurer Inge Tiegel provided a written statement to the City Council and apologized for her actions.
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] to Close the Public Hearing.
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: John Dugan
AYES: Rak, Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
The City Council thanked City Treasurer Tiegel for her apology and spoke on the importance of public trust.
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] Findings that City Treasurer Inge Tiegel is in Violation of Sections 12a, 12d, 8k, 10b and 11a of the Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy and Moved to Formal Censure for These Actions.
MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Parmer-Lohan, Rak, Dugan, Collins, McDowell
9. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Placement of Past Due Balances for Sidewalk Repairs on the County Property Tax Bill Pursuant to Section 12.04.030 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.
Public Works Director Steven Machida provided background on the Sidewalk Repair Program and requested unpaid balances be added to the County tax bill.
Public Comment
None.
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] to Close the Public Hearing.
MOVER: Ronald Collins
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES: Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, Dugan, McDowell
6.b
Packet Pg. 8
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 5
RESULT: Adopted [Unanimous] Resolution 2022-054 Approving the Placement of Past Due Balances for Sidewalk Repairs on the County Property Tax Roll Pursuant to Section 12.04.030 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: John Dugan
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
b. Consideration of Adopting an Interim Ordinance Pursuant to Governmen t Code Section 65858 (B) Extending a Moratorium on the Submission, Consideration, or Approval of Applications for Lot Line Adjustments, Subdivisions, Discretionary Land Use Approvals or Building Permits Necessary for Development Within the Northeast Area o f the City of San Carlos, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions.
Senior Planner Megan Wooley-Ousdahl provided background on the Moratorium in question, outlined staff outreach and reviewed three extension options. She, City Attorney Greg Rubens and Cit y Manager Jeff Maltbie responded to Council questions.
Council provided the following disclosures and noted that it won't influence their decision:
Councilmember Parmer-Lohan – her consulting business has not worked with the City nor any businesses that have applications before the City; she toured Alexandria Real Estate property and the MBC building; and has met with Premia, Princeton, Presidio Bay, Minkoff Group, Black Mountain Properties, Sobrato and PG&E.
Mayor McDowell met with the same developers Councilmember Parmer- Lohan disclosed, except for MBC.
Councilmember Collins and Dugan and Vice Mayor Rak note d that the disclosures made at the April 25 th Council meeting still stands and that they have had discussions with PG&E since then.
Public Comment
Brian Hecktman with Gr aymark Capital spoke on the need to update the ir property at 150 Industrial.
Mark Lockenmeyer with the Harbor Industrial Association expressed concerns with the moratorium.
Rick Lafranchi with Graymark Capital provided details on their plans.
Kevin Coakley, tenant at 610 Quarry Road, spoke on the need to improve the facade of the building and requested Council make allowances for improvements that don’t adjust the building footprint.
Community Development Director Al Savay and City Attorney Greg Rubens responded to Council's additional questions.
6.b
Packet Pg. 9
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 6
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] to Close the Public Hearing.
MOVER: Ronald Collins
SECONDER: Adam Rak
AYES: Rak, Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
Council discussion ensued and req uested staff include a review provision and provide an update within 12 months.
RESULT: Adopted [Unanimous] Option 2, Urgency Ordinance 1582 Extending a Moratorium on the Approval of Applications for (I) Lot Line Adjustments and the Subdivision of Land within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) Design Review, Use Permit, Temporary Use Permit, Planned Development, Zoning Amendment, Waiver, Variance, General Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, or any Other
Discretionary Approval from the City of San Carlos Necessary for the Development of a Site within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a Building Permit Required for Construction and/or Alterations on Property within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions.
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Parmer-Lohan, Rak. Dugan, Collins, McDowell
Council recessed at 9:22 PM and reconvened at 9:32 PM.
10. STUDY SESSION
a. Discuss and Provide Direction on Updates to the User Fee Schedule.
Administrative Services Director Rebecca Mendenhall commenced the item and turned the presentation over to Consultant Nicole Ki ssam. Ms. Kissam reviewed the project and summarized the results.
Principal Planner Andrea Mardesich, Ms. Mendenhall, City Manager Jeff Maltbie, Parks and Recreation Director Amy Newby and City Attorney Greg Rubens responded to Council questions.
Council provided staff with the following feedback:
Gradually increase the Planning, Building and Parks & Recreation fees to fully recover the costs over two years
Implement a scholarship program to assist those that may find the field use fee increase as a barrier for participation
11. AGENDA SETTING
Councilmember Dugan requested adding an agenda setting item on a future meeting for Council to consider a measure on the 2024 General Municip al Election ballot to eliminate the elected position of City Treasurer.
6.b
Packet Pg. 10
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
May 23, 2022 7
12. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:19 PM.
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
6.b
Packet Pg. 11
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 23, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
June 13, 2022 1
San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Regular Meeting
Council Chambers, City Hall – 600 Elm Street, San Carlos June 13, 2022, 7:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember
John Dugan, Councilmember
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor
Staff Present: Adam Aronson, Economic Development and Housing Manager Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Amy Newby, Parks & Recreation Director
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Al Savay, Community Development Director
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:07 PM by Mayor Sara McDowell.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor McDowell.
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
None.
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing June 2022 as Pride Month.
Mayor McDowell recognized June 2022 as Pride Mon th and presented a proclamation to Tanya Beat, Director of San Mateo County's LGBTQ Commission.
Ms. Beat thanked the City on behalf of the LGBTQ Commission for recognizing Pride Month and shared a resident's personal story of being her true self.
Council spoke in support of the City’s efforts in celebrating Pride Month. b. Present a Proclamation Recognizing the 25 th Anniversary of Healthy Cities Tutoring.
6.c
Packet Pg. 12
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Jun 13, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
June 13, 2022 2
Mayor McDowell presented a proclamation to Karen Molinari recognizing the 25th Anniversary of Healthy Cities Tutoring.
Ms. Molinari thanked the City and community for its support.
Councilmember Pa rmer-Lohan encouraged community members to volunteer with Healthy Cities.
5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Collins shared that h e toured the Hetch Hetchy Water System and encouraged water conservation. He also reported that a Millbrae Councilmember is a recent victim of a hate crime and wished him a speedy recovery.
Councilmember Dugan reported on attending the City’s volunteer r ecognition event and voiced appreciation for our volunteers building community in San Carlos.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Collins thanked the Public Works Director for proceed ing with the HAWK Signal Program at Belmont Avenue-El Camino Real (item d).
RESULT: Adopted [Unanimous] Consent Calendar Items ‘a’ – ‘i”.
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve Minutes of April 25, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting. c. Approve Minutes of May 25, 2022 City Council Special Meeting. d. Adopt a Resolution Awarding the High Intensity Crosswalk (HAWK) Signal at Belmont Avenue-El Camino Real Project C1807; Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Public Projects Agreement with W. Bradley Electric, Inc. of Novato, CA in the Amount of $345,652; and Authorizing the Expenditure of Contingency in the Amount of $69,130. Resolution 2022-055
e. Adopt a Resolution Ratifying the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Years 2022 -24 for the Belmont-San Carlos Fire Department. Resolution 2022-056 f. Adopt a Resolution Approving Amendment 4 (Exhibit B -1) to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement with the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office, Including the Fiscal Y ear 2022-23 Payment of $11,086,640, and the Approval of the Use of Prior Year Savings in the Amount of $228,540 for Police Services.
Resolution 2022-057
6.c
Packet Pg. 13
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Jun 13, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
June 13, 2022 3
g. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Counci l and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.
Resolution 2022-058
h. Reappoint Cecile Lee to the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission for a Three-Year Term Ending June 30, 2025.
i. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Adden dum to Agreement for Professional Services with Granicus LLC for Website and Intranet Subscription Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $37,981.71. Resolution 2022-059
8. REPORTS TO COUNCIL
a. Receive an Update on Trails in San Carlos.
Parks and Recreation Director Amy Newby provided backgroun d on the Trail Connections Plan, spoke on recent a nd potential trail improvements and responded to Council questions.
Public Comment
Tom Morse, resident, spoke on his volunteer work on the trails in San Carlos and provided suggestions on improvements.
Council directed the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission to work on reprioritizing trail improvements with a focus to improve safety and connections between trails and to identify third parties who are willing to partner with the City to enhance trails.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending Municipal Code Chapter 18 to Adjust the City Density Bonus, Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Affordability Periods, Parking for Affordable Un its, and Making Other Conforming Amendments.
Economic Development and Housing Manager Adam Aronson provided an overview of the Below Market Rate (BMR) waitlist and BMR Unit Inventory, reviewed recommended changes and responded to Council questions.
Public Comment
David Tuzman, resident, spoke in support of the recommended updates and inquired when the draft housing element will be available.
Alexander Melendrez, an Organizing Manager for Peninsula for Everyone, spoke in support of the recommendations from the Planning Commission.
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] to Close the Public Hearing.
MOVER: Ronald Collins
SECONDER: Adam Rak
AYES: Rak, Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
6.c
Packet Pg. 14
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Jun 13, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
June 13, 2022 4
Council provided the following feedback to staff:
- provide potential impact of Assembly Bill 2097
- consider proactively promoting to developers
- take action quickly on adopted changes
- update the BMR waitlist to ensure it accurately reflects current needs - ensure a mix of housing with studios and units with 1-3 bedrooms - keep City Density Bonus in mind as projects move forward and make adjustments if needed
RESULT: Introduced [Unanimous] Ordinance 1583 Amending Municipal Code Chapter 18 to Adjust the City Density Bonus,
Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Affordability Periods, Parking for Affordable Units, and Making Other Conforming Amendments.
MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Parmer-Lohan, Rak, Dugan, Collins, McDowell
b. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Title 18 - Zoning, Consisting of Modifications to Chapter 18.23.210 - Accessory Dwelling Units/Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.
Principal Planner Andrea Mardesich presented on the proposed changes to the Municipal Code Sections on Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU).
Public Comment
None.
RESULT: Approved [Unanimous] to Close the Public Hearing.
MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, Dugan, McDowell
RESULT: Introduced [Unanimous] Ordinance 1584 Amendi ng San Carlos Municipal Code Title 18 - Zoning, Consisting of
Modifications to Chapter 18.23.210 - Accessory Dwelling Units/Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.
MOVER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
SECONDER: John Dugan
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
10. AGENDA SETTING
a. Consideration of a Agendizing an Item to Approve a Letter from the City Council to PG&E Regarding Code Enforcement Issues and Requests in the Industrial Arts District.
Mayor McDowell and Vice Mayor Rak spoke on their frustration with PG&E’s lack or response and effort to clear debris from their property.
6.c
Packet Pg. 15
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Jun 13, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
June 13, 2022 5
Council supported adding a future Consent Calendar item to approve a letter to PG&E requesting cooperation in maintaining their property in the Industrial Arts Area and to gauge their interest in beautification of the park area.
Councilmember Parmer-Lohan suggested sending a letter of solidarity to the Millbrae Councilmember who was a victim of hate. Council voiced support of this.
11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:12 PM.
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
6.c
Packet Pg. 16
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Jun 13, 2022 7:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council a ccept the Quarterly Reports from the City’s Commissions and Boards.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None for this action.
BACKGROUND:
Since 2020, the City Council has received quarterly reports from each Commission and Board with updates on activities from the preceding period along with its member attendance report.
ANALYSIS:
Attached are the reports from the following Commissions and Boards covering April through June 2022:
- Downtown Advisory Committee
- Economic Development Advisory
- Museum of San Carlos History
- Parks, Recreation and Culture
- Planning
- Residential Design Review
- Transportation and Circulation Commission
- Youth Advisory
A quarterly report from the San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control Board has not been included as the City’s representative resigned on April 8, 2022 and the seat remains vacant.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards; or
6.d
Packet Pg. 17
2 2. Do not accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Downtown Advisory Committee Q4 Report
2. Economic Development Advisory Commission Q4 Report
3. Museum Q4 Report
4. Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission Q4 Report
5. Planning Commission Q4 Report
6. Residential Design Review Committee Q4 Report
7. Transportation and Circulation Commission Q4 Report
8. Youth Advisory Council Q4 Report
6.d
Packet Pg. 18
Downtown Advisory Committee (“DTAC”)
Q4 Quarterly Report
April – June 2022
Summary of Accomplishments
The DTAC held one (1) meeting (on June 22, 2022) in the 4 th quarter of FY 2022 and
received a presentation and information from planning staff and City Attorney Greg Rubens on the following items:
• Welcome and introductions, including City Staff contact information • DTAC orientation on the Brown Act and Public Records Requests • DTAC roles and responsibilities, city email, communications, meeting schedule and format, project website and resource library (i.e. knowledge center) • Introduction to the Downtown Specific Plan – project goals and timeline, and introduction to Specific Plans by Jami Williams with RRM Design • Civic Engagement – community workshops, online surveys, focus group and stakeholder meetings
• DTAC meet and greet social event (staff discussed invitation to attend a DTAC meet and greet event on July 13 at 5:30 pm)
6.d.1
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Downtown Advisory Committee Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date James Bertram
Madison
Blanton
Allie
Board
Amy
Buckmaster
Sreecharan
Chandrasekharan
Allison
Chang
Tom
Davids Jean Dehner
Elisa
Espinoza
Samina
Ginwalla
Anthony
Kamm
Cecile
Lee
Donna
Lera
Tracy
Massaro
Mark
Maxwell
Monette
Meredith
Elizabeth
Min
Maya
Nayberg
Joaquin
Pedrin
6/22/2022 E P P P P P P P E P P P P P P P P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
4th Quarter
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Downtown Advisory Committee Attendance Log
To assist with development of the Downtown Specific Plan, a Council-appointed committee representing multiple interests of the study area was formed on May 25, 2022. The DTAC is responsible for reviewing information, providing feedback on topics, soliciting the participation of the community at large, and working to represent specific interests of the community. DTAC members will serve until the conclusion of the project, which is projected to conclude in March 2024.
6.d.1
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Downtown Advisory Committee Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMISSION (EDAC)
QUARTERLY REPORT, APR-JUN 2022
Commissioners
Don Mancini (Chair)
Pranita Ballback (Vice-Chair)
Pranita Ballback, Mark Berger, Madhura Kumar, Sailesh Mehra, Anthony Kamm
Advisory
Al Savay, Community Development Director
Adam Aronson, Economic Development & Housing Manager
Cristian Padilla, Economic Development Coordinator
Sajuti Haque, Sr. Management Analyst
Meetings Summary
Over the last Quarter (April – June 2022) the EDAC held one meeting on May 24th, 2022.
At the May meeting the EDAC received one presentation. The first presentation was from Cristian Padilla on the City of San Carlos’ adopted 2021 – 2024 Economic Development Plan.
The presentation included an overview on the plan’s strategic priorities and implementation actions, and then summarized the progress achieved since adopting the Economic Development Plan in November 2021. At the end of the presentation Cristian Padilla asked the commissioners for feedback on the progress underway, suggestions on moving the Economic Development Plan forward, and commissioners’ preference on the strategic priorities in order to update the EDAC subcommittees.
6.d.2
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Economic Development Advisory Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date
Don Mancini
(Chair)
Chris Van Wert
(Resigned
03/31/22)
Pranita Ballback
(Vice-Chair)
Anthony Kamm
(Appointed
10/11/21) Sailesh Mehra Madhura Kumar Mark Berger
7/27/2021 - C
8/24/2021 P U P E P P
9/28/2021 - C
Total Unexcused Absences 1st Quarter 0 1 - U 0 0 0 0 0
10/26/2021 P P P P P P P
11/23/2021 - C
12/28/2021 - C
Total Unexcused Absences 2nd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/25/2022 P U P P P P P
2/22/2022
3/22/2022 P U P P P P P
Total Unexcused Absences 3rd Quarter 0 2 - U 0 0 0 0 0
4/26/2022 - C
5/24/2022 P P P P E U
6/28/2022 - C
Total Unexcused Absences 4th Quarter 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 - U
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 3 - U 0 0 0 0 1 - U
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Economic Development Advisory Commission Attendance Log Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.2
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Economic Development Advisory Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Museum of San Carlos History
4th Quarter Report to the San Carlos City Council
This report covers the time period from April 1 to June 30, 2022.
The Museum Board had one regularly scheduled meeting during this time period on May 9. The meeting was held via Zoom and was attended by all Board members.
The 4th quarter traditionally is a little slower than Fall and Winter with fewer activities and meetings.
Attendance
• All three City representatives were present at the May meeting. • The Villagers, the Museum docent group, held an in person meeting at the Museum April 7.
Most Museum Board members attended that meeting as well.
Activities & More
• The Museum was open to the public every Saturday from 1 to 4pm during the 4th quarter. • The number of weekly visitors increased during the 4th quarter. We attribute this in part to good weather, summer vacation and aggressive marketing on NextDoor, FaceBook, the website and signs downtown.
• A 100th year celebration committee was established to determine the Museum’s contribution to the City celebrations in 2025 The committee met on April 20 and held a workday on April
28. The committee has determined some exhibits to store so as to make room for temporary exhibits that will start rotating through in the Fall.
• The Museum debuted puzzles as a fundraiser at the end of the 2021 year. Artwork for additional puzzles has been evaluated and is in the process of being prepared to send for an additional puzzle order. One piece of art will be made into posters instead of puzzles. • The Museum continues to grow its profile on social media to increase visitors, advertise pop up shopping and Museum field trip opportunities.
• The Museum Board and Villagers are in the process of preserving our oldest newspapers that are too fragile to be scanned into the online archives.
The next report will be submitted at the end of September 2022.
Respectfully Submitted by,
Molly Barton
MoSH Secretary
07/19/2022
6.d.3
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Museum Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date Molly Barton Gordon Burton John Durkin
7/13/2021 P P P
8/10/2021 P P P
9/14/2021 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences 1st
Quarter 0 0 0
11/8/2021 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
2nd Quarter 0 0 0
1/10/2022 P P P
3/14/2022 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences 3rd
Quarter 0 0 0
5/9/2022 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences 4th
Quarter 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Museum of San Carlos History Attendance Report
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) consecutive Regular Meetings, will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from (2) consecutive Regular Meetings will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.3
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Museum Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Parks, Recreation & Culture Commission
Fourth Quarter for FY 2022
April - June 2022
The Parks, Recreation & Culture Commission met twice during the fourth quarter, FY 2022, on April 6, 2022 and June 1, 2022 via Zoom.
• Commissioners received updates on the San Carlos Museum of History Board by Chair John Durkin.
• Commissioners received a presentation on Youth Center Programs and Camps. • Commissioners received a presentation on Athletics.
• Commissioners received an update on the Rotational Art Program. • Commissioners provided recommendation of the Public Art Mural Project, “Love More” at AST Fabrics, 1379 Old County Road.
• Commissioners requested City Council Designate, “July is Parks & Recreation Month”. • Commissioners received updates on CIP projects, including the resurfacing of the tennis courts at Highlands Park, update on the status of the field lighting project for Burton Park Flanagan field and Highlands Park Stadium field, an update on installation of the new scoreboards at Burton Park fields, and issues with the Crestview Park track that will require replacement, as well as updates on the Parks & Recreation programs and services.
Attendance: April 6, 2022 – Commissioner Maxwell had an unexcused absence; June 1, 2022 – Commissioner Lee was excused.
Please see attached PRC Commission Attendance Log.
6.d.4
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date John Durkin Cecile Lee Mark Maxwell Stacy Cooper Dent Tony Chao* 8/11/2021 P P P E P
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
10/6/2021 P E P P P
12/8/2021 P P P E P
Total Unexcused Absences
2nd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
2/2/2022 P P P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
3rd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
4/6/2022 P P U P P
6/1/2022 P E P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
4th Quarter 1 - U
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 1 - U 0 0
*Chao (alternate) joined 8/11/21. Became a regular member at 10/6/21 meeting.
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission Attendance Log Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.4
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports)
Planning Commission
Q4 Quarterly Reports
April – June 2022
Summary of Accomplishments
The Planning Commission held 6 meetings in the 4th quarter of FY 2022 and addressed the following items:
April 4, 2022: Adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a historical property agreement “Mills Act Contract” for 300 Chestnut Street (APN: 050-043-030).
April 18, 2022: Adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance making amendments to Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) Section 18.23.210 of the San Carlos Municipal Code to update the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) Ordinance.
May 2, 2022: Adopted a resolution finding that Capital Improvement Projects Proposed for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 were in conformance with the San Carlos General Plan.
May 16, 2022: Approved a Design Review permit for 201 Industrial Road (APN: 046-020-370) to install a freeway-oriented sign (wall mounted, internally illuminated) for Curia.
Adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance to amend Municipal Code Chapter 18 to adjust the City Density Bonus, Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Affordability Periods, Parking for Affordable Units, and make other conforming amendments, and to find such actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
June 6, 2022: Held a Study Session to gather input and receive public comments on the Objective Design Standards (ODS) being developed for future residential projects in San Carlos and also to gather input and receive comments on the permanent SB-9 Ordinance.
June 20, 2022: Made appointments to the Planning Commission Chair (Jim Iacoponi) and Vice Chair (Kristen Clements), and appointments to the RDRC Chair (Ellen Garvey) and RDRC alternate (David Roof).
Adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance to amend the Planned Development Plan permit (Ordinance 1240) for 1087 Old County Road (APN: 046- 184-270) to allow multiple-tenants in the existing building.
6.d.5
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Planning Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date Don Bradley Kristen Clements Ellen Garvey Jim Iacaponi David Roof 7/6/2021 P P P P P
7/14/21 - Special Mtg. P P P P P
7/19/2021 P P P P P
8/2/2021 - C P P P P
8/16/2021 P P P P P
8/25/2021 - Special Mtg. P P P P P
9/7/2021 P P P P P
9/20/2021 - C
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
10/4/2021 P P P P P
10/18/2021 P P P P P
11/1/2021 - C
11/15/2021 P P P P P
12/6/2021 P P P P P
12/20/2021 P E P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
2nd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
1/3/2022 - C
1/12/2022 - Special Mtg. P P P P P
1/18/2022 P P P P P
2/7/2022 - Special Mtg. P P P P P
2/22/2022 P P E P P
3/7/2022 P E P P P
3/21/2022 P P P E P
Total Unexcused Absences
3rd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
4/4/2022 P P P P P
4/18/2022 P P E P P
5/2/2022 P E P P P
5/16/2022 P P P P P
6/6/2022 - Special Mtg. P P P P P
6/20/2022 P P P P P
7/5/2022 - C
07/18/2022 - C
Total Unexcused Absences
4th Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Planning Commission Attendance Log
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.5
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Planning Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) 1 Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC)
Q4 Quarterly Report
April 1, 2022 – June 30, 2022
Summary of Accomplishments
The RDRC held three public hearings in the 4th quarter of FY 2021-22 and took the following actions:
A. Approvals: Four (4) applications: Two (2) new residences and two (2) additions Continuation: One (1) application
Address Description Total square
footage of
residence (s.f.)
81 Cedar Street Addition 3,088 s.f.
944 Elm Street New Residence 3,198 s.f.
123 Rockridge Road Addition 3,515 s.f.
2417 San Carlos Avenue New Residence 3,652 s.f.
703 Knoll Drive Addition -Continued 5,017 s.f.
B. Other: Provide an update, gather input, and receive public comments on the Objective Design Standards (ODS) being developed for future residential projects in San Carlos and present on the progress, gather input, and receive comments on the permanent SB- 9 Ordinance.
6.d.6
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Residential Design Review Committee Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date Don Bradley* Ellen Garvey* Eugene Sakai Hae Young Datwani Jim Iacoponi, Alternate 7/6/2021 P N/A P P N/A
7/13/2021 P P P P N/A
7/19/2021 N/A P P P N/A
8/2/2021 N/A P P P N/A
9/7/2021 N/A P P P N/A
9/20/2021 N/A P P P N/A
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
10/4/2021 N/A P P P N/A
10/18/2021 - C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
11/1/2021 N/A P P P P
11/15/2021 N/A P P P N/A
12/6/2021 N/A P P P N/A
12/20/2021 N/A P P P N/A
Total Unexcused Absences
2nd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
1/3/2022 - C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1/18/2022 N/A P P P N/A
2/7/2022 N/A P P P N/A
2/22/2022 N/A E P U P
3/7/2022 N/A P P P N/A
3/21/2022 N/A P P P N/A
Total Unexcused Absences
3rd Quarter 0 0 0 1 - U 0
4/4/2022 - C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
4/18/2022 - C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
5/2/2022 - C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
5/16/2022 N/A P P P N/A
6/6/2022 N/A P P P N/A
6/16/2022 N/A P P P N/A
Total Unexcused Absences
4rd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 1 - U 0
* Ellen Garvey was nominated by the Planning Commission on July 6, 2021 to succeed Don Bradley on the RDRC.
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Residential Design Review Committee
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.6
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Residential Design Review Committee Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) 1 San Carlos Transportation and Circulation Commission
Report Apr – Jun 2022
Commissioners:
Sandra Nierenberg, Chairperson
William Fairclough
Nishant Garg
April 19, 2022
Senior Engineer Vatsal Patel gave a presentation on the State of the Str eets which was previously presented to City Council. He also spoke about the Annual Pavement Rehabilitation Project and explained the Pavement Condition Index (“PCI”) and the pavement distress types and conditional categories. Senior Engineer Patel said that San Carlos streets are below the County’s average and the goal over the next five years is to improve the city’s PCI by five points.
The Commission was offered the opportunity to return to in- person meetings and voted to maintain the remote schedule.
May 17, 2022
This meeting was cancelled due to the Commission’s failure to achieve quorum.
June 21, 2022
This meeting was cancelled due to the Commission’s failure to achieve quorum.
6.d.7
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Transportation and Circulation Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date Matt Baker William Fairclough Nishant Garg Leeron Morad Sandra Nierenberg 7/20/2021 E P P P P
8/17/2021 - C
8/25/2021 - Special Joint Meeting P P E P P
9/21/2021 P P E P P
Total Unexcused Absences 1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
10/19/2021 P P P P P
11/16/2021 U P U P P
12/21/2021 - C
Total Unexcused Absences 2nd Quarter 1 - U 0 1 - U 0 0
1/18/2022 P P P U P
2/15/2022 QP QA QA QA
3/15/2022 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences 3rd Quarter 0 0 1 - U 2 - U 1 - U 4/19/2022 P P P
5/17/2022 QP QP QA
6/21/2022 QP QP E
Total Unexcused Absences 4th Quarter 0 0 0 0 1 - U
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 1 - U 0 2 - U 2 - U 2 - U
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Transportation and Circulation Commission Attendance Log Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
6.d.7
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Transportation and Circulation Commission Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL (YAC): QUARTERLY REPORT
April 2022 – June 2022
April:
Bunny Hop Breakfast
Youth Advisory Council members volunteered at the Bunny Hop Breakfast on Saturday, April 9, at the San Carlos Adult Community Center. YAC members helped serve the pancake breakfast and assisted the youth participants with spring craft projects.
San Carlos Earth Day Cleanup
To celebrate Earth Day, the Youth Advisory Council teamed up with the Parks and Recreation Department to host a Laurel Street Cleanup on Saturday, April 23. This Earth Day event was a great way for community members to participate in ongoing efforts to increase sustainability while keeping our city clean and beautiful.
Personal Care and Cleaning Item Drive
Throughout April and May, the Youth Advisory Council organized a Personal Care and Cleaning Item Donation Drive benefiting One Life Counseling Center. The YAC collected personal hygiene products such as shampoo, conditioner, toothpaste, and cleaning items such as dish soap, laundry detergent, and sponges. The items collected will be distributed to local families in need.
May:
Mental Health Awareness Week at the Youth Center
In celebration of Mental Health Awareness Month, the Youth Advisory Council hosted special after school activities for students to promote mental health and wellness during the week of May 23. Daily activities included a visit from SPCA therapy dogs, de-stress finger painting presented by the San Carlos Library, mental health and wellness workshops for middle school and high school students by One Life Counseling Center, and various other activities for students to relax, unwind and take their minds off daily stresses.
Youth Center Blood Drive
YAC Members partnered with volunteers from the Community Foundation of San Carlos to host a Blood Drive at the Youth Center on Saturday, May 7. Thirty units of blood were collected, which has the power to save ninety lives!
Recruitment
The YAC received 16 applicants for the 2022-2024 term. Interviews were held in May, and the Council selected 7 new members and 2 new alternates. The new members will begin their terms in August when school resumes.
June:
Summer Break
The Youth Advisory Council will resume meetings in late August.
6.d.8
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Youth Advisory Council Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports) Meeting Date
Ezra Bergson-
Michelson Lucas Eden
Alice
Finkelstein
Samina
Ginwalla
Griffin
(formerly Mila)
Hamby
Vikram
Kacholiya Maya Nayberg
Isabela
Sugden Liam Tierney
Atharss
Prasath
(Alternate)
Ivy Zhou
(Alternate)
7/14/2021 (Summer Break)
8/25/2021 U P P P U P P P P P P
9/8/2021 P P P P P P P P P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 1 - U 0 0 0 1 - U 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/13/2021 P P P P E E P P E P P
11/10/2021 P P P P P P P P P E P
12/8/2021 - C C C C C C C C C C C C
Total Unexcused Absences
2nd Quarter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/12/2022 P P U P P P P P P P P
2/9/2022 P P P P U P P P P P P
3/16/2022 P P P P P P P P U P P
Total Unexcused Absences
3rd Quarter 0 0 1 - U 0 1 - U 0 0 0 1 - U 0 0
4/13/2022 E E U P P P P P P E P
5/11/2022 E P U P U P P P U U U
6/8/2022 (Summer Break)
Total Unexcused Absences
4th Quarter 0 0 2 - U 0 1 - U 0 0 0 1 - U 1 - U 1 -U
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 1 - U 0 3 - U 0 3 - U 0 0 0 2 - U 1 - U 1 - U P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.
City of San Carlos
Youth Advisory Council Attendance Log
6.d.8
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Youth Advisory Council Q4 Report (Commission Quarterly Reports)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $18,750 from the Unassigned Balance in Gas Tax Fund (Fund 16) to Project C9465 in Fiscal Year 2022 -23; Awarding the 2023 On -Call Sidewalk Repair Projec t C9465; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Public Projects Agreement with VNH Builders of Burlingame, CA in an Amount Not-To-Exceed $138,750.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution appropriating $18,750 fro m the unassigned balance in Gas Tax Fund (Fund 16) to C9465 in Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2022 -23; awarding the 2023 On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project (“Project”) C9465; and authorizing the City Manager to execute a public projects agreement with VNH Builders of Bur lingame, CA in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Funding for this project is included in the Gas Tax (Fund 16) Capital Improvement Program.
The Project has an available budget of $120,000 in FY 2022 -23. The lowest responsible and responsive bid received was $138,750; therefore, an additional appropriation of $18,750 is needed from the unassigned Gas Tax balance in Fund 16 to C9465 in FY 2022 -23. There are funds available to cover this request.
With the available Project budget and the additional appropriation, the Project can be awarded to VNH Builders in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750.
BACKGROUND:
The City’s Municipal Code Section 12.04 and Chapter 22 of the California Streets and Highway Code assign responsibility for the ma intenance and repair of the sidewalk adjacent to a property’s frontage to the property owner. To defray the financial burden of sidewalk repair, the City implemented the City Sidewalk Repair Program (“Program”) to assist property owners with the financial burden of repairing tripping hazards and vertical offsets in the sidewalk area along a property’s frontage through which the cost of repair is shared evenly between the City and the property owner.
Eligible properties are placed in the City’s database o f repairs, which is used to select the locations for the Project based on the approved annual budget.
6.e
Packet Pg. 35
2 The City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on May 10, 2022 and the City Council approved the construction documents at its May 23, 2022 meeting.
ANALYSIS:
On May 24, 2022, the City advertised for bids for construction of the Project and bids were opened on June 20, 2022. The following table shows the engineer’s estimate along with the results of the bids in order of lowest to highest:
Contractor Total Bid Amount
Engineer’s Estimate $120,000
VNH Builders $138,750
JJR Construction, Inc. $355,550
Golden Bay Construction, Inc. $553,900
The lowest responsible and responsive bid was submitted by VNH Builders with a total bid amount of $138,750. The variance between the total bid amounts and the engineer’s estimate can be attributed to the current economy as well as the bidder’s workload and other obligations.
Therefore, staff recommends appropriating $18,750 from the unassigned balance in Fund 16 to C9465 in FY 22-23, awarding the Project, and authorizing the City Manager to execute a public projects agreement with VNH Builders in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750.
ALTERNATIVES:
Options available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a resolution appropriating $18,750 from the unassigned balance in Gas Tax (Fund 16) to C9465 in FY 2022-23; awarding the 2023 On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project C9465- 23; and authorizing the City Manager to execute a public projects agreement with VNH Builders of Burlingame, CA in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Steven Machida,
Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
6.e
Packet Pg. 36
3 ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
6.e
Packet Pg. 37
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROPRIATING $18,750 FROM THE UNASSIGNED BALANCE IN GAS TAX FUND (FUND 16) TO PROJECT C9465 IN FISCAL YEAR 2022-23; AWARDING THE 2023 ON-CALL SIDEWALK REPAIR PROJECT C9465; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A PUBLIC PROJECTS AGREEMENT WITH VNH BUILDERS OF BURLINGAME, CA IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $138,750.
WHEREAS, the 2023 On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project (“Project”) is funded from Sidewalk Reconstruction C9465, which has an available budget of $120,000 in Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2022-23; and
WHEREAS, the lowest responsible and responsive bid received was $138,750; therefore, an additional appropriation of $18,750 is needed from Fund 16 to C9465 in FY 2022-23; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Municipal Code Section 12.04 and Chapter 22 of the California Streets and Highway Code assign responsibility for the maintenance and repair of the sidewalk adjacent to a property’s frontage to the property owner; and
WHEREAS, to defray the financial burden of sidewalk repair, the City implemented the City Sidewalk Repair Program (“Program”) to assist property owners with the financial burden of repairing tripping hazards and vertical offsets in the sidewalk area along a property’s frontage through which the cost of repair is shared evenly between the City and the property owner; and
WHEREAS, eligible properties are placed in the City’s database of repairs, which is used to select the locations for the Project based on the approved annual budget; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on May 10, 2022 and City Council approved the construction documents at the May 23, 2022 meeting; and
WHEREAS, on May 24, 2022, the City advertised for bids for construction of the Project and bids were opened on June 20, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the lowest responsible and responsive bid was submitted by VNH Builders with a total bid amount of $138,750; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends appropriating $18,750 from the unassigned fund balance in Gas Tax Fund 16 to C9465 in FY 22-23, awarding the Project, and authorizing the City Manager to execute a public projects agreement with VNH Builders in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the San Carlos City Council hereby approves appropriating $18,750 from the unassigned fund balance in Gas Tax Fund (Fund 16) to C9465 in FY 2022 -23; awarding the 2023 On -Call Sidewalk Repair Project C9465 -23; and authorizing the City Manager to execut e a public projects agreement with VNH Builders of Burlingame, CA in an amount not-to-exceed $138,750.
* * * * *
6.e.1
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Resolution (Award the On-Call Sidewalk Replacement Project) I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 8th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
6.e.1
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Resolution (Award the On-Call Sidewalk Replacement Project)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Deny Claim of Searight.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Coun cil deny the claim of Debra Sea right as recommended by the Sedgwick representative.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None for this action.
BACKGROUND:
This item is coming before the Council to act on the claim submitted by Debra Searight. Staff recommends that the Council deny the claim based on Sedgwick’s guidance.
The Tort Claims Act. California Government Code Sections 900, seq., mandates that all claims for money or damages against a public entity must be presented in writing to the public entity prior to filing suit. Generally, claims concerning personal injury, wrongful death, damage to personal property, or damage to crops must be presented to the public within six (6) months of the accrual of the claim. All other claims, principally claims on contracts and damage to real property, are subject to a one-year statute of limitations for presentation of the tort claim. Once a tort claim is received by the public entity, the entity has forty-five (45) days to act on the claim. A claim can be settled or rejected. If no action is taken within 45 days, the claim is deemed rejected by operation of law on the last day.
Claims Processing in San Carlos . When the City receives a claim, the claim is immediately forwarded to claims examiners at Sedgwick for investigation. After Sedgwick investigates the claim, Sedgwick provides a recommendation to the City on the handling of the claim.
About Sedgwick. Sedgwick is a leading global provider of technology -enabled risk, benefits and integrated business solutions. In July 2019, Sedgwick acquired York Risk Services Group (“York”). York was originally hired through the Pooled Lia bility Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority (“PLAN JPA”), and Sedgwick will continue claims administration services to provide claims administration services to the City. The City Council approved the City’s participation in the PLAN JPA (previously kn own as the Association of Bay Area Government Pooled Liability Assurance Network or “ABAG PLAN”) on November 27, 2017 and designated the
6.f
Packet Pg. 40
2 Administrative Services Director and Senior Management Analyst as primary and alternate PLAN JPA Board members.
ANALYSIS:
Debra Searight (“Claimant”) filed a claim against the City seeking reimbursement for property damages. The claimant alleged that on April 27, 2022, an A -frame outdoor dining guidelines sign was positioned on a sidewalk. While the claimant was drivin g, the sign blew into the car from a gust of wind causing over $2,500 of damages to the claimant’s vehicle.
This does not appear to be a case of liability against the City. The A-frame sign was positioned properly on the sidewalk. Staff made sure that th e barricades were completely open and stable.
Furthermore, like other public entities, the City has several immunities as outlined in the State of California Government Code. While staff placed the sign on the sidewalk, staff had no notice of this sign be ing lifted and blown into people or property causing damage s. Government Code §835.2(a) indicates that immunities apply when the City does not have any prior notice to the City of a “dangerous condition”.
In addition, Government Code §820.2 says that a public employee is not liable for an injury resulting from his act or omission where the act or omission was the result of the exercise of the discretion vested in him. Government Code §830.2 further shows that the City is immune from liability where there is only a minor risk of injury. Similarly Government Code §835.4 indicates that the City is immune from liability where the City’s act or omission was reasonable. For these reasons, Sedgwick recommends formal rejection of Debra Searight’s claim.
Council’s rejection of this claim does not prohibit staff or the staff of Sedgwick from continuing to work with the claimant to resolve the dispute.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Deny claim of Debra Searight; or
2. Do not deny claim of Debra Searight; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Rebecca Mendenhall,
Administrative Services Director
6.f
Packet Pg. 41
3 Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Searight, D. Claim Form
6.f
Packet Pg. 42
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Searight, D. Claim Form (Deny Claim of Searight)
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Searight, D. Claim Form (Deny Claim of Searight)
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Searight, D. Claim Form (Deny Claim of Searight)
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Searight, D. Claim Form (Deny Claim of Searight)
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Searight, D. Claim Form (Deny Claim of Searight)
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 48
A
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 49
A
6.f.1
Packet Pg. 50
A
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of the Fiscal Year 2021 -2022 Fire Inspection Report in Compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution acknowledging receipt of the Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2021 -22 Fire Inspection Report in compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
BACKGROUND:
California Health and Safety Code Section 13146 requires the chief of any city or county fire department or district providing fire protection services and his or her authorized representatives to inspect every bui lding used as a public or private school within his or her jurisdiction, for the purpose of enforcing specified building standards, not less than once each year, as provided.
Existing law requires every city or county fire department or district providing fire protection services that is required to enforce specified building standards to annually inspect certain structures, including hotels, motels, lodging houses, and apartment houses, for compliance with building standards, as provided.
Senate Bill (“SB ”) 1205 added Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4, which requires every city or county fire department, or district required to perform the above-described inspections, to report annually to its administering authority, as defined, on the department’s o r district’s compliance with the above -described inspection requirements, as provided. Section 13146.4 requires the administering authority, in this case the San Carlos City Council, to acknowledge receipt of the report in a resolution or a similar formal document.
ANALYSIS:
The Redwood City Fire Department uses the fiscal year calendar for the annual cycle of Fire and Life Safety Inspections. In compliance with the California Health and Safety Code Section 13146, 100% of all property types required by st ate mandate to be inspected annually were inspected in FY 2021-22.
6.g
Packet Pg. 51
2 Attachment 2 to this staff report shows the FY 2021 -22 inspection results for state mandated inspections. The state requires that the listed occupancy types receive an initial annual inspection. It does not mandate that any violations noted be corrected within the annual cycle.
Mandated inspections include:
R2: Multi-Family Residential
E: Educational Facilities
R1: Hotel/Motel
I-3: Institutional Jails
High Rise Buildings
There is a rel atively high rate of correction for all violations on all of the state mandated inspections listed above considering the large amount of occupancies that are mandated to be inspected. The properties that did not achieve complete correction of all violation s within FY 2021-22 are continuously followed up on until violations are corrected.
The Fire Department annually conducts Wildland Urban Interface (“WUI”) defensible space inspections of properties in the hills primarily West of Alameda De Las Pulgas in cluding properties located in the designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones located in the City of San Carlos.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the Council include:
1. Adopt a Resolution acknowledging receipt of the FY 2021 -22 Fire Inspection Repor t in compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4 relating to fire inspections; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Dave Pucci,
RWCFD Deputy Fire Chief
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
6.g
Packet Pg. 52
3 ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. Exhibit A to Resolution - Mandated Inspections Table
6.g
Packet Pg. 53
RESOLUTION NO. 2022- ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 FIRE INSPECTION
REPORT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 13146.4.
WHEREAS, California He alth and Safety Code 13146 requires the Fire Chief to report annually on the status of state mandated fire and life safety inspections to the City Council, the City of San Carlos’ administering authority; and
WHEREAS, in F iscal Year (“FY”) 20219-2022 the San Carlos Fire Department completed 100% of its state mandated inspections and the attached report (Exhibit A) was presented to the City Council by the Fire Chief.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of th e City of San Carlos hereby acknowledges receipt of the FY 2021-2022 Fire Inspection Report, and thereby the San Carlos Fire Department has fully complied with and met the requirements of Californ ia Health and Safety Code 13146.4.
* * * * *
I, Crystal Mui, City Clerk, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A – San Carlos State Mandated Inspection Report
6.g.1
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Resolution (FY 22 Fire Inspection Report)
City of Redwood City 755 Marshall Street, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7400 www.redwoodcity.org
July 18, 2022
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 13146
SAN CARLOS STATE MANDATED INSPECTIONS FY 21/22
Occupancy
Code
Occupancy Type Number
Assigned
Number State
Mandate
Completed
Number of
Properties with
Passed Inspection
%
Passed
R2 Multi-Family
Residential
220 220 202 91
E Educational 11 11 10 90
R1 Hotels / Motels 8 8 5 37
I-3 Institutional Jails 1 1 1 100
None High Rise 0 0 0 0
C Camps 0 0 0 0
Fire Department
Office of the Fire Chief
755 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
(650) 780-7400
Fax (650) 780-7461
6.g.2
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Exhibit A to Resolution - Mandated Inspections Table (FY 22 Fire Inspection Report)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Sign an Amendment to the Agreement with Hyland Software, Inc for Disk Encryption for OnBase and Authorize the On -Going Annual Mainten ance and Additional Subscription Costs Until the System is Replaced Sometime in the Future.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council a dopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an amendment to the agreement with Hyland Software, Inc. for disk encryption for the OnBase document management system and authorize the ongoing annual maintenance and additional subscription costs until the system is replaced sometime in the future.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action, nor is any additional appropriation needed.
Ongoing annual maintenance and subscription costs for the Enterprise Content Management System, known as OnBase, will be funded under the Information Technology (IT) Equipment Maintenance budget in the General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
In January 2018, the Council authorized the purchase and installation of OnBase to replace Sire as the City’s document management solution. The annual maintenance cost for the 202 2 calendar year is $31,961.78, with an annual 3% increase. The annual cost for the encrypted disk group subscription will be an additional $2,880.00 per contract year for three years.
ANALYSIS:
Adding disk group encryption will help protect the files stored in OnBase from theft, data l eaks, or accidental loss. Many files in OnBase contain personal identifiable information (PII) and disk group encryption will help protect this sensitive data from unauthorized access. In essence, when the files are encrypted, even if an unauthorized perso n or entity gains access to it, they will not be able to read it. Authorized users will be able to access the data by using OnBase.
Encrypting the data is the first step the process to digitize our important files in OnBase and reduce the amount of paper documents stored.
6.h
Packet Pg. 56
2 ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an amendment to the agreement with Hyland Software, Inc for disk encryption for OnBase and authorize the on -going annual maintenance and additional subscription costs until the system is replaced sometime in the future; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Rebecca Mendenhall,
Administrative Services Director
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. Quote - Encrypted Disk Groups
6.h
Packet Pg. 57
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 - _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT
WITH HYLAND SOFTWARE, INC FOR DISK ENCRYPTION FOR ONBASE AND
AUTHORIZE THE ON-GOING ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND ADDITIONAL SUBSCRIPTION COSTS UNTIL THE SYSTEM IS REPLACED SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE.
WHEREAS, in January 2018, the Council authorized the purchase and installation of OnBase to replace Sire as the City’s document management solution; and
WHEREAS, adding disk group encryption will help protect the files stored in OnBase from unauthorized access so that when the files are encrypted, even if an unauthorized person or entity gains access to it, they will not be able to read it; and
WHEREAS, the annual maintenance cost for 202 2 is $31,961.78 with an annual 3% increase. The annual cost for the encrypted disk group subscription will be $2,880.00 per year for three years; and
WHEREAS, authorize the on-going annual maintenance and additional subscription costs until the system is replaced sometime in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby authorizes the City Manager to sign an amendment to the agreement with Hyland Software, Inc for disk encryption for OnBase and authorize the on-going annual maintenance and additional subscription costs until the system is replaced sometime in the future.
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui , hereby certify that th e foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting held on the 8th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
__________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
6.h.1
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Resolution (OnBase Disk Encryption)
File Server Encryption - Encrypted Disk Groups
Published: 6/30/2022
Q-248117
Hannah Gilbert
Account Manager
+1.602.781.5057
[email protected]
HSI: 14563 | Quote: Q-248117
© Hyland Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
6.h.2
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Quote - Encrypted Disk Groups (OnBase Disk Encryption) Subscription Products
Product Name Quantity
Local Govt Encrypted Disk Groups 1
Year 1 $2,880.00
Year 2 $2,880.00
Year 3 $2,880.00
Subscription products are quoted for a 36 month term.
HSI: 14563 | Quote: Q-248117
© Hyland Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
6.h.2
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Quote - Encrypted Disk Groups (OnBase Disk Encryption) Terms
1 Pricing is valid until 9/30/2022. Pricing is based on information and assumptions provided by you; should such information or assumptions change, this pricing quote may also change. 2 The subscription fees actually invoiced will be a prorated amount based on the number of months remaining in your current subscription period at the time of the order.
Prices are exclusive of all taxes and governmental charges (such as duties). All invoices issued by Hyland and any affiliates will include all applicable taxes based on the jurisdiction in which the customer is located. Customer agrees to provide Hyland with valid tax exemption certificates in advance of the issuance of any invoice.
Make Purchase Order out to:
Hyland Software, Inc.
28500 Clemens Rd
Westlake, Ohio 44145
United States
HSI: 14563 | Quote: Q-248117
© Hyland Software, Inc. All rights reserved.
6.h.2
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Quote - Encrypted Disk Groups (OnBase Disk Encryption)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for On -Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services Not to Exceed $200,000 Annually with the Firms Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council a dopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements for professional services for on -call economic development and housing consulting services not to exceed $200,000 annually with consulting firms Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action n or is additional appropriation needed at this time.
The proposed agreements for professional services would not commit the City of San Carlos to any fiscal obligations. The purpose of this action is to pre -qualify a select group of firms for services to be provided on an as-needed basis. The agreements include no retainer and no guarantee of work. When professional services are needed, staff will request a proposal from one or more of the three firms, selecting the best firm based on cost, timeliness, and approach.
To fund work under these contracts, there are several sources of Council-approved funds. The appropriated Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 budget includes $3 24,400 for economic development professional services and $35,800 for housing professional services.
BACKGROUND:
Since 2006, the City has contracted with firms to augment staff capacity and perform specialized analyses and tasks in economic development and housing. The City has a policy to seek new bids for services every three years. The last request for qualifications (“RFQ”) issued for on -call economic development and housing services resulted in contracts with RSG, Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and HR&A Advisors. These contracts expired at the conclusion of FY 2022 on June 30, 2022.
On June 1, 2022, the City released an RFQ (Attachment 2) soliciting responses from qualified firms and individuals to provide on -call economic development and housing professional
6.i
Packet Pg. 62
2 services. The City received seven responses, which were reviewed by staff for comp leteness and ranked by submitter qualifications and experience. Staff opted to recommend three firms for on-call contracts.
ANALYSIS:
The intent in selecting three firms for on -call services is to allow the City flexibility when selecting which firm to use for particular services. These firms are considered full -service, with varying levels of experience on the Peninsula and in the areas of expertise that staff anticipate s will be required over the next several years. (See Attachment 3 for Statements of Qualifications for all three firms; please note that work samples have been removed.)
Economic & Planning Systems (EPS)
EPS is a full -service, Oakland-based firm that has expertise in fiscal impact analysis, financing districts, community benefits progra ms, and housing policy. EPS has worked on multiple projects under the previous on-call agreement, including a study of the City’s housing regulations and inclusionary housing requirements, research on the use of development agreements for community benefits, and the introduction of a new childcare impact fee program.
Additionally, its ability to communicate complex topics in an easy -to-understand manner makes EPS a valuable asset to the City.
BAE Urban Economics (BAE)
A full-service, San Francisco-based firm, BAE has expertise in housing development feasibility analysis, parcel assembly, affordable housing inclusionary and linkage fee studies, community benefits negotiations, retail analysis , and tenant selection. Additionally, BAE assisted in the development of the City ’s 2021 – 2024 Economic Development Plan. BAE is also adept at graphic depiction of complex topics and develops strong presentations that complement its high-quality analyses and recommendations.
RSG
RSG holds extensive experience in wor king with the City of San Carlos. RSG’s work on Wheeler Plaza, 817 Walnut Studios, the Landmark Hotel, and the city’s infill development opportunity sites study provides beneficial local knowledge. Most recently, RSG has assisted in several community benef it analyses and negotiations for life -science and other commercial development projects. RSG has also assisted with successor agency reporting, providing technical expertise and assistance.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed agreements for professional services h ave a term beginning upon execution and running through the fiscal year ending in June 30, 2024. The agreements would be renewable for an additional year at the City Manager’s option. Each of the full -service firm agreements would have a limit not to exceed $200,000 annually.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
6.i
Packet Pg. 63
3 1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements for professional services for on -call economic development and housing consulting services not to exceed $200,000 annually with the consulting firms of Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Lisa Porras,
Planning Manager
Cristian Padilla, Economic Development
Coordinator
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. On Call Agreement 2022
3. Statements of Qualifications
6.i
Packet Pg. 64
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 - _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES FOR ON-CALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING CONSULTING SERVICES NOT TO EXCEED $200,000 ANNUALLY WITH THE FIRMS ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, BAE URBAN ECONOMICS, AND RSG.
____________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, since 2006, the City of San Carlos has used the expertise of consulting firms for economic development and housing services; and
WHEREAS, contracts with firms previously selected to provide economic development and housing services expired at the conclusion of Fiscal Year 2022 (June 30, 2022); and
WHEREAS, a formal request for qualifications process was published on June 1, 2022, to select the best qualified firms for new on-call professional service agreements; and
WHEREAS, staff reviewed the statements of qualifications from the seven responding firms and found the firms of Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG to be the best qualified to perform the services; and
WHEREAS, based on the recently adopted Fiscal Year 2022 -23 budget and anticipated services needed in the coming years, staff recommends that annual contract amounts for Economic & Planning Systems, BAE Urban Economics, and RSG have a limit not to exceed of $200,000 each.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Carlos authorizes the City Manager to execute Agreements for Professional Services for on -call economic development and housing services for initial terms beginning upon contract execution and running through the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2024; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to extend the agreements for professional services for on-call economic development and housing services for an additional one-year period following the initial term at his or her sole discretion.
* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting held on the 8th day of August, 2022 by the following vote:
___________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
0 __________________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
6.i.1
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Resolution (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS:
On-Call Economic Development & Housing
Consulting Services
Issue Date: June 01, 2022
Submittals Due: June 22, 2022
City Hall
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA
cityofsancarlos.org
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
2 | P a g e
BACKGROUND
The City of San Carlos (City) is located on the San Francisco Peninsula in San Mateo County and incorporated in 1925 as a General Law city. It is approximately 25 miles south of San Francisco and 26 miles north of San Jose. The city is about 6 square miles and has a population of slightly more than 30,000. Highway 101 runs through the eastern portion of the city, near an assortment of industrial and commercial uses, including a small airport and a small neighborhood of single- family homes. The west side of town extends into the Santa Cruz Mountains and is largely single- family residential with the exception of the El Camino Real and Laurel Street corridors and the City’s downtown. The city has high property values (median single-family home transacting at $2.4 million in 2021) and a high household income (median of $169,640).
Over 1.7 million square feet of high-tech research and development space is likely to be developed in the next few years on the City’s east side. Major employers include Natera, Pacific Gas & Electric, The Home Depot, Recology, Check Point Software Tech, Delta Star, Natera, Joby Aero, Atreca, and Thought Stream. Major retailers include Home Depot, Best Buy, REI, T.J. Maxx, Ross, PetSmart, and Trader Joe’s. Collectively, building construction and materials businesses (cabinetry, flooring, tiling, etc.) represents the largest commercial segment. Several hotel properties with high average daily rates and occupancy contribute to the tax base significantly.
Downtown San Carlos, located along Laurel Street from San Carlos Avenue to Arroyo Avenue, is the heart of the community and is a compact, walkable cluster of primarily one-story retail buildings with small storefronts. It has become an increasingly popular destination for restaurants and unique small shops.
Highways 101 and 280, and State Highway 82 (El Camino Real) move vehicle traffic from the north and south to the primary access points in San Carlos. Several major east-west spines move traffic into the commercial and residential areas. Traffic capacity at several major intersections in the commercial sector nearest the freeway is becoming increasingly constrained. San Carlos is also home to an airport operated by the County of San Mateo. San Carlos is also served by Caltrain, which operates a commuter train that stops at the historic San Carlos Depot near Downtown. Freight trains operate on the rails overnight.
The City is governed by a five-member City Council, with members selecting a Mayor for a one- year term, and an appointed City Manager. There is great emphasis on public participation in local government and the citizenry is quite active as well. Support and guidance for economic development comes from both a City Council subcommittee and a seven-member Economic Development Advisory Commission. The City Council also recently established a Housing Subcommittee.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
3 | P a g e
The City has now turned its focus on proactive measures to expand its economic base and increase revenues. The 2016-2019 Economic Development Plan provided a comprehensive set of actions that the City achieved, including the creation of Industrial Business Association and the redevelopment of Wheeler Plaza. In 2021, the City Council adopted the 2021-2024 Economic Development Plan, which was developed with input from the Economic Development Advisory Commission, City staff, and consultants. The Plan includes the following strategic priorities:
Sustain the Unique Character of Downtown
Activate the Public Realm
Promote Environmental Sustainability
Support the Arts and Cultural Sector
Support and Encourage Alternative Transportation Modes Deploy New Technologies and Solutions to Increase Connectivity, Improve Parking, and Reduce Congestion
Improve the Business Climate
Create New Opportunities for Business Growth and Expansion Expand the Supply of Housing
Proactively Plan for Future Growth
Increase Access to Childcare
The 2021-2024 Plan, was approved by City Council on November 8, 2021, is available here.
The City had the support of its Redevelopment Agency from 1986 until it was dissolved by the State in 2012. The Agency funded major public improvement projects, affordable housing and economic development. The City has assumed the role of Successor Agency and has retained several properties and financial assets of the former Low and Moderate Housing Fund.
Additionally, the City has a Below Market Rate Housing Ordinance that is presently under review but currently requires all residential developments of seven or more dwelling units to include least fifteen percent (15%) of the total units as below market rate units restricted for rent or sale by moderate-, low-, and very low-income households.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
4 | P a g e
CONSULTING SERVICES NEEDED
The City of San Carlos is seeking proposals from qualified firms or individuals to provide on-call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services. The City is interested in entering into contracts with several qualified firms to utilize, on an as-needed basis, based on expertise, availability and cost. Potential scope of services may include, but is not limited to:
Economic Development
Project-specific strategic advice and analysis for real estate assembly and development projects such those in the El Camino Real corridor and other potential opportunity sites. Advise the City on strategic property selection and negotiations. Provide real estate market data and analysis.
Prepare fiscal impact analyses.
Identify current and future funding sources and tools for economic development.
Redevelopment Agency Dissolution
Monitor and advise the City on enacted and future legislation. Assist in compliance and preparing reports for Successor Agency, Oversight Board, and Department of Finance.
Housing
Assist in the management of housing assets retained by the City as successor to the RDA’s Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund.
Provide strategic advice, negotiation assistance and analysis for proposed low-income tax credit and senior affordable housing developments.
Assist in compliance with state housing obligation requirements. Monitor state and federal legislation regarding housing. Identify potential funding opportunities for housing.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
5 | P a g e
SUBMITTAL OF QUALIFICATIONS
Submittal Content
To be deemed complete, submittals must include all of the following:
Company profile and qualifications including a summary of representative services or projects managed and specifically staffed by the individuals likely to be assigned. Identification of the project manager and senior level staff likely to be assigned to this project, as well as any proposed sub-consultants and their staffs. Include the qualifications and relevant experience for the identified team members. Complete contact information for three recent clients for whom similar services described in this RFQ have been performed.
Proposed compensation rates.
Excerpts of relevant sample work.
Submittal Location and Deadlines
Interested parties should email their proposals by 5:00 p.m. PST, Wednesday, June 22, 2022 to:
City of San Carlos
Cristian Padilla
[email protected]
Additional Information
The City assumes no responsibility for delays caused by delivery service. Postmarking by the due date will not substitute for actual receipt. All costs incurred during submittal preparation or in any way associated with the Consultant’s preparations, submission, presentation, or oral interview shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant.
If awarded a contract, the consultant shall maintain insurance coverage, including worker’s compensation, reflecting the minimum amounts and conditions specified by the City. Consultants are liable for all errors or omissions contained in their proposals.
If you have any questions concerning this request for qualifications, please contact Cristian Padilla via email at [email protected] or phone at (650) 802-4267.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
6 | P a g e
SELECTION PROCESS
Evaluation Criteria
In accordance with the Municipal Code, consultant selection shall be on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required and on fair and reasonable price. Evaluation considerations will include the following:
Responsiveness of the proposal to the submittal requirements listed above Clear indication of understanding of the work to be performed and demonstration of intent and ability to perform the work
Professional qualifications and technical expertise
Experience and track record conducting similar work for similar cities Proposed compensation rates
Completeness of submittal
It is the City’s intention to contract with a highly qualified bench of consultants. Your firm must not demonstrate depth in both economic development and housing, but should have substantial experience in at least one of these two areas of expertise.
Should you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Cristian Padilla at [email protected] or (650) 802-4267.
The question cut-off date will be June 15, 2022, by 5 p.m.
Non-Obligation
The City retains sole discretion to evaluate submittals and may make an award to the consultant(s) the City deems to be most responsive to the request for qualifications. Receipt of submittals in response to its request for qualifications does not obligate the City in any way to engage any consultant and the City reserves the right to reject any or all submittals, wholly or in part, at any time, without penalty. The City shall retain the right to abandon the request for qualifications and selection process at any time prior to the actual execution of a contract with a consultant, and the City shall bear no financial or other responsibility in the event of such abandonment. The City reserves the right to negotiate all final terms and conditions of any agreements entered into.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 1 Revised 04/08/2022
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement is made and entered into as of __________________ by and between the City of San Carlos hereinafter called "CITY" and ____________________ hereinafter called "CONSULTANT".
RECITALS
This Agreement is entered into with reference to the following facts and circumstances:
A. That CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to render certain professional services in the CITY;
B. That CONSULTANT is qualified to provide such services to the CITY and;
THEREFORE, the CITY has elected to engage the services of CONSULTANT upon the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth.
1. Services. The services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall include those services set forth in Exhibit A, which is, by this reference, incorporated herein and made a part hereof as though it were fully set forth herein.
Performance of the work specified in said Exhibit is hereby made an obligation of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, subject to any changes that may be made subsequently hereto upon the mutual written agreement of the said parties.
Where in conflict, the terms of this Agreement supersede and prevail over any terms set forth in Exhibit A.
2. Term; Termination. (a) The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the date hereinabove written and shall expire on June 30, 2024 unless renewed for one additional year by the City Manager. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of (a) above, CITY may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving written notice not less than ten (10) days prior to the effective date of termination, which date shall be included in said notice. In the event of such termination, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for services rendered, and reimburse CONSULTANT for costs and expenses incurred, to the date of termination, calculated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3. In ascertaining the services actually rendered to the date of termination, consideration shall be given both to completed work and work in process of completion. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a limitation upon the right of CITY to terminate this Agreement for
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 2 Revised 04/08/2022 cause, or otherwise to exercise such rights or pursue such remedies as may accrue to CITY hereunder.
3. Compensation; Expenses; Payment. CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for all services performed by CONSULTANT hereunder in an amount based upon CONSULTANT’s hourly rates during the time of the performance of said services. A copy of CONSULTANT’s hourly rates for which services hereunder shall be performed are set forth in CONSULTANT’s fee schedule marked Exhibit B hereof, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the combined total of compensation and reimbursement of costs payable hereunder shall not exceed the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) unless the performance of services and/or reimbursement of costs and expenses in excess of said amounts have been approved in advance of performing such services or incurring such costs and expenses by CITY’s City Manager (for contracts less than $75,000 or authorized by City Council action for contracts $75,000 or more by motion duly made and carried).
Compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses hereunder shall be payable upon monthly billing therefor by CONSULTANT to CITY, which billing shall include an itemized statement, briefly describing by task and labor category or cost/expense items billed.
4. Additional Services. In the event CITY desires the performance of additional services not otherwise included within the services described in Exhibit A, such services shall be authorized in advance of the performance thereof by CITY’s City Manager (for contracts less than $75,000 or authorized by City Council action for contracts $75,000 or more by motion duly made and carried). Such amendment to this Agreement shall include a description of the services to be performed thereunder, the maximum compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses payable therefor, the time of performance thereof, and such other matters as the parties deem appropriate for the accomplishment of such services. Any additional services causing the total contract price to exceed $75,000, shall require approval by the City Council. Except to the extent modified by written amendment, all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed incorporated in each such amendment.
5. Records. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain accurate records of all time expended and costs and expenses incurred relating to services to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. Said records shall be available to CITY for review and copying during regular business hours at CONSULTANT’s place of business or as otherwise agreed upon by the parties.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 3 Revised 04/08/2022
6. Authorization. This Agreement becomes effective when endorsed by both parties in the space provided below.
7. Reliance on Professional Skill of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT represents that it has the necessary professional skills to perform the services required and the CITY shall rely on such skills of the CONSULTANT to do and perform the work. In performing services hereunder CONSULTANT shall adhere to the standards generally prevailing for the performance of expert consulting services similar to those to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. CONSULTANT acknowledges the importance to CITY of the skill, competency, ability to appropriately work with CITY staff and expertise of individual staff assigned to the project, and accordingly the individuals assigned to the Project must be acceptable to CITY.
8. Documents. All documents, plans, drawings, renderings, and other papers, or copies thereof, as finally rendered, prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, shall, upon preparation and delivery to CITY, become the property of CITY.
9. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the relationship of CONSULTANT to the CITY is that of an independent contractor and all persons working for or under the direction of CONSULTANT are its agents or employees and not agents or employees of the CITY.
10. Schedule. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A; provided, that CITY shall grant reasonable extensions of time for the performance of such services occasioned by governmental reviews of CONSULTANT’s work product or other unavoidable delays; provided, further, that such unavoidable delay shall not include strikes, lockouts, work stoppages, or other labor disturbances conducted by, or on behalf of, CONSULTANT’s officers or employees.
CONSULTANT acknowledges the importance to CITY of CITY’s Project schedule and agrees to put forth its best professional efforts to perform its services under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that schedule.
11. Indemnity. CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, and cost (including, without limitation, reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except such loss or damage
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 4 Revised 04/08/2022 caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify CITY its officers, employees, agents and volunteers against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.
12. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall acquire and maintain Workers’ Compensation, employer’s liability, commercial general liability, owned and non-owned and hired automobile liability, and professional liability insurance covering risks relating to CONSULTANT’s services to be performed hereunder in form subject to the approval of the City Attorney and/or CITY’s Risk Manager. The minimum amounts of coverage corresponding to the aforesaid categories of insurance per insurable event, shall be as follows:
Insurance Category Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation statutory minimum
Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. CONSULTANT shall submit
to City a Waiver of Subrogation
endorsement in favor of City, its officers,
agents, employees, and volunteers.
Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 (to $5,000,000 depending on exposure) per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury, and property
damage, including without limitation,
blanket contractual liability and
coverage for explosion, collapse and
underground property damage hazards.
If a general aggregate limit applies,
either the general aggregate limit shall
apply separately to this project/location
or the general aggregate limit shall be
twice the required occurrence limit.
Coverage must be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office form CG 00
01. Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage (coverage
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 5 Revised 04/08/2022 required to the extent applicable to
CONSULTANT’s vehicle usage in
performing services hereunder)
1Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and if a general aggregate limit applies, general
aggregate limit shall be twice the
required occurrence limit.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with certificates and copies of information or declaration pages of the insurance required hereunder and, with respect to evidence of commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance coverage, original endorsements:
(a) Precluding cancellation or reduction in per occurrence limits before the expiration of thirty (30) days (10 days for nonpayment) after City shall have received written notification of cancellation in coverage or reduction in per occurrence limits by first class mail;
(b) CONSULTANT’s general liability policies shall be primary and non- contributory, and be endorsed using Insurance Services Office form CG 20 10 to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be additional insured under such policies. An endorsement providing completed operations coverage for the additional insured, ISO form CG 20 37, is also required.
Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Verification of Coverage
1 Note: Professional liability insurance coverage is not required if the contractor/vendor/consultant is not providing a service regulated by the state. (Examples of service providers regulated by the state are insurance agents, professional engineers, doctors, certified public accountants, lawyers, etc.) Please check and initial the following if professional liability is NOT required for this agreement. Recommended ______ [Project Manager] Approved _______[Risk Manager]
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 6 Revised 04/08/2022 Consultant shall furnish the CITY with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.
Waiver of Subrogation
Consultant hereby grants to CITY a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. This provision applies regardless of whether or not the CITY has requested or received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
Special Risks or Circumstances
CITY reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
Coverage
It is a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be made available to the Additional Insured and shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy, whichever is greater.
Primary and Non-Contributory Coverage
The Additional Insured coverage under the Consultant’s policy shall be “primary and non-contributory” as will not seek contribution from the CITY insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04
12. Excess Insurance
The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and noncontributory basis for the benefit of CITY before the CITY insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 7 Revised 04/08/2022
13. Workers’ Compensation. CONSULTANT acknowledges and certifies awareness of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and CONSULTANT certifies and agrees to compliance with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement.
14. Subcontractors (If applicable). CONSULTANT agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontracts the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and Insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the Subcontractors’ work. Subcontractors hired by CONSULTANT agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Contract documents.
Subcontract shall agree to include these same provisions in any agreement with a sub-subcontractor. CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work and will provide proof of compliance to the CITY.
Subcontractor shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSUTLANT is bound to CITY under the Contract Documents. Subcontractor shall further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this agreement, including the indemnity and Insurance requirements, with a Sub-subcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the Sub-subcontractors’ work. A copy of the CITY Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance provisions shall be furnished to the subcontractor upon request.
15. Non-Discrimination. The CONSULTANT hereby assures that it will comply with Subchapter VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC Section 2000 (e)(17), to the end that CONSULTANT will not exclude any person from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination from any project, program, or activity supported by this Agreement, based on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, age, or religion,. CONSULTANT shall comply with its EEO Certification (Form PW-7). In addition, CONSUTLANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and the employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, advancement, demotion, transfer,
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 8 Revised 04/08/2022 recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall at all times be in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Americans With Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment any notices provided by the CITY setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.
15. Notice. All notices required by this Agreement shall be given to the CITY and CONSULTANT in writing, by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
CITY: City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Attention: ____________________
CONSULTANT: ____________________________
(Fill in CONSULTANT Name, Address, Phone
Number, and Project Manager for
CONSULTANT)
16. Non-Assignment. This Agreement is not assignable either in whole or in part.
17. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by both parties.
18. Business Registration. VENDOR agrees to comply with Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code and pay all fees required to be paid.
19. Validity. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
20. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any suit or action initiated by either party shall be brought in the County of San Mateo, California. In the event of litigation between the parties hereto to enforce any provision of the Agreement, the unsuccessful party will pay the reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation of the successful party.
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Agreement for Professional Services 9 Revised 04/08/2022
21. Mediation. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, the parties shall meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator. Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be paid equally by the parties. If a mediated settlement is reached neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of the settlement and each party shall bear its own legal costs. If a party refuses or fails to participate in mediation in good faith prior to filing a lawsuit, then that party shall be barred from recovery of attorneys fees and costs of suit.
22. Conflict of Interest. CONSULTANT may serve other clients, but none who are active within the City of San Carlos or who conduct business that would place CONSULTANT in a "conflict of interest" as that term is defined in State law.
23. Entire Agreement. Each party acknowledges that this agreement, the exhibits hereto, and the documents incorporated by reference herein constitute the complete agreement and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions between the parties, which supercedes and merges all prior proposals, understandings and all other agreements, verbal and written, between the parties relating to the subject matter of this agreement. This agreement may not be modified or altered except by written instrument duly executed by both parties.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
6.i.2
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: On Call Agreement 2022 (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Statement of Qualifications
On-Call Economic Development
and Housing Consulting Services
Prepared for:
City of San Carlos
Prepared by:
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
June 22, 2022
EPS #221043
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Table of Contents
1. Cover Letter and General Information .................................................................. 1
2. About Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. ............................................................ 2 Specialized Services ................................................................................................ 4
3. Selected Project Profiles .................................................................................... 5 Project Experience in San Carlos ............................................................................... 5 Relevant Project Experience in Other Jurisdictions ........................................................ 6
4. Client References ............................................................................................ 10 Recent Clients ...................................................................................................... 10
5. Project Management and Staffing ...................................................................... 11 Project Management .............................................................................................. 11 Assigned Staff ...................................................................................................... 11
6. Firm Billing Rates ........................................................................................... 13 EPS 2022 Hourly Billing Rates ................................................................................. 13
Appendices
APPENDIX A: Staff Résumés
APPENDIX B: Work Samples
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
1 1. Cover Letter and General Information
June 22, 2022
Mr. Cristian Padilla, Economic Development Coordinator
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Subject: Response to RFQ for On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services; EPS #221043
Dear Mr. Padilla:
On behalf of Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS), I am pleased to submit this proposal to provide On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services to the City of San Carlos. We understand the City is seeking to update its pool of qualified firms to conduct various analytical tasks and feel EPS is well- qualified to continue assisting you in this manner.
Founded in 1983, EPS is an Oakland-based land use economics consulting firm with a broad-based practice that includes real estate development feasibility, fiscal impact analysis, economic development strategy, and housing policy. As demonstrated in the enclosed materials, EPS has worked with numerous jurisdictions throughout California, large and small, on the full range of topical areas addressed in your RFQ. EPS has a successful track record of providing technical and strategic advisory services that progress local economic initiatives and development projects toward positive outcomes.
We commonly work on complex projects that require balancing community, economic, and design constraints. Furthermore, our experience working for a range of public, private, and nonprofit clients confers us a broad perspective and strong credibility to effectively address wide ranging economic and policy issues.
Additionally, EPS has worked on multiple projects under the previous On-Call agreement, including a study of the City’s housing regulations and inclusionary housing requirements, research on the use of development agreements for community benefits, and the introduction of a new childcare impact fee program.
We are very excited about the opportunity to work as part of this important engagement. We are available to begin work immediately upon identification of a specific assignment and authorization to proceed. If you have any questions or comments related to this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us at (510) 841-9190 or via e-mail at [email protected] or [email protected]. We look forward to hearing from you and further discussing our qualifications as part of an interview, if needed.
Sincerely,
ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, INC.
Jason Moody Ashleigh Kanat
Managing Principal
Principal
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2
2. About Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Firm Economic & Planning Systems, In c. (EPS) is a land economics consulting firm experienced in the full spectrum of services related to real estate development, the financing of public infrastructure and government services, land use and conservation planning, and government organization.
Guiding Principle EPS was founded on the principle that real estate development and land use-related public policy should be built on realistic assessment of market forces and economic trends, feasible implementation measures, and recognition of public policy objectives, including provisions for required public facilities and services.
Areas of Expertise
Real Estate Market and Feasibility Analysis
Public Finance
Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
Reuse, Revitalization, and Redevelopment
Real Estate Transactions and Negotiations
Regional Economics and Industry Analysis
Land Use Planning and Growth Management
Open Space and Resource Conservation
Housing Policy
Transportation Planning and Analysis
Asset Valuation and Repositioning
Clients Served Since 1983, EPS has provided co nsulting services to hundreds of public- and private-sector clients in California and throughout the United States. As illustrated in Figure 1, our client base includes a balanced mix of public, private, and nonprofit entities, which we believe enhances our effectiveness and credibility in projects involving multiple stakeholders and perspectives and cross-cutting issues. Clients include cities, counties, special districts, multi-jurisdictional authorities, educational institutions, property owners, developers, financial institutions, and land use attorneys.
Staff Capabilities The professional staff includes trained specialists in economics, public policy, business and finance, real estate development, and computer applications.
The firm excels in preparing concise analyses that disclose risks and impacts, support decision making, and provide solutions to real estate development and land use-related problems.
EPS Locations Oakland, Los Angeles, and Sacramento, California Denver, Colorado
EPS Web Site www.epsys.com
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3
Figure 1 EPS Representative Clients in California
California Cities
American Canyon
Anaheim
Auburn
Bakersfield
Berkeley
Chico
Chula Vista
Clover
Concord
Culver City
Cupertino
Davis
Duarte
Folsom
Fremont
Fresno
Glendora
Hayward
Livermore
Los Angeles
Menlo Park
Merced
Mission Viejo
Modesto
Monterey
Mountain View
Napa
Oakland
Palo Alto
Pleasanton
Redding
Redwood City
Sacramento
Salinas
San Bruno
San Clemente
San Francisco
San Jose
San Luis Obispo
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Santa Monica
Santa Rosa
Seaside
South San Francisco
Stockton
Turlock
Vacaville
Vallejo
Ventura
Walnut Creek
Watsonville
Winters
California Counties
Alameda
Contra Costa
Los Angeles
Alameda
Merced
Marin
Mendocino
Orange
Riverside
Sacramento
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Santa Clara
Santa Cruz
Solano
Sonoma
Sutter
Yolo
Educational Institutions
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Davis
University of California, Merced
University of California,
Office of the President
University of California, San Francisco
University of California, Santa Cruz
University of Hawaii
Chabot-Las Positas Community College
District
Davis Unified School District
Modesto City Schools
Placer County Office of Education
River Delta Unified School District
Rocklin Unified School District
Roseville City Elementary School District
Sacramento State University
San Francisco Unified School District
Stockton Unified School District
California State Agencies
University of California, Presidents Office
CalTrans
California State Lands
California Attorney General
California Coastal Conservancy
California High Speed Rail Authority
California State Dept. of Fish & Game
Other Public Agencies and Special Districts
Alameda County Congestion Management
Agency
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Capital Area Development Authority
Capital District Transportation Authority, New
York
Contra Costa LAFCO
Denver Regional Transportation District
East Bay Regional Park District
El Dorado Hills CSD
El Toro Redevelopment Authority
Fitzsimmons Reuse Authority, Colorado
Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Incline Village G.I.D.
Los Angeles Community Redevelopment
Agency
Mobile (Alabama) Airport Authority
Northwest Pacific Railroad Authority
Olivehurst Public Utility District
Port of Los Angeles
Port of Oakland
Port of San Diego
Port of San Francisco
Roaring Fork Transit Authority
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
Sacramento City-County Office of
Metropolitan Water Planning
Sacramento Open Space Commission
Sacramento Regional Transportation District
San Joaquin Council of Governments
Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and
Open Space District
Stapleton Redevelopment Corporation, Colorado
Transmission Agency of Northern California
Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority
Treasure Island Development Authority
Inter-American Development Bank
Nonprofit/Advocacy Organizations
American Center for Wine, Food, and Arts
Building Industry Association
Downtown Spokane Partnership
East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
Marin Agricultural Land Trust
Mountains Restoration Trust
North Coast Builders Exchange
San Francisco Jewish Museum
Santa Cruz County Business Council
The Nature Conservancy
The Trust for Public Land
The Wilderness Society
Yosemite Restoration Trust
Private Sector
AEW Capital Management
Aspen Skiing Company
A. Teichert & Son
Beazer Homes
Buzz Oates Enterprises
Callahan Property Company
Camray Development and Construction Co.
Catellus Development Corporation
Centex
Continuum Partners LLC
Corrie Development Corporation
DKM Investments, Inc.
El Dorado Hills Development Co.
FHK/Ward Company
First Commercial Bank
Forest City Development
General Growth Partners
Graham Development Company
Granite Power and Development Co.
Hyatt Rickeys
The Hofmann Company
Jones Lang LaSalle
JPI West Coast Construction
KB Home
Kaiser Permanente
L & P Land Development
Lennar Communities
Lewis Homes
McClellan Business Park
McCuen Properties
Morrison Homes
Pacific Construction Company
Pacific-Teal Development
Pacific Telesis
Pacific Gas & Electric Properties
Powell Development
Prometheus Development Company
Prudential Development Group
Pulte Homes, Inc.
Resort Development Company
Reynen & Bardis Communities
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
Shaffer Management Group
Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
Sterling Pacific Assets
The DeSilva Group
The Hodgson Company
The MacDiarmid Company
The Pivotal Group
The RREEF Funds
Wadsworth Golf Construction
Waterworld Resorts, Inc.
WCI Communities, Inc.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4
Specialized Services
EPS brings considerable experience and success conducting various types of economic analyses in California and beyond to support intelligent, informed decisions as planning initiatives are conceived, evaluated, and implemented. Many of EPS’s core services are precisely those sought by the City under this RFQ, including:
Real Estate Market Research and Analysis to identify and assess development opportunities through an understanding of local and regional supply and demand dynamics Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis to project municipal revenues and service demands and costs associated with proposed development as well as direct, indirect, and induced impacts on the local and regional community
Economic Development and Revitalization Strategies to enhance job creation, revenue generation, and physical improvements in the community
Affordable Housing to inform various dimensions of affordable housing programs and policies, including affordable housing strategies, commercial linkage fees, housing impact fees, inclusionary housing ordinance updates, and in-lieu fee studies Development Negotiation Support to establish terms for the lease or sale of property, financing of improvements, and sharing of risks and financial rewards Property Valuations using cash flow projections and residual land value analyses to establish reasonable expectations for the proceeds from land disposition and development Ground Lease Strategies to be used by public clients for generating fiscal benefits and as a tool to promote economic development; EPS has considerable experience in formulating and structuring ground lease strategies based on valuation results Disposition and Development Strategies to assess an organization’s overall real estate portfolio and identify actions likely to yield positive financial and operational results Public Infrastructure Financing and Financing Plans for infrastructure, community benefits, and other development components that optimally utilize available tools and resources to yield a feasible project
Pro Forma Analysis and Review to develop feasibility analysis to test whether the economics of development (costs and revenues) are expected to yield competitive, risk- based financial returns
Community Benefits Analysis to evaluate the trade-offs associated with various requirements or requests that new development provide affordable housing, parks, jobs programs, or similar benefits that can add costs and/or reduce revenues for the developer Developer or Tenant Solicitation to draft of RFQs/RFPs, managing correspondence with interested parties, and evaluation of responses
Industry Cluster Analysis and Strategies for Economic Development to capitalize on an area’s competitive advantages and to target and attract catalytic and complementary businesses.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5
3. Selected Project Profiles
This section describes projects EPS conducted for the City of San Carlos as part of the last round of the on-call bench and provides project profiles for recent EPS consulting assignments that have involved topical areas similar to those referenced in the City’s RFQ. With one exception, the following examples are focused within the San Francisco Bay Area in general and in the Silicon Valley/Peninsula region in particular.
Project Experience in San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee
San Carlos, CA
In downtown San Carlos, the City offers project developers the option to pay a fee in lieu of providing required parking. However, the in-lieu fee, established in 2015, did not sufficiently cover the City’s cost to provide the required parking. With growing demand for Downtown parking along with land and development cost escalation, the City sought a fee update. EPS provided technical analysis to support the fee update. EPS delivered a cost analysis that identified maximum in-lieu fee levels and also provided important contextual information to assist the City with in-lieu fee adoption, including fee comparisons with nearby jurisdictions and financial testing of various fee levels on real estate development economics. EPS found that the true cost of parking was roughly four times the City’s fee, but that charging the maximum allowable fee for parking could deter development. EPS advised the City on a fee increase that would make the City’s fee similar to neighboring jurisdictions, but was unlikely to have a detrimental effect on new investment in the downtown.
San Carlos Housing Policy and Project Analysis
San Carlos, CA
EPS was retained by San Carlos to assist in several assignments related to housing policies and projects. When the City was considering the merits of affordable housing development at 817 Walnut Street and 1232 Cherry Street, EPS provided a review of development cost and funding estimates (including the need for City subsidy to augment other funding sources), as well as a proposal from Charities Housing and an assessment of the implications of following a developer- led process vs. having the City itself lead the development process. As a follow-on assignment, EPS assisted San Carlos staff in preparing a presentation for the Economic Development Advisory Commission regarding Statewide, regional, and local trends in housing demand, production, funding, and legislation. Most recently, EPS reviewed a developer’s request to pay the City’s in- lieu fee rather than providing affordable units within a condominium project proposed on Walnut Street. This analysis involved several iterations of analysis, including a variety of alternative means of compliance and the impact that utilizing the State’s density bonus may have on project feasibility. EPS also participated in negotiation discussions with the developer, City staff, and the City’s outside counsel for housing-related issues.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6
Economic Study of San Carlos’ Housing Regulations
San Carlos, CA
The City of San Carlos contracted EPS to review its inclusionary housing requirements and provide analysis which would inform an update to San Carlos’ inclusionary housing ordinance, Zoning Code, and local density bonus incentive program. EPS provided a survey of comparable jurisdictions in addition to analysis of the potential impacts of increasing inclusionary housing requirements to determine financial feasibility. EPS then provided insights into how to adjust those requirements for owners and renters, and changes that could be made to the inclusionary housing fee.
San Carlos Childcare Impact Fee Nexus Study
San Carlos, CA
In response to a study initiated by the San Mateo County’s Office of Education, which identified significant shortages of childcare spaces in San Mateo County, generally, and San Carlos, specifically, the City began to study the regulatory and financing options available to the City to increase the supply of childcare facilities and develop strategies to mitigate the future demand based on the expected increase in residents and jobs in San Carlos. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) was retained to develop the technical analysis and prepare the required Nexus Study to support potential implementation of a childcare development impact fee, as authorized by the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code 66000 et seq.). The Council will be considering a Childcare Impact Fee Ordinance and fee levels at the June 27, 2022 meeting.
Relevant Project Experience in Other Jurisdictions
Redwood City El Camino Real Corridor Plan
Redwood City, CA
The City of Redwood City was seeking to develop and implement a strategic planning effort to guide land use and growth along the 2.5-mile segment of El Camino Real that passes through Redwood City. This planning effort was designed to help city staff better understand the existing market, infrastructure, and design conditions along the corridor as well as identify development opportunity nodes and sites to better foster economic vibrancy and sense of place.
As the economist as part of a multi-disciplinary consultant team, EPS was charged with identifying the existing market conditions along the El Camino Real corridor in order to determine the appropriate mix of future land uses. Additionally, EPS looked at data on parcel size, ownership characteristics, and other metrics in order to identify any opportunity sites along the corridor that were poised for redevelopment. EPS used this information to study the feasibility of various land use types along the El Camino Real corridor in Redwood City. The final component of EPS’s involvement in this corridor plan was to examine the financing strategies of implementing various infrastructure improvements (primarily transportation related) within the study area. EPS has and will continue to work with the project team to complete the technical reports and findings of this corridor study.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7
Cupertino Community Benefits and Growth Management Advisory Services Cupertino, CA
The Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040, adopted in 2014, incorporates community input, regulatory changes, best practices, and the desire to achieve community building, sustainability, economic, and fiscal objectives. However, the City Council deferred considerations related to development heights, development allocations (i.e., rights), and the potential for a Community Benefits Program until 2015. The City Council sought to study and collect public input on approaches achieving community benefits from development and managing growth in the City.
In early 2015, the City engaged EPS to provide research and guidance regarding the advantages and disadvantages of zoning-based community benefit programs. EPS work informed City discussions regarding potential program options for Cupertino. In this work, EPS evaluated a range of “value capture” techniques, relying heavily on case studies from other municipalities around California. With a solid understanding of the range of options, and given the Cupertino community’s concerns related to density and the City Council’s desire for flexibility in land use decision making, the City decided to pursue new General Plan Amendment (GPA) procedures, rather than a community benefit program. EPS advised the City on GPA procedures and subsequently assisted the City with economic and fiscal impact reviews for the first round of GPA proposals.
Palo Alto Downtown Commercial Development Cap Study
Palo Alto, CA
Because of increasing traffic and parking congestion Downtown during the 1980s, the City of Palo Alto rezoned the area and implemented a commercial development cap. The cap limited new nonresidential development Downtown to 350,000 square feet, which was achieved recently. The Downtown Development Cap Evaluation sought to re-evaluate the Cities land use policies for the Downtown and to recommend policy adjustments as appropriate. EPS assisted in the process by providing real estate market and development feasibility analyses. In addition, EPS worked on a team to evaluate the theoretical and likely commercial development buildout Downtown.
South San Francisco On-call Economic Advisory Services
San Francisco, CA
Over the last 3 years, EPS has provided a variety of market, financial, and related technical analysis to the City of South San Francisco to support their consideration and implementation of various policy and planning initiatives:
In-Fill Financing Options: EPS provided review and recommendations related to the financing of in-fill development in the City.
Developer Due Diligence Review: EPS provided due diligence review on the qualification and financial capacity of a development entity as part of a Development Agreement (DA) and Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) assignment of development rights for 2.25 million square feet of biotech and life science uses.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8
Specific Plan Financing Strategy: EPS made recommendations related to financing mechanisms and resources to deliver infrastructure and related implementation actions for the El Camino/Chestnut Avenue Specific Plan.
City of Belmont
Belmont, CA
The City of Belmont’s Quimby in-lieu and park impact fee programs required a comprehensive update and the City wanted to introduce a new transportation impact fee and public art in-lieu fee. At the same time, the state’s evolving legal landscape (AB 2299, AB 494, SB 13, SB 1069, and SB 229) required that the City’s municipal code be updated, and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic required a cautious approach toward increasing fees.
EPS led a team that included transportation consultants and coordinated extensively with City staff. EPS navigated City staff and decision makers through a range of fee implementation policy considerations guided by fee survey, feasibility work, and other best practices. All recommended fees were adopted unanimously.
Ten Year Economic Development Implementation Plan for San Luis Obispo County Communities and Sub-Regions
San Luis Obispo County, CA
The Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC), a non-profit economic development organization, engaged EPS to develop a Ten-Year Economic Development Implementation Plan for San Luis Obispo County and its subregions. Funded through a grant from the Economic Development Administration (EDA), the purpose of the project was to determine clear strategies and implementation actions to guide the County towards post-COVID economic recovery and resilience.
EPS collaborated with EVC staff to leverage existing economic development documents, and supplemented that information base with additional data analysis, to establish an understanding of current economic conditions. Based this research, EPS synthesized the County’s primary economic Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT), within the County’s four subregions, and then by six unique industry clusters. Based on these assessments, EPS developed economic vitality strategies that addressed specific critical needs, including a focus on the ongoing COVID crisis. The strategies were incorporated into the ten-year Implementation Plan that delineated priorities, capacity, partners, time horizons, and evaluation metrics for each item. The Plan was completed in December 2020, and relevant local stakeholders are currently reviewing.
Downtown Berkeley Community Benefits Financial Analysis Berkeley, CA
The 2211 Harold Way project was an 18-story, 180-foot mixed-use tower proposed for development in Downtown Berkeley. The project was the first to request approval under the City’s Downtown Area Plan and its 2012 zoning ordinance, which requires “significant community benefits” for structures taller than 75 feet. The City of Berkeley engaged EPS to assist with review of the community benefits proposed by the 2211 Harold Way applicant.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9
EPS reviewed the applicant’s community benefit proposal and quantified its economic value. The analysis focused on the value attributable to two key elements of the proposal, a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) and the inclusion of a movie theater in the project. EPS evaluation of the PLA relied on interviews with local Labor representatives, interviews with local developers, and a review of academic literature on the topic. The EPS analysis of the movie theater proposal identified the market value of the movie theater use, and compared that value to the cost of development, to establish the private-funding gap that would exist in the absence of the community benefits program. The EPS analysis provided quantitative results that informed the Berkeley Zoning Adjustments Board’s decision to grant the project its Conditional Use Permit.
Walnut Creek Real Estate Development and Policy Advisory Services Walnut Creek, CA
Over the last two years EPS has provided a variety of market, financial, and related technical analysis to the City of Walnut Creek to support their consideration and implementation of various policy and planning initiatives. These services have included the following:
Affordable Housing Linkage Fee: EPS is preparing nexus studies to update the City’s housing and commercial development in lieu fees based on their respective impact on local affordable housing demand and the required funding gaps. Downtown Specific Plan Financing: EPS identified and evaluated various financing mechanisms and their feasibility to support the infrastructure burden as part of the recently adopted Downtown Specific Plan financing plan.
Economic Implications of City Development Fees: EPS evaluated the economic implications of the City’s development impact fees across a range of land uses by comparing them against those charged by peer jurisdictions and estimating their financial “burden” on various real estate development prototypes.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10
4. Client References
Recent Clients*
Jenna Garcia
Housing Administrator
City of Rohnert Park
Phone:
707-588-2233
Email: [email protected]
Anna McGill
Principal Planner
City of Redwood City
Phone:
650-780-7278
Email: [email protected]
Matt Udouj
Development Associate
Mill Creek Residential
Phone:
650-248-2130
Email: [email protected]
Darcy Smith, AICP
Community and Economic Development Director
formerly with the City of San Bruno, currently with Millbrae Phone:
650-259-2341
Jennifer Rose
Housing, Economic Development, & Finance Manager
City of Belmont Finance Department
Phone:
650-595-7453
Email: [email protected]
Stephen Sotomayor
Housing Administrator
City of Healdsburg
Phone:
707-431-3396
Email: [email protected]
*Additional References can be provided upon request.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11
5. Project Management and Staffing
Project Management
EPS will staff assignments in a manner to bring about the highest quality result at the most efficient cost. While our staff works collaboratively, each project is assigned a project manager, who is available to the client on a day-to-day basis.
As the City’s primary point-of-contact, Jason Moody, EPS Managing Principal, will review all requests for services issued by the City and assemble an appropriate team of consultants with a high-level of expertise and capacity for the work. The number of hours to be committed to the project by each staff person will be detailed when the specific project and associated work plan is established.
EPS has a long and successful track record of delivering quality deliverables on time and within the authorized budget. Our proven approach generally includes the following:
A “Project Initiation” task for each assignment that begins with establishing a clear understanding of the client’s objectives, articulation of desired outcomes, schedule, and type of deliverables, and well-defined roles and responsibilities. EPS generally documents this initial phase of the study with a memorandum to ensure concurrence on the work program, study process, and schedule.
A collaborative work effort that includes regular and open lines of communication with the client and established milestones to ensure progress is being made consistent with expectations and to allow for course correction, as necessary. EPS makes appropriate use of available technology to establish and maintain communication protocols including the use of web-based document handling and “shared” technical modeling. Clear, concise, and user-friendly deliverables that document all assumptions, methods, and data. Throughout our assignments, EPS stresses transparency and objectivity. Transparency allows all stakeholders to understand assumptions, calculations, and the logic behind conclusions, and allows healthy dialogue on important policy considerations. Objectivity ensures that positional advocacy does not cloud judgment and lead to faulty conclusions or projections. This means that there are no “surprises” at the end of the assignment that could derail the collective effort.
Assign ed Sta ff
A brief description of the role and background for the key staff members assigned to this effort is provided below. Resumes for key staff members are provided in Appendix A.
Jason Moody, Managing Principal
Jason has more than 25 years of professional experience in the field. During his tenure at EPS, Jason has worked extensively for a variety of public- and private-sector clients in the areas of real estate market and financial analysis, development feasibility, regional economics, and
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services EPS Statement of Qualifications 06/22/2022
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12
competitive analysis. Jason has substantial experience working in Silicon Valley and the Peninsula, including recent and ongoing work for the Cities of Redwood City, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San Bruno.
Ashleigh Kanat, Principal
Ashleigh has been with EPS for 15 years and has significant experience preparing and evaluating real estate market and financial feasibility analyses, urban revitalization and economic development strategies, public financing and implementation plans, and economic and fiscal impact analyses. She has worked on inclusionary housing ordinances and nexus-based affordable housing impact fee programs throughout California. Her experience along the Peninsula includes work in Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, Foster City, and Menlo Park. She is currently working in San Carlos, helping the City craft a child care impact fee program to help fund the creation of new childcare spaces in the City.
Darin Smith, Managing Principal
Having recently led the City’s inclusionary housing work, Darin will lead EPS’s work for San Carlos on housing issues. Darin has extensive experience in housing policy and developments, utilizing advanced economic modeling to inform decisions that promote the production of affordable housing while maintaining the feasibility of new residential and commercial development. Over the last several years, Darin has worked on numerous inclusionary housing ordinances, nexus-based affordable housing impact fee programs, density bonus programs, Housing Element updates, affordable housing strategies for specific development projects, and negotiations between public landowners and nonprofit affordable housing builders. Among these assignments were several for San Carlos, evaluating the need for subsidy for various affordable housing projects, as well as developer proposals for affordable housing and requests for alternative forms of compliance with the City’s affordable housing requirements. In addition, Darin has provided support for development negotiations on public land in San Jose, Santa Clara, and San Mateo, among other locations in California and throughout the United States. Through these and other projects, Darin has extensive experience communicating the complex economic realities and financial feasibility challenges of market-rate, inclusionary, and stand-alone affordable housing development with stakeholder groups and to elected bodies.
Benjamin C. Sigman, Principal
Ben will serve as a project manager for San Carlos projects, bringing expertise in real estate development, economic development, community benefits and municipal finance, as well as deep knowledge of the Peninsula and Silicon Valley more broadly, based on his recent and on-going work for Redwood City, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, and Cupertino. Ben has over 15 years of consulting experience, including real estate and economic development projects nationwide.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13
6. Firm Billing Rates
As specific projects are identified, EPS will prepare a scope of work and budget estimate, based on hourly rates in effect at the time. Rates for 2022 are provided below. Direct costs (e.g., travel, data) are billed at cost, and charges are based on the amount of time actually spent. EPS typically provides monthly invoices for work performed and anticipates payment within thirty (30) days.
EPS 2022 Hourly Billing Rates
Managing Principal $310
Senior Principal $360
Principal $285
Executive/Senior Vice President $260
Senior Consultant $250
Vice President $240
Senior Technical Associate $260
Senior Associate $215
Associate $185
Research Analyst II $160
Research Analyst I $110
Production and Administrative Staff $110
Billing rates updated annually.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
APPENDIX A:
Staff Résumés
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, CA 94612
510.841.9190 [email protected] www.epsys.com
Jason Moody
Managing Principal
Education
Master of Public Policy,
University of California,
Berkeley, 1995
Bachelor of Arts in
Economics, University of
California, Santa Cruz, 1988
Previous Employment
Budget Analyst for City of San
Francisco (1995)
Research Analyst, Fisher
Center for Real Estate and
Urban Economics (1994–5)
Business Analyst, Port
Authority of New York/New
Jersey (1994)
Print Media Journalist, States
News Service, Washington,
DC (1989–1992)
Affiliations
International Downtown
Association
San Francisco Planning and
Urban Research Association
International Economic
Development Council
Publications/Presentations
“Town Centers: Typologies and
Policy Directions,” Bay Area
Planning Directors Association
(BAPDA), Spring 2017 Meeting
“Building Livable Communities
with Transit: Making the Case
with Data,” Rail-Volution 2016
Annual Conference
“Innovation Districts,” 2016
National APA Conference
“Urban-Suburbia,” Urban Land,
October 2008.
“Transit Joint Development,” with
Bruce Appleyard, Urban Land,
August 2007.
“The Town and Gown,” Economic
Development Journal, Fall 2004.
“Spontaneous Research Districts,”
Association of University Related
Research Parks conference paper.
ABOUT
As a Managing Principal at EPS, Jason has worked at the firm for over 20 years.
He has extensive professional experience evaluating the fiscal and economic implications of projects and policies at local and regional levels. He has strong expertise evaluating the market and development feasibility of various real estate product types as well as financing public infrastructure and amenities. Jason has worked for hundreds of jurisdictions in California helping understand the short and long-term implications of their planning efforts and is an accomplished presenter on issues related to local public finance and economic analysis.
SELECTED PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE
San Carlos Downtown TOD Opportunity Site Feasibility Analysis EPS assisted the City of San Carlos with a P3 disposition and development strategy for a strategically located site in their Downtown in close proximity to a Caltrain station.
Redwood City El Camino Real Corridor Plan and Streetcar Feasibility Study EPS evaluated market and development feasibility issues relevant to implementing a comprehensive revitalization plan along the El Camino Real corridor in Redwood City. EPS also assessed economic and financing issues associated with proposed streetcar connecting a downtown regional multi-modal transit hub to higher density employment and residential districts.
Downtown Mountain View Development Strategy
EPS was retained by the City to evaluate development strategies and opportunity sites to ensure their downtown core, situated adjacent to a Caltrans Station, effectively adapts to the changing market dynamics facing mid-size downtown in light of changing retail landscape.
San Bruno Bayhill Specific Plan and Development Agreement EPS assisted the City of San Bruno evaluate the market, economic and fiscal implications associated with redeveloping the Bayhill business park, home to YouTube, Walmart.com, and other high-profile tenants seeking to expand and modernize their headquarters campus. EPS is currently assisting the City as it seeks to execute a Development Agreement with YouTube
Palo Alto Downtown Development Cap Economic Analysis
EPS assisted the City of Palo Alto evaluate the type and amount of growth likely to occur in the Downtown upon lifting of an existing development cap on office and commercial uses.
City of Oakland Affordable Housing Negotiations
EPS has provided financial due diligence on the terms and conditions associated with several affordable housing projects proposed on City-owned land.
Financial Review of Redwood City Sequoia Station Development Proposal EPS evaluated the financial performance of a mixed-use project (office, residential, and retail) at the Caltrain Sequoia Station site to validate a developer claim for additional height to ensure project viability.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) J ASON M OODY 2
SELECTED PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE (CONTINUED)
Santa Clara City North Specific Plans
EPS was retained by the City to provide economic, fiscal, and infrastructure financing analysis as pa rt of a Specific Plan process designed to support the transition of several focus areas on in the northeast area of the City (Patrick Henry, Freedom Circle, and Tasman East) into higher density housing and mixed-use commercial nodes.
Palo Alto Rail Grade Separation Financing Strategy
Jason provided a comprehensive analysis of potential financing tools and resources to assist the implementation of various grade separation alternatives for CALTRAINS/HSR service.
Redwood City Interactive Fiscal Model
EPS developed a comprehensive fiscal model that focused on measuring the differential impacts of various land uses (e.g., single-family, multi-family, office, retail, warehouse-industrial) and potential policy changes (e.g., changes in tax or fee rates), while also accounting for the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Economic and Fiscal Analysis of Walnut Creek Broadway Plaza Expansion EPS was retained by the developer of a premier mall in Walnut Creek to evaluate the fiscal and market implications of a major renovation and expansion project to include Neiman Marcus and other tenants.
Seminary Point Development Negotiation Support
EPS assisted the City of Oakland evaluate the terms and conditions (including low interest loan and land disposition) for the development of a mixed-use retail project in a low income and under-served neighborhood of Oakland.
San Bruno Hotel Negotiations
EPS represented the City San Bruno in negotiating the terms and conditions for a public-private partnership to develop a business service-oriented hotel on a site located near BART, retail, and a major office park.
Fiscal Analysis of Harbor Bay Alameda Zoning Change
EPS compared the fiscal impact of a zoning change for a 12-acre parcel in the City of Alameda from industrial to residential.
Fiscal Analysis of San Bruno Economic Enhancement Initiative EPS was retained by the City to evaluate the fiscal and economic impacts within the San Bruno Transit Corridor Area that is expected to occur over time as a result of a Community Plan designed to foster higher density development.
Downtown Orinda Precise Plan
EPS is assisting the City of Orinda evaluate a range of economic and market issues to inform a downtown Precise Plan study effort.
Downtown Walnut Creek Precise Plan
Working for the City, EPS evaluated the market and financial feasibility of various mixed-used redevelopment options for a two-block area in Downtown.
Downtown Santa Rosa Specific Plan
EPS is currently working as part of a multi-disciplinary team retained by the City to update the Downtown Specific Plan, with a particular focus on addressing the need for additional high-density housing and other catalytic projects.
Pleasanton Civic Center Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan EPS provided strategic market and development feasibility analysis to support a Specific Plan for Downtown Pleasanton as well as a Civic Center Master Plan. The work focused on opportunities presented by a strategically located Civic Center that could be made available for private development with the re-location of key City functions. EPS coordinated this work with the Downtown Specific Plan focused on creating new land use and development opportunities.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, CA 94612 The Economics of Land Use 510.841.9190 [email protected] www.epsys.com Ashleigh Kanat
Principal
Education
Master of Public Policy,
University of California,
Berkeley, 2004
Bachelor of Arts in American
Studies with a concentration
in Urban Studies, Smith
College, 1998
Previous Employment
Assistant Vice President, New
York City Economic
Development Corporation,
2005–2007
Senior Associate, Rosen
Consulting Group,
2004–2005
Assistant Planner, City of
Piedmont, 1998–2002
Awards
California American Planning
Association 2022—Sausalito
General Plan
California American Planning
Association 2022—Santa Rosa
Downtown Station Area Plan
California American Planning
Association 2014—Windsor
Station Area Plan
California American Planning
Association 2010—South
Fremont/Warm Springs
Revitalization Plan
Associations
Lambda Alpha International
San Francisco Planning and
Urban Research Association
(SPUR)
ULI UrbanPlan Volunteer
CREW, San Francisco
ABOUT
Ashleigh Kanat joined EPS in 2007 and has significant experience preparing and evaluating real estate market and financial feasibility analyses, urban revitalization and economic development strategies, public financing and implementation plans, and economic and fiscal impact analyses. She has helped numerous jurisdictions develop approaches and strategies to promote housing production, generally, and affordable housing, specifically. Ashleigh brings technical rigor, creativity, and collaborative project management experience to her projects.
SELECTED PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE
San Carlos Childcare Impact Fee Nexus Study
In response to a study initiated by the San Mateo County’s Office of Education, which identified significant shortages of childcare spaces in San Mateo County, generally, and San Carlos, specifically, the City began to study the regulatory and financing options available to the City to increase the supply of childcare facilities and develop strategies to mitigate the future demand based on the expected increase in residents and jobs in San Carlos. EPS was retained to develop the technical analysis and prepare the required Nexus Study to support potential implementation of a childcare development impact fee, as authorized by the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code 66000 et seq.). The Council will be considering a Childcare Impact Fee Ordinance and fee levels at the June 27, 2022, meeting.
Inclusionary Housing Programs and In-Lieu Fees
For dozens of cities in California, including recent work for Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Healdsburg, Clayton, Atascadero, San Luis Obispo, and Benicia, as well as for Mono County, EPS evaluates and formulates inclusionary policies requiring developers to provide affordable units within their market-rate developments. EPS works with planning and community development staff to identify policy-based inclusionary targets, calculate equivalent in-lieu fees, and evaluate the economic feasibility of such programs.
Affordable Housing Nexus Fee Studies and Commercial Linkage Fees EPS has prepared nexus studies documenting the link between the development and occupancy of new market-rate housing and new nonresidential development and the demand for affordable housing. EPS coordinates with planning staff and local developer stakeholders to establish critical development prototype and cost assumptions, which underpin the fee calculations. EPS evaluates the feasibility of the maximum-justified fees and works with planning and community development staff to recommend fees to mitigate these impacts. Recent clients include Rohnert Park, Petaluma, Mono County, and the Town of Jackson/Teton County, Wyoming.
City of Burlingame Public Parking Lots Financial Feasibility Analysis The City of Burlingame owns several surface parking lots in the Downtown area and wanted to leverage these valuable real estate assets. The City retained EPS to specify the business terms for each of the projects and negotiate the terms of the agreements between the developers and the City. EPS developed a multi-year development pro forma to evaluate the residual land value of the project to determine the appropriate value for the City-owned parcel.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Ashleigh Kanat 2
City of San Mateo General Plan Update
In support of the City’s General Plan update, EPS prepared the existing conditions assessment of the City’s key socio- economic, market, and fiscal trends to guide a discussion of critical long-term planning and policy issues. Ongoing work includes the evaluation of land use alternatives from a fiscal sustainability perspective as well as preparation of a financing and implementation strategy.
City of Belmont Impact and In-Lieu Fee Update
The City of Belmont’s Quimby in-lieu and park impact fee programs required a comprehensive update and the City wanted to introduce a new transportation impact fee and public art in-lieu fee. At the same time, the state’s evolving legal landscape (AB 2299, AB 494, SB 13, SB 1069, and SB 229) required that the City’s municipal code be updated and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic required a cautious approach toward increasing fees.
EPS led a team that included transportation consultants and coordinated extensively with City staff. EPS navigated City staff and decision makers through a range of fee implementation policy considerations guided by fee survey, feasibility work, and other best practices. All recommended fees were adopted unanimously.
Bedwell Bayfront Park Funding Strategy
Menlo Park’s 160-acre Bedwell Bayfront Park (BBP) is a regional asset that draws visitors from across the Bay Area, and it is one of the City’s few open space resources east of Highway 101. The BBP Master Plan process identified a number of capital improvement investments and associated operating and maintenance costs that are required to provide both basic and enhanced park improvements. The City also must continue to address the required landfill improvements and management costs as well as a range of costs associated with addressing sea level rise. In support of the BBP Master Plan process, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) prepared a funding strategy to guide implementation of the proposed park improvements. Based on the Master Plan concept, associated improvements, and capital and operations and maintenance cost estimates, the funding strategy summarizes the estimated costs by phase and describes potential funding sources and financing mechanisms. The funding strategy is based on information learned through discussions with City staff and during the community meetings, subsequent targeted research, and prior EPS experience. The Master Plan and associated funding strategy was adopted by the City in 2018.
Economic Development Implementation Plan for San Luis Obispo EVC The Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC), a non-profit economic development organization, engaged EPS to develop a Ten-Year Economic Development Implementation Plan for San Luis Obispo County and its subregions. Funded through a grant from the Economic Development Administration (EDA), the purpose of the project was to determine clear strategies and implementation actions to guide the County towards post-COVID economic recovery and resilience.
Mountain Housing Council Housing Implementation Plan
The Mountain Housing Council of the Tahoe/Truckee Community Foundation works to accelerate solutions to local achievable housing, including creating policy recommendations for local jurisdictions, advocating for state housing bills, and creating tools for action. EPS updated the outdated housing needs assessment and facilitated a collaborative process to develop a 3-year Regional Housing Implementation Plan.
Santa Rosa Housing Action Plan and Implementation Support Facing a significant housing supply shortage, the City retained EPS to evaluate the role of impact fees within the larger context of public finance and development feasibility. This work led to the development of the city’s first Housing Action Plan, focused on addressing how Santa Rosa can increase housing production, working toward a goal of “housing for all.” EPS provided implementation support in the form of framework and policy development, technical analysis, ordinance drafting, and assistance with staff report preparation and public hearing presentations.
Healdsburg Housing Needs Analysis, Action Plan, and Feasibility Analysis EPS assisted the City of Healdsburg with a review and update of the city’s affordable housing policies, with a focus on developing an approach to estimating unmet current and future housing demand. EPS worked with city staff to identify four sites in the city with potential to provide affordable housing. The financial feasibility analysis evaluated several programs per site and tested a range of income levels, development costs, and tax credit scenarios. The City Council is using this analysis to identify priorities for scarce City resources in the coming years.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, CA 94612
510.841.9190 [email protected] www.epsys.com
Darin Smith
Managing Principal
Education
Master of City Planning,
University of Pennsylvania
Bachelor of Arts in
Psychology, University of
Pennsylvania
Previous Employment
Real Estate/Urban Planning
Consultant, ZHA, Inc.,
Annapolis, MD, 1997–2000
Retail Site Selection
Consultant, Pep Boys, Inc.,
Philadelphia, PA, 1996–1997
Honors and Awards
Congress for the New
Urbanism “Award of
Excellence” 2001 – Robert
Mueller Municipal Airport
Reuse Plan, Austin, TX
FTA/FHWA/APA
“Transportation Planning
Excellence Award” 2004—
Valley Metro Rail Station
Development Opportunities
and Strategies, Phoenix, AZ
California APA “Award of Merit
for Planning Implementation”
2002—Sonoma County
Housing Element, Sonoma
County, CA
California AIA and APA
“Awhanee Award of Honor”
2002—Hayward Cannery Area
Design Plan
Speaker—Best Practices in
Transit-Oriented
Development, Rail~Volution,
2007, 2008, 2010, 2012,
2016, 2017
Panelist – Urban Land
Institute “Transit-Oriented
Development Marketplace,”
2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010
Panelist – California APA
“Local Solutions for Affordable
Housing,” 2015
Lecturer—Bay Area Housing
Dynamics, Leadership San
Francisco, Class of 2007,
2008, and 2009
ABOUT
Darin Smith is a real estate economist with broad experience providing strategic advice to public and private clients on the economic and financial dimensions of land use and real estate development. Darin has helped numerous jurisdictions create strategies to promote development of affordable housing, including inclusionary policies, in-lieu fees, jobs/housing linkage fees, and developer exactions. He also has particular expertise in urban redevelopment projects large and small, negotiating public/private development and financing agreements, evaluating opportunities for transit-oriented development, and creating downtown revitalization strategies and policies.
EXPERTISE
Non Residential Linkage Fee Studies
For Sunnyvale, Foster City, Culver City, Walnut Creek, Roseville, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Sonoma County, Windsor, Goleta, Alameda, and others, EPS has determined the housing needs created by new retail, office, and industrial development, recommended fee programs to mitigate those impacts, and in some cases drafted linkage fee ordinances that have been adopted.
Affordable Housing Nexus Fee Studies
For Sunnyvale, San Mateo, Mountain View, Walnut Creek, Pleasanton, Santa Rosa, and Sonoma County, and others, EPS has prepared nexus studies documenting the link between the development and occupancy of new market-rate housing and the demand for affordable housing, and recommending fees to mitigate these impacts.
Affordable Housing Programs and In-Lieu Fees
For the Cities of Foster City, San Carlos, San Mateo, Santa Clara, South Pasadena, Riverside, San Clemente, Laguna Beach, Gilroy, Larkspur, San Bruno, Goleta, Newport Beach, Sonoma County, and others, EPS has prepared ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable units within their market-rate developments or, under certain circumstances, to pay fees in-lieu of providing affordable units.
Housing Element Updates
For Sonoma County and the Town of Winters, EPS has prepared Housing Elements documenting the inventory of housing supply and demand for special populations, a review of the character and effectiveness of existing policies, recommendations for new policies, and documentation of available sites for new housing.
Affordable Housing Policy Reviews
For the Cities of San Mateo and Santa Rosa, EPS has worked with for-profit and nonprofit housing developers to evaluate and recommend policy options that can enhance the production of affordable housing while minimizing adverse effects on the production of market-rate housing.
Displacement Mitigation Studies
For the Cities of Austin TX and Mountain View and the County of Los Angeles, EPS has provided analysis of demographic and economic shifts indicating gentrification and displacement, and provided case study research, programmatic strategies, and analysis to support fees, replacement requirements, zoning recommendations, tax policies, and similar mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of displacement of lower- income households.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, CA 94612 The Economics of Land Use 510.841.9190 [email protected] www.epsys.com Benjamin C. Sigman
Principal
Education
MS Agricultural and
Resource Economics,
University of California,
Davis, 2003
BA Economics, Colby
College, 1999
Previous Employment
Principal and Vice
President, AECOM (2009-
2011)
Senior Associate,
Economics Research
Associates (2005-2008)
Associate, Economic &
Planning Systems
(2004-2005)
Research Analyst,
Industrial Economics, Inc.
(1998-2002)
Affiliations
Urban Land Institute
ABOUT
Benjamin C. Sigman is a land use economist with over 20 years of experience providing consulting services for public, private, and institutional clients. Ben possesses significant expertise analyzing land use policy and regulation. He authors studies that evaluate real estate market and financial feasibility factors, and offer public financing strategies. He also conducts economic and fiscal impact analysis of wide-ranging activities, including infrastructure development, commercial operations, and open space management. In his economic development work, Ben brings a land use-focused perspective to guide communities toward competing through quality of place, value creation, and public investment.
Before joining EPS in 2011, Ben also worked for AECOM (New York and San Francisco) and Industrial Economics, Inc. (Cambridge, Massachusetts), providing economic analysis and advisory services private and public clients, including federal, state, and local governments. His work included benefit-cost studies related to land use policy and regulation, and associated litigation support.
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Downtown Oakland Incentive Zoning
Principal in Charge of an extensive real estate market and financial feasibility study to inform City planning for an incentive zoning program in Downtown Oakland. EPS analyzed development trends, including market values and development costs, using data and developer interviews to inform pro forma financial analysis of prototypical real estate projects Downtown. The work focused on the potential for up zonings to create value for new community benefits. The analysis highlighted an increasingly challenging real estate development environment, and tempered expectations that modest density increases would yield significant benefits for the City in the near term.
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update Fiscal Analysis
Senior economist for an expansive fiscal analysis that assessed several planning scenarios that were developed to capture the range of possible outcomes of the Comprehensive Plan Update process. The analysis focused specifically on the effect that population and employment growth will have on Palo Alto’s $171.1 million 2015 Adopted General Fund Operating Expenditure Budget. Ben prepared a unique study methodology to isolate the fiscal impact attributable to residents, workers, and visitors, in addition to impacts by land use category. The work informed selection of the City’s preferred alternative.
Infill Development Finance Study
Senior economist for a study of existing and potential financing tools for infill development, prepared for the State of California’s Strategic Growth Council. Ben conducted an assessment of current infill development financing instruments and performed case study analysis to test their efficacy. Ben and his team also made recommendations concerning potential new and refined infill financing mechanisms.
The work informed new state legislation for tax increment financing and highlighted the range of existing municipal financing tools available to California cities.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) BENJAMIN C. SIGMAN 2
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE (CONTINUED)
Downtown West Real Estate and Community Benefits Advisory Principal economist assisting Google with financial analysis to inform the company’s development agreement with the City of San Jose for their Downtown West mixed-use masterplan. Ben advised Google on community benefits practices and precedent agreements, and conducted extensive financial analysis concerning horizontal and vertical development of the masterplan. As part of the engagement, Ben represented Google in discussions with the City’s economist and coordinated with both Google and the City team on technical work to support the project’s public benefits agreement.
Port of San Francisco Mission Rock Real Estate Advisory Project manager and senior economist for ongoing real estate and public finance advisory services for the Port of San Francisco’s Mission Rock project at Seawall Lot 337. Ben conducted pro forma financial feasibility analysis and evaluated infrastructure financing mechanisms, including consideration of developer returns, ground lease term, and use of IFD and CFD tools, among other factors. He evaluated numerous stress tests of contemplated deal parameters to ensure the Port’s position would maximize its revenue potential while reducing risk exposure and quantifying elements of uncertainty. Resulting deal terms were reflective of the Port, City, and Project Sponsor goals and were agreed upon by all parties. The Port Commission approved the Project in 2018, and Ben continues to advise on project implementation.
City of Cupertino Community Benefits Advisory Services
Senior economist assisting the City of Cupertino with evaluation of community benefits programs and options for evaluating proposed General Plan Amendments, as well as the Vallco Town Center Specific Plan. Ben conducted extensive research concerning community benefits programs in California, providing the City with a white paper on the topic. Ben also conducted a range of financial analyses to evaluate the potential for Cupertino projects (including residential, office, and hotel projects) to yield additional public benefits. His work on Vallco led to adoption of a Specific Plan that included a bonus density option with the provision of well defined community benefits.
City of Berkeley Downtown Development Community Benefits Review Senior economist working with the City of Berkeley to evaluate a community benefits proposal made by proponents of the first high-rise to be developed under Berkeley’s Downtown Area Plan. Ben assessed the value of the applicant’s proposed Project Labor Agreement and performed financial analysis on the project’s proposed 10- screen cinema complex. The City relied on this benefits valuation as part of the approval process.
City of Sunnyvale Peery Park Community Benefits Program Senior economist consulting on the development of incentive zoning potentially to be included in the City of Sunnyvale’s Peery Park Specific Plan. Ben analyzed the economic value that might be created by up-zonings contemplated by the proposed Plan. In collaboration with City staff, he identified a range of real estate development scenarios including higher density allowances that might be made available through incentive zoning.
Ben’s financial analysis considered a range of potential development scenarios and included sensitivity analysis of market uncertainties.
Napa Valley Ruins and Garden Study, American Canyon
Project manager and senior economist for a market and financial feasibility review of a destination event facility at a unique industrial reuse site in Napa County. The study provided concept evaluation, assessed market demand, and estimated revenue potential to determine the financial viability of the project. EPS also assisted the development team with feasibility analysis and negotiation of public infrastructure contributions. This later phase of work included extensive fiscal impact analysis and cost burden assessments.
Davenport Cement Plant Predevelopment Study
Senior economist exploring the reuse potential of a 100+ acre site on the California coast in Santa Cruz County.
Ben conducted market research, performed outreach to the real estate development community, and developed detailed financial feasibility analyses for multiple site reuse alternatives that informed land use planning at the site. The work focused on hospitality and light industrial uses. Ben conducted significant research on travel trends and hotel performance, and advised the project team on unique development opportunities.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
bae urban economics
Statement of Qualifications for
On-Call Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services for the City of San Carlos
June 22, 2022
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 1400 I St. NW, Suite 350 215 Park Ave. S, 6th Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20005 New York, NY 10003 510.547.9380
510.338.9202 (fax)
530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486
www.bae1.com
June 22, 2022
Christian Padilla
Economic Development Coordinator
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Re: Request for Qualifications, Economic Development and Housing Consulting Services
Dear Mr. Padilla:
BAE Urban Economics, Inc. (“BAE”), in association with Greensfelder Real Estate Strategy (“GRES”) and Novin Development Company (“Novin”), is pleased to submit this statement of qualifications to provide economic development and housing consulting services to the City of San Carlos (“City”) as a member of the City’s bench of on-call consultants. Please note that we are submitting our qualifications for the Economic Development and Housing scope of consulting services. GRES brings national retail expertise to the team and Novin offers extensive affordable housing project planning, financing, and development consulting services.
BAE is especially well-suited to provide these services to the City, for several reasons. We have decades of work experience in San Mateo County, including in San Carlos, in the areas of real estate market and financial analysis, fiscal and economic benefits analysis, community benefits valuation, economic development, transit-oriented development, and affordable and workforce housing. BAE has completed numerous economic development strategies for cities including Vallejo, Sunnyvale, Walnut Creek, Pleasanton, San Ramon, San Carlos, and Santa Cruz, South San Francisco, and Santa Cruz County. Our industrial, office/R&D, and bioscience experiences come from assignments with the cities of Cupertino, Daly City, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Redwood City and Vallejo, as well as ongoing real estate advisory services for the award-winning NASA Research Park in Silicon Valley, Valley Transportation Authority, and the Port of San Francisco.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 1400 I St. NW, Suite 350 215 Park Ave. S, 6th Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20005 New York, NY 10003 510.547.9380
510.338.9202 (fax)
530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486
www.bae1.com
BAE is also a leader in real estate market analysis, development feasibility analysis, and fiscal and economic impact analysis. BAE has performed over hundreds of market and financial feasibility studies and over 200 fiscal or economic impact studies, including dozens of analyses for projects in San Mateo County within the past few years. While we value solid and thorough data analysis, our deep knowledge of local market conditions and development environments, together with an understanding of broader trends, allows us to see beyond the numbers to anticipate challenges and identify opportunities. In addition, BAE has worked successfully to prepare over 300 housing studies, including Housing Elements, affordable housing inclusionary and linkage fee studies, Affordable Housing and Anti-Displacement Strategies as part of PDA Specific Plans, and residential market studies. We are considered national experts in housing policy, demonstrated by our recent City of Los Angeles Affordable Housing Linkage Fee Nexus Study and our NYC Mandatory Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study.
In all our advisory engagements, we focus on creative solutions that enhance the project to meet the City’s broader goals and objectives. We bring a developer and investor perspective to the assignments, with a focus on maximizing public benefits. As a land use economics firm, we provide all the services needed to achieve successful outcomes – from upfront market and feasibility analyses needed to define a market-supportable project, to advisory and negotiation services, to the creation of financing and implementation strategies and action plans that can achieve tangible results.
We look forward to the opportunities to work with you and your colleagues on the City’s upcoming consulting engagements. Please contact David Shiver at [email protected] or Stephanie Hagar at [email protected] or call us at 510.547.9380 if you have any questions or comments regarding this proposal.
Sincerely,
David Shiver Stephanie Hagar Chelsea Guerrero
Principal Associate Principal Vice President
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Table of Contents
2. COMPANY PROFILE AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................ ................................ ............ 1 Firm Description and Guiding Principles .................................................................................... 1 Summary of Services ................................................................................................................... 2 Firm Qualifications ....................................................................................................................... 4 Excerpts of Relevant Past Work ............................................................................................... 23
3. TEAM MEMBERS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 24
4. REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 45 BAE References ......................................................................................................................... 45
5. HOURLY RATES................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 46 ATTACHMENTS: EXCERPTS OF PAST WORK ................................ ................................ ............ 47
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
1 2. Company Profile and Qualifications
Firm Description and Guiding Principles
BAE Urban Economics, Inc. is an award-winning, national urban economics and real estate consultancy. Since 1986, we have completed more than 2,400 client engagements for public agencies, non-profit organizations, financial institutions, real estate investors, and developers.
All our work is led by seasoned professionals, who are responsible for project direction and quality control.
BAE’s services include market and financial feasibility studies, strategic planning, revitalization and economic development, public-private transactions, public financing, fiscal and economic impacts analyses, and development advisory services. We have extensive work experience in:
• Market and Financial Feasibility Studies
• Economic Development and Revitalization
• Fiscal Impacts, Community Benefits, and Economic Benefits Analyses • Affordable and Workforce Housing
• Public-Private Partnership (P3) Structuring and Negotiation Support • Public Finance
• Sustainable Development and TOD
• Parks and Community Facilities
BAE’s passion about the “triple bottom-line” of sustainable economics, equity, and environment makes us unique among urban economists. We believe that there are practical solutions to urban issues which will achieve this triple bottom-line, and that consideration of environmental impacts and social benefits as well as financial returns result in the best value for our clients.
Our company has practiced this same philosophy since our inception in 1986, with intentional investments in our staff and workplaces to foster creativity and a commitment to excellence.
We have pioneered the use of survey research to target urban housing products, created innovative GIS tools for smart growth planning, and provided real estate advisory services to some of the largest revitalization and sustainable development efforts in the US.
BAE is a certified Green Business in Alameda County, CA, bringing our sustainability focus to our own business practices. BAE is also certified as a Minority Business Enterprise and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise by numerous public agencies.
The BAE difference shows - we have earned more awards for excellence than any other firm in our field, our core staff has averaged more than 15 years each with the company, and our
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
2 clients have retained us repeatedly over our 35-year history. BAE has 18 staff members in five offices including San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, New York City, and Washington DC.
For more information, see www.bae1.com.
Summary of Services
BAE offers real estate and urban economics consulting services in a number of key practice areas of interest to San Carlos, as follows:
Economic Development
Economic Development Strategic Plans. BAE prepares economic development strategic plans, downtown revitalization plans, retail analysis, industrial land demand studies, innovation district plans, and tourism studies in support of local and regional initiatives to grow, sustain, and expand economic vitality. BAE’s approach to economic development is to formulate actionable recommendations based on insightful data analysis, deep understanding of underlying economic and consumer trends, and thoughtful input from employers, policy- makers, community members, and other stakeholders.
Real Estate Market Data and Analysis. BAE offers real estate market data and analysis expertise in support of general plans, subarea plans, corridor studies, TOD plans, highest and best use studies, and infrastructure financing plans, frequently working with multidisciplinary teams of planners, architects, and civil engineers. BAE’s expertise extends across a wide range of land uses, including residential, office/R&D, retail, hospitality, and industrial/warehouse. Through our robust research-driven real estate market data and analysis, BAE provides its clients with timely and relevant information to inform land use decision-making.
Economic Feasibility and Pro Forma Studies. BAE provides financial feasibility and pro forma analyses in support of highest and best use studies, community benefit programs, inclusionary housing and in-lieu fee programs, developer proposal reviews, public asset lease vs. sell disposition studies, and value capture studies. As part of its financial feasibility and pro forma practice, BAE models the anticipated economic performance of a development project, utilizing real estate market research, construction costs, permitting and impact fee costs, and real estate developer and investor investment goals and testing the sensitivity of pro forma results given changes in key market, cost, and financial variables.
Fiscal Impact and Economic Benefits Studies. BAE prepares comprehensive fiscal impact and economic benefit studies to help its clients understand the fiscal and economic implications of land use decisions. BAE’s fiscal impact studies measure the net revenue contributions of a real estate project or proposed land use mix at the city, school district, special district, and county levels. Each fiscal impact model is tailored to each client’s specific set of revenues and
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
3 service expenditures. BAE’s economic benefit studies measure how a proposed development project or new set of land uses will contribute to the prosperity of a region through direct, indirect, and induced job generation and additional economic activity, using the widely accepted IMPLAN input-output model for California and its constituent cities and counties.
Public Private Partnerships. BAE supports public-private partnership (P3) collaborations between its public clients and private developers by offering P3 structuring, RFQ/P developer solicitations, developer proposal evaluations, term sheet and agreement negotiations for a variety of P3 projects, including development agreements, ground lease and sale disposition agreements, and master development agreements. In its P3 practice, BAE seeks successful outcomes that provide fair returns to both the public and private sector without impairing development project feasibility.
Housing Policy, Affordable & Workforce Housing, and Project Support
Inclusionary/BMR Housing and Impact Fees. BAE helps its clients formulate inclusionary housing and impact (residential and commercial) fee programs by preparing financial feasibility analyses that reflect local policy goals and local market conditions and by contributing to implementation strategies and actions. BAE prepares its rigorous residential pro forma analysis to test affordability requirements at specified income limits for different development programs and configurations. Based upon this work, BAE assists its clients to develop strategies, incentives, and programs to support affordable and workforce housing production.
Housing Needs Assessments, Housing Strategies, and Housing Elements. BAE offers expertise to its clients to navigate the rapidly evolving California housing legal and regulatory framework.
Our services include Housing Element preparation and updates, Consolidated Plans, housing needs assessments, and housing strategies. BAE combines its real estate and financial pro forma expertise to evaluate affordable housing and workforce opportunity sites to ensure that local agencies can fulfil their state-mandated goals and can formulate funding strategies for specific residential development projects or affordable or workforce housing programs.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
6 four percent program and regional funding in addition to a permanent mortgage leveraged by the project’s rental revenue.
• Affordable Housing Contribution Peer Review. BAE conducted a peer review of a developer pro forma to inform the City’s discussions with the developer regarding the provision of City funding for the project’s affordable housing component which was designed to satisfy required affordable housing mitigations for multiple projects.
• Library Reuse Analysis. BAE provided an assessment of the potential reuse value of a City-owned library building for residential development for office development, for comparison with estimated costs to refurbish the space for a city sponsored childcare facility. BAE analyzed the potential value of the property for adaptive reuse for private offices and for clearing the site for residential development.
• Downtown Specific Plan. As part of a multidisciplinary planning team, BAE performed market and financial analyses to determine the development capacity and feasibility of new development. BAE also prepared a housing and anti-displacement strategy as well as an infrastructure financing strategy. The South San Francisco Downtown Specific Plan received an award from the Northern California Section of the American Planning Association in 2016.
• Genentech Economic Impacts Study. BAE was engaged by Genentech, Inc. to prepare an analysis of economic and fiscal impacts related to its existing campus and recently proposed master plan.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
23 Excerpts of Relevant Past Work
Please see excerpts of recent relevant past work attached at the end of this Statement of Qualifications.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 112
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
24 3. Team Members
For projects completed under this on-call contract, BAE anticipates that Principal David Shiver or Stephanie Hagar will serve as Principal-in-Charge and Chelsea Guerrero, Vice President, or Matt Fairris, Senior Associate, will serve as Project Manager.
BAE frequently engages with sub-consultants and has proposed Greensfelder Real Estate Strategy (“GRES”) for additional expertise on the retail sector and Novin Development (“NOVIN”) which does consulting and development in the area of affordable housing. BAE has worked with both GRES and Novin on numerous engagements and can offer the City a seamless team with seasoned subject area experts.
See following pages for further details about our team.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 113
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
25 Education
Master of City and Regional
Planning, University of
California, Berkeley
Master of Business
Administration, University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts, Public
Affairs, University of
Chicago
Lecturer
Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, San
Jose State University
URBP 206: Market
Analysis, Appraisal, &
Finance of Real Estate
Development
Role for Proposed
Scope of Services
Principal-in-Charge
Professional Experience
David has more than 35 years of real estate
market and financial analysis and has worked
on many of the Bay Area’s most high-profile
planning initiatives and public/private
partnerships. His experience includes
preparing and managing the preparation of
market studies, market rent surveys, project
and prototypical project financial analyses,
value capture and community benefits
studies, fiscal impact studies, economic
benefit studies, lease analyses, highest and
best use studies, and developer solicitations.
David has recently completed value capture
and community benefits analyses for the
cities of Mountain View, Menlo Park, and Los
Altos, as well as for NASA as part of NASA
Research Park.
Over the past 21 years, David assisted NASA
in the initial concept planning and
subsequent implementation of the award-
winning NASA Research Park at Moffett
Field. He served as the lead real estate
advisor for NASA’s landmark long- term
leases to Google, Inc., Carnegie Mellon
University , and Clark Capital Realty. His work
in Silicon Valley keeps him abreast of the
latest trends in technology tenant space and
facility requirements, mixed- use
development, and retail space demand.
David has made numerous presentations of
his work to public bodies and professional
associations, including CoreNet Global,
American Planning Association, American
Defense Communities, Advisory Council for
Historic Preservation, National Trust for
Historic Preservation, National Academy of
Sciences, and Society of Military Engineers,
and he recently ser ved on ULI Technical
Advisory Panels for the City of Orinda and
City of Dublin.
NASA Research Park P3
(Residential/Commercial Mixed
Use)
Moffett Field, California
Business Planning
Market and Financial Analysis
Developer Solicitations
Ground Lease Negotiations
MBS Building and Buri Buri
Shopping Center
Redevelopment Analysis
South San Francisco, California
Pro Forma Analysis
Land Residual Analysis
ConnectMenlo General Plan
Update
Menlo Park, California
Market and Financial Feasibility
Economic Development
Value Capture/Community
Benefits Study
Point Molate FIAs Peer Review
and DDA/DA Review
Richmond, California
FIA Peer Reviews
Market Analysis
CFD Financial Plan Analysis
DDA/DA Transaction Support
San Antonio Precise Plan
Mountain View, California
Value Capture/Community
Benefits Study
PDR Policy Analysis
San Francisco, California
Zoning Analysis
Developer Outreach
Pro Forma Analysis
Loyola Corners Repurposing
Study
Los Altos, California
Revitalization Study and Value
Capture/Community Benefits
Analysis
VTA/Santa Clara Water District
Winfield Development
Feasibility Study
San José, California
Residential, Office, and Industrial
Market Analysis
Financial Feasibility Analysis
Fiscal Impact Analysis
David Shiver
Principal
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
26 Stephanie Hagar, MCP
Associate Principal
Education
Master of City and
Regional Planning,
University of California,
Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts,
Psychology, UC San
Diego
Role for Proposed
Scope of Services
Principal-in-Charge
Project Manager
Professional Experience
Stephanie provides strong leadership and project
management to BAE engagements throughout
the western US. She has extensive experience in
fiscal and economic impact analysis, market
studies, affordable and workforce housing, and
development feasibility analysis.
Stephanie has completed numerous workforce
and affordable housing strategies and policy
studies. She served a key role in BAE’s recent
Los Angeles Affordable Housing Linkage Fee
Nexus study, leading the portion of the study
describing affordable housing need generated by
new commercial and market-rate residential
projects along with developing fee schedules and
analyzing special issues. Her other affordable
housing policy work has included Housing
Element Updates for the cities of Milpitas and
Concord, CA. For each Housing Element,
Stephanie analyzed housing needs and potential
housing development sites.
Stephanie has supported numerous TOD plans
throughout California, including plans for
Downtown South San Francisco, Walnut Creek’s
West Downtown, Larkspur’s SMART Station,
Rohnert Park’s SMART Station, and the Suisun
Downtown/Amtrak Station area. Stephanie’s
work for these plans included market analysis for
a wide range of uses, assessment of affordable
housing needs and development of housing
strategies, financial feasibility testing for potential development sites, and formulating financing
strategies for public improvements.
Stephanie also offers strong expertise in
development feasibility analysis. Stephanie
recently served as project manager for an
analysis of the financial feasibility of nine different affordable housing scenarios on a site in
Mountain View. She has also evaluated the
financial feasibility and developer profit potential
for several projects in Menlo Park, including
mixed-income residential uses.
South San Francisco
Downtown Station Area Plan
South San Francisco, CA
Market and Financial Analysis
Affordable Housing Strategy
Financing Plan
ConnectMenlo General Plan
Update
Menlo Park, CA
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Market and Financial Analysis
Community Benefits Program
Formulation
Residential and Commercial
Linkage Fee Nexus Study
City of Los Angeles
Affordable Housing Need
Analysis and Policy Development
Housing Impact Fee Nexus
Study
City of Berkeley
Affordable Housing Need
Analysis and Policy Development
General Plan Update M2
District
Menlo Park, California
Market and Financial Feasibility
Economic Development
Value Capture/Community
Benefits Study
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Cupertino General Plan Update
Cupertino, California
Office, Retail, & Residential
Market Study
Willow Village (Meta)
Community Benefits Study
Menlo Park, California
Community Benefits Value
Analysis
Fiscal Impact Analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
27 Raymond Kennedy, MA
Director of Research
Education
Master of Arts, Geography,
University of Cincinnati
Bachelor of Arts,
Anthropology, University of
Cincinnati
Role for Proposed
Scope of Services
Quantitative analysis of
industry impacts, using
IMPLAN input-output model
Professional Experience
Ray’s in-depth knowledge of complex data
sources and quantitative methods serves has
been a premier BAE asset since he joined BAE
in 1988. He contributes to BAE engagements
across the company, providing strong analytical
and data management services.
Ray is adept in conducting economic impact
studies using IMPLAN, a dynamic model of
direct, indirect, and induced economic activity
and job growth from key regional investments.
He has provided analysis using IMPLAN for
projects ranging from the Berkeley In-Lieu
Housing Fee study to the San Francisco Food
and Beverage Production Strategy.
Ray is one of the California’s leading experts in
“urban decay” impact analysis, which assesses
the effects of developing new retail space on
existing retail sales and supportable square
feet in a trade area. Ray has completed impact
studies for proposed retail centers throughout
California including projects in Tracy,
Patterson, Los Banos, Crescent City, Antioch,
Eureka, Morgan Hill, Petaluma, Redding,
Suisun City, Windsor, and Napa. This work
includes establishing the trade area, analyzing
retail leakage, estimating capture of additional
sales from growth in future years, identifying
supportable square feet, and making findings
regarding potential physical deterioration
resulting from imbalances in supply and
demand for retail space.
Ray also has prepared numerous real estate
development cash flows and pro formas,
including recent work for the redevelopment of
Fort Monroe, VA, a former military installation
being converted to a mix of hotel, housing, and
office space. This model combines private real
estate investment scenarios with associated
public municipal service costs and capital
improvement expenditures in infrastructure
improvements, generating a complete picture of
private sector feasibility and public sector fiscal
impacts throughout the 20-year redevelopment
period.
NASA Research Park Real
Estate & Economics Support
Services
Moffett Field, California
Economic Impacts
Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
San Francisco Bay Area
Socioeconomic Impact studies
Gilroy 2040
9212 Study for Growth
Boundary Initiative
Gilroy, California
Economic Impacts
Proposed Legislation on Hotel
to Condominium Conversions
New York City, New York
Economic Impacts
Proposed Legislation to
Regulate Horse-Drawn
Carriages
New York City, New York
Socioeconomic Impacts
Tracy Distribution Center
Tracy, California
Economic Impacts
Thomas Nelson Community
College: Advanced
Manufacturing Center
Hampton, Virginia
Economic Impacts
Mare Island Dry Dock
Vallejo, California
Economic Impacts
EB-5 Foreign Investor Impact
Studies
Various locales, California &
Arizona
Economic Impacts
Fort Monroe Authority
Hampton, Virginia
Fiscal and Economic Impacts
Market and Financial Analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
28 Chelsea Guerrero
Vice President
Education
Master of City and Regional
Planning, University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts, Political
Economy and Geography,
University of California,
Berkeley
Role for Proposed
Scope of Services
Project Manager
Research and Analytical
Support
Professional Experience
Ms. Guerrero brings a strong background in
market research, economic development
and mixed-use residential and commercial to
BAE. She is familiar with econometric
statistical modeling and specializes in
detailed analysis for public policy and land
use planning.
Chelsea provides market, feasibility, and
fiscal impact analyses for BAE projects
throughout California. She has prepared
fiscal impact analyses, feasibility analyses,
and market studies to support the evaluation
of planned and proposed development
projects, public policies, and future long-
range planning efforts. Her work has helped
to inform public policy and land use
decisions in jurisdictions throughout the Bay
Area, including the cities of Milpitas, Napa,
San Ramon, San Rafael, Vallejo, Gilroy, and
Menlo Park. She also played a key role
supporting the formulation of recent
economic development strategies in the
cities of Milpitas, San Ramon, San Carlos,
and Sunnyvale.
Prior to joining BAE, Chelsea worked at the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) on its Regional Prosperity Plan, a
three-year regional planning initiative funded
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).
San Rafael General Plan
Update
City of San Rafael
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Facebook Willow Village
City of Menlo Park, California
(Residential/Retail/Office)
Community Amenities Proposal
Evaluation for Mixed-Use Master
Plan
Fiscal impact Analysis
VTA Development Advisory
Services
Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority
Highest and Best Use Analysis
Developer Proposal Evaluation
for Creative Office/Industrial
San Ramon Retail Strategy
Update
City of San Ramon, California
Market Analysis (Residential,
Retail, Office), Development
Feasibility Analysis, Fiscal Impact
Analysis
Milpitas General Plan Update
City of Milpitas, California
Market Analysis (Residential,
Office, Industrial, Retail), Demand
Projections (Residential, Office,
Industrial)
Truckee North Tahoe Workforce
Housing
Town of Truckee, California
Housing Needs Analysis
I-20 East Corridor TOD
Strategic Plan
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority, Georgia
Market Analysis & Demand
Projections (Residential, Retail,
Office, Industrial), Equitable TOD
Assessment, Anti-Displacement
Strategy Development
Point Molate FIAs Peer Review
and DDA/DA Review
Richmond, California
FIA Peer Reviews
Market Analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
29 Matt Fairris, MCP
Senior Associate
Education
Master of City Planning,
UC Berkeley
Bachelor of Science,
Environmental Policy
Analysis and Planning, UC
Davis
Lecturer
Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, San
Jose State University
URBP 206: Market
Analysis, Appraisal, &
Finance of Real Estate
Development
Role for Proposed
Scope of Services
Project Manager
Research and Analytical
Support
Professional Experience
Matt Fairris is a Senior Associate in BAE’s
Sacramento Region office, where he provides
research and analytical support for BAE’s
consulting assignments throughout Northern
California. He specializes in pro forma
feasibility modeling and market analysis in
support of affordable and market-rate
residential development advisory.
His recent experience includes market
analysis and financial feasibility analysis in
support of public sector site dispositions,
including the State of California Excess Sites
program, Alameda County’s Broadway Sites in
Downtown Oakland, and several Santa Clara
Valley Transit Authority-owned sites, among
others. He also contributed to neighborhood-
level market analysis and financial feasibility
analysis of various residential, commercial,
and industrial prototypes in support of
community benefit policy analysis. These
include studies in the Eastern Neighborhoods
of San Francisco, and the Route-1 South Plan
Area in Alexandria, Virginia. Matt has also
contributed to pro forma financial feasibility
modeling in support of affordable housing
impact fee studies, including analyses in
Windsor, CA, Stockton, CA, and Palm Beach
County, FL.
During his time at UC Berkeley, Matt was part
of the winning team in the Bank of America
Low-Income Housing Challenge and the Big
Ideas competition, both focusing on the
feasibility of affordable housing. Matt also
teaches a real estate finance course in the
Department of Urban and Reginal Planning at
San Jose State University.
Broadway Sites
Disposition
County of Alameda, CA
Market Analysis; Mixed-
Income Financial
Feasibility Analysis; Site
Disposition Strategy
Excess Sites
Disposition
State of California
Market Analysis;
Affordable Housing
Financial Feasibility
Analysis; Site Disposition
Strategy and Negotiations
VTA Real Estate
Advisory
Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority
Market Analysis;
Affordable Housing
Financial Feasibility
Analysis; Negotiations
Support
Residential & PDR Real
Estate Advisory
City of San Francisco, CA
Market Analysis;
Financial Feasibility
Analysis; Economic
Development Policy
Analysis
SteelWave Retail and
Life Science Market and
Financial Analyses
Foster City, CA
Market Analysis Financial
Feasibility Analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
30 Nyny (Phuong) Vu
Analyst
Professional Experience
Education
Bachelor of Science,
Environmental Science
and Management,
minor in Spanish,
University of California,
Davis
Nyny (Phuong) Vu is an Analyst at BAE’s
Sacramento Area office with a background
in environmental and community
development, GIS, and quantitative
analysis.
Nyny provides data collection and analysis
to support BAE’s work on fiscal and
economic impact studies, affordable housing
policy studies, real estate market analysis,
financial feasibility analysis, economic
development strategies, and real estate
development advisory services. Her work
for recent projects has included assembling
real estate market data to inform an analysis
of the financial feasibility of redeveloping a
site in North Richmond, CA to create new
mixed-income housing, economic
background reports for General Plan
updates, development feasibility research
for projects in the Town of Truckee, and
other specialized economic research for a
wide range of BAE assignments.
Prior to joining BAE, Nyny worked for the
City of Sacramento Department of Parks
and Recreation as a Parks Planning Intern
and Sacramento Area Council of
Governments (SACOG) as a GIS Intern.
She also served as a Forest Planning
Research Associate with the University of
Santiago de Compostela in Spain and a
Forest Dynamic Research Fellow with Ceiba
Foundation for Tropical Conservation in
Ecuador.
Nyny holds a Bachelor of Science in
Environmental Science and Management
with a minor in Spanish at UC Davis. She is
fluent in Vietnamese and Spanish.
South Baltimore
Gateway
Industry Analysis
Baltimore, MD
Economic Profile
Market Analysis
Future Opportunities
Analysis
Sunnyvale
Economic
Development
Strategic Plan
Sunnyvale, CA
Economic Profile
Market Analysis
Local Policy Analysis
Strategic Services
NASA Ames Research
Park
Mountain View, CA
Market Analysis
Fair Market Rent
Evaluation for Leasing
Support
Los Angeles County
Asset Mapping for
COVID-19 Recovery
Los Angeles County, CA
Economic profile
Demographic and
market analysis
GIS mapping
Systematic Code
Enforcement Program
Cost Recovery Fee
Study
Los Angeles, CA
Case study research
Fee analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
32 David Greensfelder
Founder and Managing Principal, Greenfelder Commercial Real Estate
David Greensfelder is the founder and managing principal of Bay Area- based Greensfelder Commercial Real Estate LLC, which provides strategic planning, market research/analysis, and real estate development services to communities, financial institutions and investors, and develops for its own account as well as for other property owners and partners. As a developer, consultant, and an experienced corporate real estate executive, David has driven more than 325 projects spanning 6.5 million square feet with an aggregate acquisition and construction value exceeding $750 million (finish market value estimated at well over $1.25 billion).
David’s expertise ranges from market analytics and location intelligence to real estate economics, overseeing due diligence, acquisition, land-use and entitlements, mixed-use project implementation, project management (design, leasing, and construction oversight), and asset management (including administration of existing portfolios). Significant assignments include providing fee development services to technology companies in pre-IPO fundraising rounds, managing national retail tenant representation programs for Fortune 25 companies such as CVS Health, developing comprehensive retail and economic development strategies for cities and market strategies for retailers and REITs, and specialized expertise repositioning “dead” malls.
Prior to forming his own firm, David was Director/VP and Principal of LandMark/NewMark's Northern California office and managed corporate real estate programs for publicly traded Fortune 500 companies. David frequently speaks at national and regional conferences, and lectures at UC Berkeley’s Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics and Haas Graduate School of Business, USC’s Lusk Center for Real Estate Development, and ULI and ICSC education programs. He serves on Bay Area-based Satellite Affordable Housing Associates’ Board of Directors, is an active member of the ULI (Urban Revitalization Product Council, Advisory Services, and UrbanPlan steering committee) and ICSC’s P3 National Steering Committee. David graduated from Pitzer College (The Claremont Colleges) with a degree in Business Economics.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
S TRATEGY AND P LANNING
M ARKET AND L OCATION I NTELLIGENCE
D EVELOPMENT M ANAGEMENT
G REENSFELDER C OMMERCIAL R EAL E STATE LLC
S AN F RANCISCO B AY A REA | W AS HINGTON , DC
(415) 696 - 6767 | WWW . GREENSFELDER . NET
REPRESENTATIVE CLIENT LIST BY SUBJECT AREA
Market and Location Intelligence, and Program and Development Management … for Users ♦ AlterG, Inc. – Retail prototype development, and market entry strategy and financial analysis ♦ Catalyze, LLC – Program management for C19 resilient office space in the San Francisco Bay Area ♦ Community Foods Market – “Food Desert” real estate market study, and program management overseeing development and opening of a community grocery store in Oakland, California ♦ Crown Books – Programmatic retail expansion development strategy and implementation ♦ CVS/Health – San Francisco Bay Area new market entry analysis, strategy, and implementation of programmatic new store development program; integration analysis for Long’s Drug Stores acquisition ♦ Decathlon – U.S. market entry strategy for French sporting goods retailer ♦ Eatzi’s (Brinker International) – Programmatic retail expansion development strategy and implementation ♦ Group 4 Architecture Research and Planning – Redevelopment program management ♦ Halo Top Creamery – Retail program and new store development and initial store rollout ♦ High Tech Burrito – Programmatic retail expansion development strategy and implementation ♦ Longs Drug Stores – Programmatic retail expansion development strategy and implementation ♦ PG&E – Retail potential analysis for conversion of a decommissioned brownfield site ♦ Silicon Valley “Big 4” tech company – Campus master plan feasibility study and master planning ♦ Sungevity, Inc. – Program management for 75,000 SF office HQ redesign and remodel, and out-of-state site location and 75,000 SF new facility development (winner of the Kansas City CSI’s Excellence in Design Award, 2016) ♦ Uniqlo (Fast Retailing) – U.S. market entry strategy for Japanese clothing retailer
Market Analysis and Strategy … for Owners and Investors ♦ Eigen10 Advisors – Project evaluation and highest and best use analysis ♦ Borel Private Bank & Trust Company – Project asset and development management ♦ Boston Private Bank & Trust Company – Project asset and development management ♦ Ohio STRS – Analysis for shopping center repositioning and potential mixed -use addition/redevelopment; site planning and development pro-forma sensitivity analysis
♦ Ramco Gershenson – Retail market evaluation and investment potential analysis ♦ Scanlan Kemper Bard – Redevelopment program for WestGate San Leandro, a 675,000 SF mixed-use retail-office project
♦ Tuscola Outlet Center – Acquisition risk assessment and underwriting for a regional outlet center ♦ Wrightwood Capital – Pre-foreclosure market positioning analysis for a 350,000 SF regional power center ♦ Family Offices/VC Firms – Venture-backed start-ups, project repositioning, project entitlements, and anchor retail tenant negotiation of business and lease terms (new stores and repositioni ng) ♦ Hedge Funds – Angelo Gordon, Bain & Company, Boston Consulting, DB Zwirn, Harris Assoc., HIG Capital, Karsch Capital, KDI Capital Partners, QVT Financial LP, SAC Capital, Scout Capital, Sh effield Mgt, Sigma Capital Mgt, Teton Capital, Wellington Mgt, and Whale Rock Capital Mgt LLC
Market Analysis and Program Management … for Owners and Developers ♦ Athenian Razak – Various Philadelphia, PA and Camden, NJ retail projects ♦ Black Equities – Project asset and development management; 1031 exchange management ♦ Bridge Housing – Integration of commercial in a mixed use project ♦ Burlingame Plaza Owners’ Association – Shopping center repositioning and remodel (scope-of-work, budget, and planning)
♦ CallisonRTKL – Integration of commercial in large mixed-use districts
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
♦ Draper & Kramer – Trade area definition and retail sales potential analysis for large -scale redevelopment project in Chicago, Illinois
♦ Dutra Cerro Graden – Development of financial modeling tools for a real estate firm serving community benefit organizations
♦ Hunt Companies – Oah’u BRAC redevelopment master planning, strategy, and feasibility analysis ♦ The Irvine Company – Property acquisition strategy
♦ Kamehameha Schools (Bishop Estate) – Supportable commercial determination, strategy, and retail integration for large, urban mixed-use redevelopment districts (Kapalama, Kaka’ako, He’eia, Mo’ili’ili) ♦ LandMark Retail Group – Fortune 20 retailer development strategy and execution ♦ Long Island (NY) Mixed-use – Planning consulting for redevelopment of a former hospital site including budget and schedule, entitlement, anchor tenant leasing
♦ Lili’uokalani Trust – Keahuolu Properties and Makalapua District Market Demand Study and Retail Strategy ♦ Lyon Homes – Integration of commercial in a mixed-use project ♦ The Prado Group – Retail tenant negotiation
♦ Pulte Homes – Integration of commercial in a horizontally-integrated mixed-use project ♦ Raintree Partners – Integration of commercial in a vertically-integrated mixed-use project ♦ Scannell Properties – Analysis for acquisition and redevelopment of an Oakland, California site ♦ SummerHill Apartment Communities – Analysis of potential retail uses and accompanying site plan recommendations for a 26-acre vertically-integrated mixed-use project
♦ Tuscola Outlet Center (Illinois) – Redevelopment underwriting and strategic plan ♦ Warmington Homes – Analysis and recommendations for commercial feasibility in mixed -use projects
Economic Development and Redevelopment Planning Strategy … for Communities ♦ BAE Urban Economics – Various economic development projects (team) ♦ Belt Collins – Economic and community development project (team) ♦ City of Albany, California – Economic Development Strategic Plan ♦ City of Albuquerque – On-call Planning Services Bench ♦ City of Boulder, Colorado – Citywide Retail Study
♦ City of Calistoga, California – Business and Retail Strategy Study ♦ City of Capitola, California – Address regional mall competitiveness and reuse in changing retail landscape ♦ City of Chicago, Illinois – Bronzeville market analysis and risk/politics assessment ♦ City of Chicago, Illinois Planning and Urban Design Division, Department of Housing and Economic Development – Retail strategy
♦ City of Cupertino, California – Retail market/focus sites feasibility study and Vallco Mall redevelopment strategies for a general plan update, and ballot initiative (§9212) analysis ♦ City of Dublin, California – Downtown Specific Plan implementation; CC&R amendment and restatement ♦ City of El Cerrito, California – San Pablo Avenue PDA Specific Plan Update and Corridor Study ♦ City of Foster City, California – Commercial real estate market and opportunity site analysis ♦ City of Fremont, California – Irvington District Land Use Conversion Study; expert planning commission and city council testimony about pending mixed-use project applications
♦ City of Indio, California – Highway 111 Corridor Study Specific Plan ♦ City of Kansas City, MO/KS MSA – Retail market assessment and market entry study for a public REIT ♦ City of Kansas City, Missouri – North Loop ULI Advisory Services Panel ♦ City of McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania – Community Rebuilding ULI Advisory Services Panel ♦ City of Los Angeles, California – Ventura-Cahuenga Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Market Study ♦ City of Los Banos, California – Market entry study for a new Costco Warehouse ♦ City of Milpitas, California – Best practices for integrating commercial into mixed-use projects ♦ City of Mineral Wells, Texas – Community Plan and Economic Development Overview ♦ Cities of Morgan City and Berwick, Louisiana – Building the Foundation for a New Economy ULI Advisory Services Panel
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
♦ City of Morgan Hill, California – Economic Blueprint
♦ City of Newark, California – Regional mall repositioning and city-wide retail positioning ♦ City of Oakland, California – Broadway-Valdez Specific Plan peer review panel ♦ City of Pacifica, California – On-call planning and economic development consulting ♦ City of Pearland, Texas – 20/20 Community Strategic Plan ♦ City of Petaluma, California – General Plan
♦ City of Portland, Oregon – Economic and Real Estate Analysis Bench ♦ City of Provo, Utah – Provo Town Center Mall evaluation and repositioning strategy ♦ City of Redwood City, California – Downtown retail and hospitality evaluation ♦ City of San Carlos, California – Downtown redevelopment project evaluation ♦ City of San Jose, California – Citywide Retail Study with Downtown and North SJ implementation strategies ♦ City of San Ramon, California – Economic Development Specific Plan and General Plan updates ♦ City of Santa Clara, California – Corridor study and retail revitalization assessment; Downtown Precise Plan ♦ City of Sunnyvale, California – Economic Development Specific Plan ♦ City of Taylorsville, Utah – Commercial Centers Master Plan and Feasibility Study ♦ City of Vacaville, California – Downtown Specific Plan ♦ City of Vancouver, Washington – Commercial Corridors Strategy ♦ City of Waukee, Iowa – Waukee/Kettlestone Market Update ♦ Cities of West Des Moines and Clive, Iowa – University Avenue Corridor Study ♦ City of Winder, Georgia – Downtown Plus Plan
♦ Confluence - Various economic development and corridor studies (team) ♦ County of Maui, Hawaii – South Maui Community Plan
♦ County of Ventura, California – Channel Islands Harbor Visioning and Market Study ♦ First Carbon Solutions – Economic Development Specific Plan and General Plan updates ♦ Leland Consulting Group - Various economic development projects (team) ♦ MIG – Various economic development projects (team)
♦ MTA/ABAG (SF Bay Area) – Regional Planning Consulting Bench, and One Bay Area Plan retail task force advising on best practices for integrating commercial into priority development areas ♦ Port of San Francisco, California – Pier 29 Cruise Terminal Feasibility Study and Business Plan ♦ Raimi + Associates – General Plans (team)
♦ SACOG Civic Lab – Sacramento-area commercial corridors study ♦ Sargent Town Planning – Visioning strategy and market feasibility study (team) ♦ Site Works – Field work and analysis for retail investment and redevelopment projects (various) ♦ Strategic Economics – Various economic development projects (team) ♦ University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii – Real estate on-call bench ♦ Urban Field Studio – Various land planning, program development and economics projects (team) ♦ Valley Transportation Authority (SF Bay Area) – On-call economics and planning bench ♦ Wasatch, Utah Regional Council/Utah Dept. of Transportation – Land-use and economics on-call bench ♦ Washington, DC – Rock Creek West planning area housing affordability study ULI Advisory Services Panel ♦ Washington, DC – Central Business District COVID-19 Resiliency and Equity ULI Advisory Services Panel ♦ WRT – Various economic development projects (team)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Key Principal Bio
Iman Novin, has over 1ϰ years of experience in the real estate development sector with a focus on mixed-income and transit- oriented development. Iman has co nsiderable experience with the acquisition and project manageme nt of both new construction multifamily projects and rehabilitation of existing properties.
Iman previously worked at MidPen Housing as Director of Acquisitions and at BRIDGE Housing as a Project Manager in both northern and southern California. While at MidPen, Iman managed MidPen’s acquisition efforts across the Bay Area closing dozens of deals and managing broker and investor relationships.
While at BRIDGE, Iman helped secure entitl ements for MacArthur Transit Village, a 675 unit mixed-income TOD project in Oakland with 42,500 square feet of ground floor retail including a 5,000 square foot childcare facility. Through BRIDGE’s innovative $300M CalPERS partnership, BRIDGE Urban Infill Land Development (BUILD), Iman gained experience with a wide vari ety of development and invest ment types including mixed- income, mixed-use, large master-plan, TOD and a portfolio of market-rate value-add investment properties acquired with CalPERS equity.
Prior to BRIDGE, Iman worked in the Real Estate and Planning Divisions of the Centre City Development Corporation (CCDC) on redevelo pment and affordable housing initiatives within the Downtown San Diego Redevelopment Project Area, as well as with Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) in their San Diego office.
Iman is actively involved with the Urban Land Institute and has published three ULI transit-oriented development technical assistance panel reports. Iman has volunteered as a classroom facilitator for the UrbanPlan Program at Berkeley High School and ŚĂƐ serveĚ as sŝĐĞŚĂŝƌ ŽĨƚŚĞWalnut CreekWůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ. Iman also serves on the Board of Directors for the Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce and the Trinity Center, a non-profit which provides services to the homeless. Iman holds joint degrees in Structural Engineering and Urban Studies and Planning from the University of California, San Diego with honors.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
IMAN NOVIN
1990 N California Blvd, Ste 800 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 · [email protected] · (415) 882-4626
EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO San Diego, CA
B.S. Structural Engineering, Cumulative GPA: 3.48, T au Beta Pi Engineering Honor Society June 2007 B.A. Urban Studies & Planning, Major GP A: 3.95, with honors Honors Theses: Equity in Redevelopment Incentive Policy & Affordable Housing Incentive Policy from Theory to Practice Relevant Coursework: Timber & Concrete Design; Conceptual Structural Design; Urban Economics
EXPERIENCE
NOVIN DEVELOPMENT CONSUL TING V arious
May 2013 - Current
Project Management, feasibility & acquisitions consultant with a variety of clients including Enterprise Community Foundation, MidPen Housing Corp., BRIDGE Housing Corp. and Related California.
MIDPEN HOUSING CORPORA TION Foster City, CA March 2014 –Nov 2015
Manage acqusition efforts throught Bay Area including identifying sites for potential new housing development or acquisition Conduct feasibility analysis, negotiate with property owners and maintain relationships with brokers and key stakeholders
BRIDGE HOUSING CORPORATION Irvine, CA
Aug. 2011- Jan. 2014
Project manager for Ivy at College Park, a 135 unit affordable rental development for families located in Chino, CA and Summerhouse Phase II, a 110 unit inter-generational affordable rental development for families and seniors located in Temecula, CA Manage a design team including architect, engineers and general contractor through all phases of development process Interface with City officials, planning department and building department to secure building approvals and permits Interact with lenders and investors to secure debt and equity for projects New business development including response to qualifications and networking events
BRIDGE URBAN INFILL LAND DEVELOPMENT (subsidiary of BRIDGE Housing Corp.) San Francisco, CA Aug. 2007-Aug. 2011
Evaluate condition and development potential of candidate properties in Northern and Southern California Coordinate entitlements for 624-unit market rate transit village in Oakland; secured LEED ND gold to fulfill condition of approval Created market rent model to stabilize 1,800-unit foreclosed asset in East Palo Alto (former Page Mill Properties) Manage CalPERS portfolio wide green initiatives and responsible contractor hiring policy Respond to RFQ’s and prepare development proposals for potential projects Monitor performance at property, portfolio and fund level and coordinate weekly draws/distributions Prepared government funding applications and secured $36.4M in State Prop 1C funding Conduct financial modeling including IRR calculations, discounted cash flow, financing alternatives and sale sensitivities Implement new technologies to expedite hunting and due diligence activities and advise development team on use CENTRE CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION San Diego, CA
Oct.2005- Mar. 2007
Worked with senior staff to design and implement a first time homebuyer program for downtown San Diego Shadowed senior planning staff on the design review of a 22-story market-rate residential high-rise Restructured and managed the agency’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and trained staff on use Analyzed use of a density bonus on a proposed affordable housing project to reduce financial gap Drafted and delivered PowerPoint presentation to staff assessing Information Technology needs
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. San Diego, CA
Oct. 2004-June 2005
Conducted acquisition due diligence including site analysis, comparable value analysis and best use studies for clients Assisted senior analyst in preparing 2005 affordable housing rent and sales price estimates for the City of San Diego Prepared case studies on redevelopment, mixed-use and smart growth for local government clients
SKILLS & AFFILIA TIONS
Strong research skills, experience with informational databases including CoStar, REIS, MLS and Census Bureau Proficient with engineering & project management software including AutoCAD, SketchUp & MS Project 2010 Fluent in Persian and Spanish
Planning Commissioner for the City of Walnut Creek, ULI Y oung Leaders Group Steering Committee, UrbanPlan Classrom V olunteer PUBLICA TIONS Downtown San Leandro Transit-Oriented Development Strategy, Urban Land Institute Bay Area TOD Marketplace Report, 2008 Antioch – Hillcrest Specific Plan, Urban Land Institute Bay Area TOD Marketplace Report, 2009
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Building Value
That Matters.
NOVIN
DEVELOPMENT
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) About Us
Building Value That Matters.
Novin Development Corp. (NDC)—based in Walnut Creek,
CA—is an experienced sponsor and developer of large
multifamily development projects with a double bottom-
line mission. We strive for a balanced approach to
development, one that centers around social responsibility and environmental sustainability. We believe in increasing the supply of housing to a broad spectrum of incomes and incorporating the latest in sustainable building materials and methods. Our projects are thoughtfully designed to be aesthetically beautiful, functional and in harmony with the broader communities they serve.
Project: Sage Park Affordable Teacher Housing
Project Manager: Iman Novin
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Our Services
Project: Mural at MacArthur BART Station
Development | Consulting | Brokerage
NDC is a privately owned real estate development, consulting and brokerage company founded in 2004 that specializes in both market-rate and affordable housing development. In addition to our own $77M portfolio of real estate, NDC’s principals have been involved with the acquisition, entitlement and/or construction of over 9,000 multifamily units valued over $3.5B throughout California.
NDC has a regional focus with local expertise, and its development arm is an expert in Joint Venture partnership with property owners and investors to entitle and develop large scale multifamily projects in the Bay Area. We target urban infill, mixed-income and transit-oriented development projects in line with our double bottom-line commitment to risk adjusted returns and social/ environmental sustainability. Our minimum new construction project size is 40 units.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Our Services
Feasibility & Project Management
NDC consulting can help with the full spectrum of
the development lifecycle from RFP’s and
predevelopment feasibility analysis to acquisition,
entitlements, construction oversight and conversion to
perm. We have strong in-house expertise in financial
modeling
of any type of deal structure with unique
expertise in mixed-income multifamily and transit-
oriented development.
Inclusionary Housing & Tech Partnerships
NDC consulting leverages its unique experience with
both affordable and market-rate housing to help our
development
partners successfully satisfy their
inclusionary housing requirement creatively and
efficiently. NDC principals have experience partnering
with large developers and tech companies.
Local Government & Transit Agencies
NDC consulting has experience consulting with Bay Area transit agencies and local governments. NDC helped BART evaluate their approximately 300+ acre land portfolio adjacent to BART stations to provide practical development and policy advice around BART’s Inclusionary Housing and updated TOD policies. NDC helped the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) issue an RFP for the Evelyn Station in Mountain View and the Town of Mammoth plan a 25 acre 450 unit affordable housing community in their downtown.
Some of NDC’s Clients
Enterprise Community Partners, EAH Housing, The Great
Communities Collaborative, BART, VTA, The CORE Companies, Republic Urban, BRIDGE Housing, MidPen, RCD, Eden Housing, Christian Church Homes, BAE, Opticos, Strategic Economics, Jay Paul, City of Sunnyvale, City of Richmond, Town of Mammoth and more.
Development | Consulting | Brokerage
NDC consulting provides acquisition, feasibility and project management expertise to a variety of for-profit, non-profit and government clients across California.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Our Services
NDC Brokerage (BRE 01999675) prides itself on the use of the latest technology in real estate acquisitions. We use custom mapping and Geographic Information System tools to analyze market conditions, zoning, ownership, improvement value, proximity to amenities and other spatial data to create ta
rgeted and sophisticated off-
market acquisition strategies for our clients. Learn more at ProforMap.com.
Client Driven Off-Market Acquisitions
The best real estate transactions occur off-market. NDC has access to a large database of zoning, land use, transit, demographic and property ownership data across California.
Once we have identified key off-market acquisition opportunity sites that match our client’s criteria, our brokers will contact property owners on your behalf to generate real off-market development leads.
Development | Consulting | Brokerage
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Chris Neale
Executive Vice President
“NDC has provided early feasibility and proforma
analysis consulting services for some of CORE’s latest
mixed-income projects including a proposed 440 unit
Transit Oriented Development at the Tamien VTA
Station in San Jose, that includes 88 affordable family apartments and our proposed 220 unit mixed-income
project in Milpitas. Iman has strong analytical skills
and an ability to evaluate projects as either affordable or market-rate, and even more complicated 80-20
mixed-income bond executions.
”
Geeta Rao
Senior Program Director
“At Enterprise Community Partners Northern
California Office, we have been working closely with
Iman for two years, and Iman has proven to be an
invaluable resource. Iman’s in-depth knowledge
and expertise about Bay Area real estate trends
and development has been critical to advancing
affordable housing practices, policies, research and
specific projects throughout the region. He is a
trusted partner among mission-driven developers,
transit agencies and advocacy organizations.
”
Dan Hardy
Acquisitions Project Manager
“Having been the acquisitions director for several
large developers, Iman knows our business process
well and what we are looking for. He is an expert
negotiator and hones in on what is important to
us. In the escrow proces he also keeps us on track,
focusing on critical milestones.
”
Testimonials
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) Testimonials
Andrea Osgood
Director of Real Estate Development
“Iman and his team are incredibly responsive and
creative in helping us source new deals -- leveraging
GIS technology and local knowledge to track down
leads.
”
Abby Thorne-Lyman
TOD Development Program Manager
“Iman is extremely knowledgeable about what it
takes to finance and build affordable housing, and is
also great at thinking and advising on policy rather
than exclusively focusing at the transactional level. He worked through Enterprise Community Partners to
advise BART on how we can deliver on our affordable
housing commitments, and continues to help find
solutions to the regional housing crisis. He is easy to work with, and a creative thinker. I highly recommend
him!
”
Scott Johnson
Director of Business Development
"Novin Development Corp. has been a valuable
partner to EAH, offering a wide scope of services that
have strengthened our community-building work
throughout Northern California. Novin’s rigorous data
and GIS driven approach to identify off-market
acquisition opportunities has streamlined EAH’s
expansion into new geographic markets. In fact, EAH
and Novin are now exploring a few emerging
opportunities where a joint-venture as co-developers
may be in our mutual interest. And by the way, have I
mentioned that Novin offers expert skills and capacity
in financial modeling, deal structuring, and RFP/NOFA
preparation? If you are seeking a value-add, give
them a call now!
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
45 4. References
BAE References
City of Menlo Park (BAE)
Deanna Chow
Principal Planner, Planning Division
Phone: 650-330-6733
Email: [email protected]
City of South San Francisco (BAE and NOVIN)
Nell Selander
Director, Economic & Community Development Department
City of South San Francisco
Phone: 650-829-6613
Email: [email protected]
City of San Carlos (BAE)
Adam Aaronson
Economic Development & Housing Manager at City of San Carlos City of San Carlos
Phone: 650-802-4257
Email: [email protected]
City of San Ramon (BAE and GRES)
Debbie Chamberlain
Community Development Director
City of San Ramon
Phone: 925-973-2566
Email: [email protected]
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
46 5. Hourly Rates
BAE contracts either on a fixed fee or on time and materials not to exceed basis. Contracts based on time and materials are subject to hourly fees for BAE professional staff. All hourly fees are for off-site personnel.
Our hourly rates for calendar year 2022 are as follows:
Principal $320/hour
Associate Principal $280/hour
Director/Vice President $270/hour
Senior Associate $200/hour
Associate $155/hour
Sr. Analyst $115/hour
Analyst $105/hour
Miscellaneous expenses such as data purchase, travel, document production, and conference calls are passed through to the client with no markup. Subconsultant contracts are subject to a charge of up to five percent for BAE’s administrative costs. These rates are subject to revision on or after January 1, 2023.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) CITY OF SAN CARLOS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS Economic Development and Real Estate Fiscal Health and Successor Agency Housing JUNE 22, 2022
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CONTENTS ABOUT RSG ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Mission Statement ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Core Values ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 QUALIFICATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Real Estate Services ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Market & Feasibility Studies ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Acquisition ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Relocation ................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Fiscal Impact & Community Benefit ........................................................................................................................ 3 Disposition & Developer Solicitation ........................................................................................................................ 3 Economic Development Services ................................................................................................................................. 4 Creating and Achieving Strategic Goals ............................................................................................................... 5 Response and Recovery Actions ................................................................................................................................ 5 Expanding Your Financing Tools ............................................................................................................................... 5 Designing Community Benefit and Public-Private Partnerships (P3) ........................................... 6 Special Studies ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Program Implementation .............................................................................................................................................. 6 List of Recent Economic Development Engagements ............................................................................. 6 Housing Services ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Creating and Achieving Strategic Planning Goals ....................................................................................... 8 Affordable Housing Underwriting and Gap Financing Resources .................................................... 9 Real Estate Development Programming and Transaction Structuring ........................................ 9 Program Administration ................................................................................................................................................. 9 State and Federal Regulatory Compliance ........................................................................................................ 9 Fiscal Health Services ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 Effective Redevelopment Dissolution .................................................................................................................. 10 Helping Secure Financing ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Studying Fiscal Impacts .................................................................................................................................................. 11 Expanding Financial Capacity ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Preparing Municipal Service Reviews and Special Studies ................................................................... 12 Evaluating Reorganization, Annexation or Incorporation Proposals .............................................. 12 Recent Fiscal Health Product Line Assignments ......................................................................................... 12 KEY STAFF ..................................................................................................................................................... 17
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
Approach to Project Management ............................................................................................................................. 17 Project and Team Management Practices ............................................................................................................ 17 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 23 Real Estate Market Study and Reuse Strategies – Los Angeles County ...................................... 23 Real Estate and Economic Development Services – South Gate .................................................... 23 Economic Development Strategic Plan - Corona ....................................................................................... 24 Site Specific Financing/Mixed Use Projects – Los Angeles .................................................................. 24 City Loan Repayment and Successor Agency Services – San Pablo Successor Agency .. 25 COMPENSATION RATES AND POLICIES ............................................................................................ 26 APPENDIX – SAMPLE WORK EXCERPTS ........................................................................................... 27
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
June 22, 2022 Via Electronic Mail [email protected] Cristian Padilla CITY OF SAN CARLOS 600 Elm Street San Carlos, CA 94070 In response to your June 1, 2022 Request for Qualifications, RSG is pleased to present the enclosed Statement of Qualifications to the City of San Carlos for the following services: • Economic development including real estate advisory services, • Successor Agency services, and • Affordable housing. Since 2009, RSG has been proud to be a trusted advisor to San Carlos and we celebrate in the recent successes of Wheeler Plaza, 817 Walnut, and the Landmark hotel (Residence Inn) to name just a few projects we have been privileged to be part of the City’s team. RSG continues to perform real estate and affordable housing services for the City, most recently active on infill land use feasibility studies and several community benefit analyses for life-science and hospitality projects under entitlement review. We look forward to continuing the pursuit of transformative and sustainable projects in San Carlos that provide for enhanced quality of life and fiscal stability. Should you wish to discuss any of the information presented, please contact me directly at [email protected] or by phone at (714) 316-2120. Respectfully, Jim Simon, Principal
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
1 ABOUT RSG RSG, Inc. is a California-based, Subchapter “S” Corporation. Founded in 1979, the firm is currently managed by active Principals Jim Simon and Tara Matthews. We maintain three offices in California, including our main office in Irvine and two satellite offices in Berkeley and Vista. RSG’s federal taxpayer identification number is 95-343-5849 and state taxpayer identification number is 27600915. RSG is also a State certified Small Business Enterprise (SBE - 2006876 DGS). RSG is a creatively charged counterpart to California public agencies. We work with the people responsible for creating vibrant places to accomplish their goals. The inspired leaders at RSG create stronger communities capable of achieving bolder futures by bringing more than four decades of native knowledge to each engagement. As diverse as the agencies we work with, our services span real estate, economic development, fiscal health, and housing initiatives. MISSION STATEMENT RSG creates solutions to enhance communities’ physical, economic, and social future. CORE VALUES Our core values define who we are as people and the standards by which we provide services to our clients. At RSG, we:
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
2 QUALIFICATIONS REAL ESTATE SERVICES Real Estate is a pivotal piece of the puzzle when it comes to creating better lives and bolder futures. At RSG we recognize the symbiotic relationship that exists between Real Estate and our other product lines. Regardless of whether it is market studies, brokerage, or disposition - we see the bottom line that lies beyond Real Estate services themselves – we see the broader picture. We understand and appreciate the profound effect Real Estate services can have within a City, capable of transforming communities and the lives of their residents. Real Estate can act as a powerful catalyst for local government as they look to meet goals in affordable housing, economic development, and fiscal health and ultimately meet their communities’ needs. Our staff understands that for many local governments, Real Estate services are often a means to an end when looking to meet various goals – from providing additional units to meet their affordable housing RHNA numbers to the successful disposition of properties Successor Agencies are required to dispose of. We also understand that cities are in a strong position to influence land-use policy and their future when they engage in real estate – and we put your objectives at the forefront of our approach. Similar to our passion behind the work we do in our other product lines and echoed in everything from our core values to the individual statements of what our staff loves about work, our motivation behind the Real Estate work we do is driven by the outcome for the communities we serve. Our services equate to more than just helping clients with the acquisition of properties or developer solicitation – we are ultimately helping our clients generate employment, stimulate their local economy, and improve the overall well-being of residents while preserving their communities.
Market & Feasibility Studies When our clients have an idea regarding the use of land, there are a number of questions that need to be considered in order to get to the heart of whether the idea is worth pursuing. Is the proposed idea achievable and realistic? What do the long-term successes and benefits to the community look like? These are just a few of the questions that RSG thinks of and helps answer for our clients. Our market and feasibility studies explore the range of options available to our clients, the highest and best use of land, and the demand for proposed use(s) of land. RSG conducts detailed economic and market research using reliable industry data resources corroborated by first-hand field research and local market evaluations to identify viable implementation strategies and investment opportunities. Identification of niche market opportunities for local communities based on consumer preferences, current market research and land use trends, project feasibility analyses, site selection and evaluation, and pre-entitlement services is our specialty. Our background working with over 100 communities lends credibility to developers as well as cities. Acquisition Our firm is skilled at acquiring properties with the expertise required when it comes to dealings and transactions at a government agency level. Many real estate transactions have multiple
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
3 components, and RSG’s team has decades of experience managing the pieces and making sure they all come together for a successful project. We know how to deal with the various participants that are typically involved in these projects and assist in the utilization of a variety of acquisition strategies, including eminent domain, to help reach the desired outcome. As a licensed broker (DRE License No. 01933174), RSG offers full-service real estate acquisition, management, and representation services which includes brokerage services to help manage what tends to usually be intricate acquisition negotiations. RSG’s real estate brokerage background provides our clients with sophisticated tools and insight on real estate trends and opportunities. We go beyond preparing the listing materials and contracts by providing services from the marketing stage to the close of escrow. We offer to partner with the client to fully understand their goals, provide advisory services, and prepare staff reports, resolutions, public hearing notices, and public agency presentation materials. We also collaborate with third-party consultants such as legal counsel, marketing professionals, and environmental consultants when necessary to facilitate a seamless transaction process. Relocation While relocation can be a sensitive matter, it is sometimes a necessity and as such, RSG is experienced at providing hands-on relocation services to residential and businesses displaced by a public project in accordance with applicable federal and/or state regulations. RSG understands the needs of both our clients and those displaced along with the nuances it takes to complete a relocation project. Our relocation services are based on establishing strong relationships with individuals subject to displacement by listening and being compassionate to their needs, which has proven to be an invaluable practice to our clients. Our comprehensive relocation services include cost estimates, project management, document preparation, and implementation. RSG is skilled in creating realistic relocation cost budgets and overseeing the entire process from the preparation of relocation plans, to the placement of residential tenants, businesses, and property owners in suitable replacement properties, and the disbursement of relocation payments. Fiscal Impact & Community Benefit When it comes to real estate transactions, we understand their impact is more far-reaching than just the transactions themselves which then calls for asking the question - what impacts and benefits will there be to the community? Part of our approach in providing services is to understand the desired outcome(s) a city is seeking with a real estate transaction and the likelihood of achieving those outcomes. Our staff is well versed in performing analysis to identify fiscal impacts like the generation of revenue from property tax and fees as well as the production of more jobs and increased access to community services. Whether it be discretionary entitlement actions, P3, or merely disposition of public property our firm helps our clients identify what their City and residents are receiving in return. Disposition & Developer Solicitation Nothing substitutes for knowledge, creativity, and experience when negotiating disposition and development agreements We understand that land is a scarce and valuable resource local governments have and sometimes wish to leverage to help reach development goals. RSG has
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
4 the requisite knowledge and extensive experience necessary to bring complex public-private transactions to fruition, including disposition and development agreements, owner participation agreements, and long-term ground leases. RSG partners with our clients to make sure that their disposition activities are done within the scope of current laws in selling real estate and done in a manner that best meets the needs of our clients’ communities. Our disposition services span from performing market analysis and reviewing building and property valuation to marketing and development strategies and negotiation assistance. RSG is also skilled in helping clients navigate the disposition of surplus land including understanding the multiple laws involved in disposing of former redevelopment agency-owned property, identifying the pros and cons of listing property and marketing it as surplus land, and maneuvering the surplus land notification process. In-depth knowledge of applicable laws and regulations, including requirements under the Government Code and other state and federal real estate regulations, coupled with broad experience in preparing development agreements, are essential to bringing creative solutions to the negotiation table with property owners, developers, and real estate investors. RSG understands how to effectively stimulate interest from highly experienced and financially capable developers. We evaluate development proposals and do our due diligence by performing a review of the developer’s financial standing, equity funding capacity, and institutional or private financing relationships, as well as a review of their project experience in terms of project size and complexity in relation to the proposed project. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES We are passionate champions of effective economic development, well before it became the widely popular essential service of local government after the COVID-19 crisis. We see our role as technicians and advisors, collaborating with our clients using the necessary but imperfect tools available to communities today. From developing outcome-focused strategies informed by data and community voices to working as an extension of staff to work closely with small businesses and your local partners, RSG possesses the knowledge and experience to plan, execute, and fine-tune your economic development priorities. RSG clients are often communities where businesses and the workforce are underserved by state and federal programs, where poverty, gentrification, and displacement pose threats to households daily. RSG’s economic development clients have included urban, full-service cities creating innovation hubs and transforming industries, to poverty stricken suburban communities recovering from displacement of manufacturing and disinvestment, communities that rely on a robust tourism industry threatened by climate change and recession, to rural and agricultural towns seeking to attract investment and jobs to diversify and offer employment pathways to young adults who must chose to leave for work. We are not only consultants in the field, but leaders in the industry as well. We give voice to the challenges our clients and communities face in California as active members of CALED and develop and influence legislative initiatives actively. We share your stories of success with other clients to build capacity and broader successes in the state. Like you, we hope our successes make us obsolete someday where businesses and households can enjoy the fruits of their hard work and drive, but until then, we are proud to be part of a challenging field that brings out the best in us.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
5 Creating and Achieving Strategic Goals Gone are the days of voluminous studies that sit in attractive binders on a shelf. As an economic developer, you have many possible projects and opportunities, but which do you focus on now with the resources you have available? This is the fundamental question that RSG aims to answer when we prepare strategic plans for our clients. Using data and the informed stories of your businesses and households, we approach strategic planning as an exercise in prioritization and transparency. We study broader economic trends on wages, workforce needs, real estate, infrastructure, and land use policy. With our knowledge and relationships across California, we help you expand your capacity by using the strategic planning process to strengthen your partnerships with chamber, business association, state, and federal representatives. We embrace the political realities of working in local government and emphasize the needs for short-term and immediate actions oriented towards a consensus built long term vision of the community’s future. Because we are using your tax dollars, we believe ardently that the public and taxpayers deserve at least annual reports on the outcomes achieved and the necessary adjustments to the policies and goals that must take place. Response and Recovery Actions With the COVID-19 economic crisis, reprioritization is a way of life now. RSG is helping our clients update economic development websites and communication tools to more effectively reach the business community, administer small business emergency grant programs, and identify a targeted action plan to industry sectors more vulnerable to the short- and long-term effects of the pandemic and recession. We can help you sort out what is next for your economic development program once the grants have been given away and the businesses are reopened to a new reality that is still uncertain. Expanding Your Financing Tools We know of few places where economic development program funds are part of any annual operating budget for a city or county; yet dedicated resources are critical to success of many projects. Today’s tax increment financing tools are a far cry from the robust resources that hundreds of California communities had prior to the loss of redevelopment nearly 10 years ago. RSG helps our clients understand today’s “alphabet soup” of tax increment financing options: EIFD, CRIA, AHA, NIFTI, and others to ascertain which of these is right for your community. We prepare feasibility studies to estimate the potential capacity, costs, and benefits, while showcasing the need for critical partnerships with other taxing agencies to make these resources more bountiful. We are able to draw upon our 3 decades of experience in tax increment financing plus expertise in the current financing tools to help you decide which of these may best fit your needs. Beyond tax increment financing, RSG also assists our clients pursue a variety of grants from state and federal programs to address technical assistance needs, Brownfields assessment and cleanup, and infrastructure funding. RSG also prepares reports entitlement jurisdictions qualify areas for CDBG eligibility under the HUD’s Slum/Blight criteria, enabling them to collect additional Federal block grant dollars for reinvestment in communities.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
6 Designing Community Benefit and Public-Private Partnerships (P3) While it has its shortcomings for some, capitalism does afford the opportunity to leverage private investment to achieve meaningful public benefits, be they diversification of the local tax base, development of workforce and affordable housing, construction of new public facilities, and other local needs. RSG is able to help your community understand the potential value of these partnerships to the public by using real estate investment analysis to ensure that any public benefit is reasonable and accounts for the ongoing fiscal impacts of the project. RSG’s clients have relied on our analysis to evaluate potential site-specific subsidies from the taxes generated in order to incentivize the creation of jobs, investment, and community benefits. In some cases, our clients have realized a yield on the public investment of anywhere from 10 to 100 percent of the public investment. Under California Health and Safety Code Section 53083, public agencies that assist projects today must prepare an economic development subsidy report and make this report available to the public prior to approving an agreement. RSG prepares these reports, including the fiscal and economic impacts related to the project, and works frequently with the IMPLAN model to extrapolate direct, indirect, and induced employment and investment impacts of new projects. Special Studies Change is inevitable, even in communities that have enjoyed decades of economic success. RSG’s clients have asked us to study the long-term opportunities for diversification of tourist economies, emerging life sciences, expansion of cannabis industries, and the creation of local small business incubators to help entrepreneurs bring about the businesses of tomorrow. These special studies are based on credible data on workforce needs, employment demands, real estate, and other factors that influence decisions of businesses to choose where they locate. Often, RSG’s work involves not only a market analysis and absorption forecast, but also recommendations to policy makers on land uses, local tax and fee regulations, and strategic partnerships needed with educational, government, and industry representatives. RSG also uses “Fiscal DNA” analysis of general fund revenues to help a city understand the taxes that sustain their operations and how these compare to neighboring cities – shedding new light on a different path to understanding economic development strengths and opportunities in communities. Program Implementation Resources for economic development are scarce, so it is difficult for some communities to make an ongoing commitment for staffing to carryout the day-to-day duties of being an economic developer. For some of our local economic development clients, RSG functions as an extension of staff, meeting with businesses, promoting programs and organizing updates for social media and the general public. We help staff be more effective by taking on outreach to SBA, SBDC, SCORE, and other regional or state partners. In one community, we helped attract SCORE to host workshops with the City and Chamber to help small businesses with business planning, capital budgeting, and other entrepreneurship fundamentals. In another, we coordinated the first workshop with small Latinx business owners to discuss their needs for technical assistance. List of Recent Economic Development Engagements • Belmont Economic Development Advisory Services (ongoing)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
7 • San Carlos Life Science Developments Community Benefit Agreement Advisory Services (ongoing) • Carlsbad Economic Revitalization and Development Strategy (underway) • Corona Economic Development Strategic Plan (underway) • Inland Valley Development Authority – CRIA Formation Services (underway) • El Monte TIF Study (April 2022) • Economic Resources Corporation Strategic Plan (Nonprofit Economic Developer based in Los Angeles County) (March 2022) • Los Angeles (City & County) West LA Courthouse Community Benefit and Wage Impact Study (December 2021) • Bellflower PBID Consulting Services (July 2021) • Big Bear Airport District Economic Impact Analysis (June 2021) • Innovate78 Strategic Planning Facilitation Services (April 2021) • Los Angeles (City of) Shared Kitchen Incubator Study (December 2020) • Westminster Small Business Recovery Grant Program Administration (December 2020) • Anaheim Business Attraction and Retention Strategy (April 2020) • Greater Palm Springs CVB Industry Cluster Marketing Strategy (January 2020) • Belmont Economic Development Action Plan (September 2019) • Los Angeles HCID Slum/Blight Analysis (October 2018) • Irwindale Economic Development Strategy (August 2018) • South Gate Economic Development Strategy (June 2018) • Avenal Economic Development Advisory Services (March 2018) • Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation – Bioscience Cluster Development Implementation Plan (June 2017) • Stockton EIFD/CRIA Feasibility Study (April 2017) • Sacramento (County of) South Sacramento EIFD/CRIA Feasibility Study (February 2017) • Stockton Interim Services - Economic Development Program Administration (January 2017) • Pico Rivera Economic Development Strategy (August 2016) • Santa Ana Economic Development Strategic Plan (August 2016) • Los Angeles (City of) EIFD Formation Policy (February 2016) • Fountain Valley Economic Development Services (February 2016)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
8 HOUSING SERVICES At RSG, we believe housing is a basic human right and the foundation of a stable and successful community. We are passionate about creating opportunities for residents to live in housing they can afford, helping to provide the necessary platform to nurture and protect quality of life for all residents. RSG understands the critical role that housing and in particular, affordable housing, for all income levels plays. Affordable housing is the key to providing residents with the income to support other needs and stimulate economic development in their communities, allowing children a safe place to return to after school and a greater chance of attaining educational success, and allowing individuals a place to call home and recharge after work. Without an adequate supply of affordable housing, communities are deprived of the opportunity to thrive and issues like homelessness, overcrowding, and economic decline can take hold. We see our role as technicians, advisors, and extensions of staff to local governments and developers, sharing a common vision of producing and maintaining healthy and affordable housing in communities. As practitioners, we know firsthand that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to California’s housing crisis and are ready to dig in and help our clients find solutions that work best for them. RSG’s housing clients have included cities, counties, housing successor agencies, housing authorities, and developers. We have experience working in coastal communities, major cities, urban areas, Central Valley agricultural communities, islands, and rural areas from Southern to Northern California. We are adept at brainstorming and developing strategies and programs, implementing and overseeing affordable housing programs and developments, performing complex affordable housing underwriting, identifying gap financing resources, and ensuring compliance with State and Federal guidelines. We are not only consultants in the field, but leaders in the industry as well. As active policy committee members of the San Diego Housing Federation and the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California, we give a voice to the challenges our clients and communities face in California by influencing legislative initiatives. We collaborate with industry leaders, other consulting firms, and community stakeholders throughout the state to share local success stories, build capacity and broader successes in the state, and remove impediments to communities’ ability to reach housing goals. Like you, we hope to solve the housing crisis in California and live in communities where all populations are adequately served and housed. We know there is a ton of work to do and here at RSG we are ready to roll-up our sleeves up and get to it! Creating and Achieving Strategic Planning Goals Affordable housing can uplift and transform a community not only through elevating residents’ quality of life, but also, increasing diversity, improving neighboring property values, and attracting more businesses and jobs. Understanding community needs and the role strategic planning plays is a key step in advancing the development of affordable housing. RSG evaluates community needs by understanding State and Federal housing goals and requirements, evaluating local housing element goals and RHNA requirements, evaluating local market opportunities and constraints, assessing local community demand and demographics, and understanding local politics and staffing resources. RSG fully understands the nuances involved in developing both short- and long-term affordable housing strategies and market studies. We help our clients identify appropriate development programming alternatives, explore policy implementation, and identify available financial and real property resources to help reach goals. We work closely with our clients to formulate precise, accurate, and project-specific solutions and analyses.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
9 Affordable Housing Underwriting and Gap Financing Resources Developing affordable housing is more of an art than a science and each project comes with its own unique issues to ensure that gap financing is secured. We work behind the scenes to help our clients navigate through the complex task of developing affordable housing. RSG advises on crafting appropriate development programs, including funding assistance strategies that balance the developer and community’s interests. Development programming evaluations are performed to identify financially feasible opportunities and examine alternatives that will result in projects having long-term economic viability while fulfilling the community’s development goals and objectives. Based on our long-standing relationships with California’s community development field, we can identify and facilitate meetings with the affordable housing community to assist in project financing. RSG has experience with single-family ownership, multifamily rental apartments, and mixed-use development projects that leverage multiple funding sources, including housing asset funds (LMIHAF), state and federal low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC), and other local funding sources, such as HOME, CDBG, PHC, NSP, HOPE VI, MHP, AHP, and inclusionary housing in-lieu fees, as well as other resources. We guide our clients through the financing process to best leverage local public financial assistance. Real Estate Development Programming and Transaction Structuring Nothing substitutes for knowledge, creativity, and experience when negotiating agreements for affordable housing transactions. In-depth knowledge of applicable laws and regulations, including requirements under the Government Code and other state and federal real estate regulations, coupled with broad experience in preparing development agreements are essential to bringing a project to life. RSG has assisted clients in programming analyses, assembling sites, relocating residents, soliciting developer proposals, and negotiating and drafting disposition agreements. Our staff is well versed in navigating the landscape of real estate in the sphere of affordable housing and we possess the insight and expertise required to help our clients make informed decisions and execute transactions with certainty. Program Administration Affordable housing helps to support the physical, mental, and social well-being of residents and therefore, residents often look to their communities for local support to secure, maintain, and provide affordable housing. RSG is well versed in developing and facilitating affordable housing programs, having assisted many communities with establishing rehabilitation loan programs and first-time homebuyer programs. We work with our clients to tailor programs to the specific needs of the community and identify financial resources to fund such programs. We monitor and track available funding sources that could be resources to local communities to ensure that we always keep a pulse on the industry. Our team is proficient in working with lenders to ensure homebuyer eligibility and working collaboratively to execute loan documents. Our services span from program design to program implementation. We work closely with our clients to help formulate programs and processes that best fit the overall housing needs of their communities. State and Federal Regulatory Compliance We understand that regulatory compliance and reporting is a critical aspect of a local government’s housing responsibilities. Our redevelopment agency roots have positioned our team well to address regulatory compliance and reporting needs. Understanding this work can be burdensome, time-consuming, and complex for some communities, RSG works closely with our clients to ensure that all annual reporting for Housing Successor Agencies, Housing
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
10 Authorities, and Cities is completed each year. As the State legislature continues to tighten up on local government housing production and compliance with annual reporting and regulatory compliance, it is imperative that reports accurately reflect community progress towards meeting housing goals. We have hands-on experience in the administration of public agencies’ affordable housing activities for multi-family rental projects and homebuyer assistance programs. RSG ensures that program and project operations are consistent with an applicable bond or other applicable financing provisions, including oversight of a project’s financial status, tenant income recertifications, and affordability requirements, together with annual compliance monitoring and regulatory reporting. We understand the importance of these reporting tools and assist our clients with getting into and maintaining compliance. We strive to have all of our clients audit-ready and off any state “naughty list”! RSG has been in the affordable housing arena for over 40 years and intimately understands what it takes to see a project come to fruition and maintain affordability. Aside from our in-depth experience in multiple facets of affordable housing, we see providing housing services as an opportunity to embrace, inspire, and create the changes so desperately needed and deserved in communities all across the state. To put it simply, we are passionate about affordable housing! FISCAL HEALTH SERVICES For RSG, Fiscal Health is about more than just numbers – it’s about community livelihood. We think of fiscal health as the oxygen of a community. A local government with a robust fiscal health is able to fully function to meet the needs of its residents and businesses, while those struggling must meet the same demands but with limited capability. Either way, RSG strives to add clarity when performing our fiscal health services. Our staff recognizes value in presenting financial data that is not only accurate but insightful to decision makers, be they investors in municipal financings, elected officials weighing the consequences in the policy choices available, or the public seeking transparency in a complex manner in which local services are funded. Communities need to be served by their local government as this is not just a luxury, it is a right. Having worked with a variety of communities, we see those that suffer from a lack of resources strive to rise above their circumstances and find resolution. Underprivileged cities lack the financial resources required to help build and sustain communities capable of offering their residents amenities like municipal services, senior services, economic development programs and affordable housing, among other basic needs. Through our fiscal health services, we strive to pave the way for those communities and help them obtain access to the same services as communities who do not face those same struggles. Our overall goal is to help empower cities by providing them with the tools they need to help their communities thrive and have access to the resources needed to secure sustainability and quality of life. Effective Redevelopment Dissolution With our extensive and deep background in redevelopment, RSG is proud that we are trusted advisors to more successor agencies than any other firm in the state. In this capacity, we work as an efficient extension of staff, providing technical, management, and administrative services. This includes preparation of PPAs and ROPS, as well as staff reports, resolutions, cash flow statements, and presentation material. We often present these items to decision makers on behalf of clients, making the burdensome and often confusing process easier on a finance department. In addition to efficiency, we also offer a wide variety of expertise in working with
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
11 so many agencies enabling RSG to provide insights and suggestions to meeting a successor agency’s specific and often unique needs effectively. Helping Secure Financing Often as an extension of our expertise with tax increment financing and successor agencies, RSG performs fiscal consulting and continuing disclosure services for many of our clients. Since 1979, RSG has served as an independent fiscal consultant on over 235 tax allocation bonds and similar financings, representing over $5.8 billion in debt issued or refunded. As one of our founders Kathy Rosenow once said, “Anyone with a computer can prepare revenue projections.” We are experienced in preparing tax increment revenue projections that delineate taxing agency payments, administrative costs, project funds, and bonding capacity. RSG knows the nuances and importance of each assumption and variable. That can make a big difference when it comes to sizing a bond and getting the best interest rate and reducing costs of issuance. After bonds are issued, RSG prepares continuing disclosure reports on behalf of our clients. Given our familiarity with the underlying data sources and required components, RSG can cost effectively ensure compliance with your financial reporting requirements. RSG also acts as a Dissemination Agent, posting the Annual Report for the FY and if needed, filing a notice of significant events to the Electronic Municipal Market Access database. Studying Fiscal Impacts Fiscal stability is one of the key drivers for revenue and expenses available to communities. The road to achieving financial efficiency often starts with fiscal impact analysis and forecasting, be it for a city, a department or division, or a specific development project. RSG’s financial projection services have been used to develop long-range fiscal studies to ensure that the General Plan build out is economically feasible, develop short-and-long range budget forecasts, and develop program strategies. Fiscal impact analysis is used to inform communities about the implications of discretionary approvals of development proposals, provide a data-driven foundation for incentivizing investment when necessary, and empower decision makers to have a basis for community benefit negotiations, often needed more than ever to mitigate gentrification risks. Our models allow the public and private sector to collaborate on viable solutions where needed beyond the ribbon cutting. Expanding Financial Capacity Because not all communities enjoy the benefits of a robust economy all the time, RSG is asked to assist in finding new sources of financing for projects and entice more private investment into communities. RSG can also identify potential financing and funding sources for various projects and programs that need to be implemented. These activities include identifying and researching the feasibility of obtaining grants, creating programs and incentives for local investment, and negotiating and devising public-private partnerships. Finally, RSG helps our clients understand today’s “alphabet soup” of tax increment financing options: EIFD, CRIA, AHA, NIFTI, and others to ascertain which of these is right for your community. We prepare feasibility studies to estimate the potential capacity, costs, and benefits, while showcasing the need for critical partnerships with other taxing agencies to make these resources more bountiful. We draw upon our 4 decades of experience in tax increment financing plus expertise in the current financing tools to help you decide which of these may best fit your communities’ needs.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
12 Preparing Municipal Service Reviews and Special Studies RSG has provided cutting-edge solutions for local government agencies, including outsourcing, shared service studies, and long-range fiscal planning. We have helped LAFCOs develop policies for island annexations and have worked with cities on crafting a viable path in delivering services to areas in their sphere of influence. We have helped cities understand how they need to restructure the services they deliver, and the manner in which they evaluate how they will take discretionary actions in the future. With our assistance, our clients have been able to instill more fiscal discipline at all levels of their organization, become more effective, and have staff engaged in identifying solutions that meet the strategic needs of their community. Throughout various project engagements, we have both participated in and observed how MSRs have unfolded, including changes to the MSR statute and how LAFCOs have implemented MSRs in a variety of manners. In some situations, a lack of growth pressure or lack of significant changes in service levels do not warrant an extensive review and a “checklist” approach is sufficient to reaffirm an existing SOI. In other situations, a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of demographic trends, financial data, infrastructure capacity/conditions, rate structures, service extension barriers for “disadvantaged unincorporated communities,” and shared service delivery alternatives is warranted to lay the groundwork for SOI updates and/or imminent changes of (re)organization. And in other situations, there may be a political minefield and the MSR is a necessary tool that allows LAFCO to play independent facilitator and evaluator and bring parties together around common data and agreement points. Evaluating Reorganization, Annexation or Incorporation Proposals Occasionally, how communities deliver services goes beyond the capacity of the agencies responsible for those services today, and local government and LAFCOs engage RSG to assist in the independent review of the fiscal and operational implications of proposals to annex, incorporate or reorganize local agencies. RSG has significant experience in providing extensive analysis of the potential municipal impacts associated with annexation and reorganization. RSG first seeks to understand the merits of the primary assumptions behind the prospect. Second, RSG reviews the major cost areas that are not a revenue offset, outlining more realistic approaches to projecting these costs. We conclude the study with final suggestions obtained from conducting a preliminary review of the costs and benefits associated with annexing or reorganizing. RSG’s work products have led to many successful changes in local agency organization and withstood scrutiny of the public, decision makers, and even the State Controller. Recent Fiscal Health Product Line Assignments INCORPORATION STUDIES San Joaquin LAFCO Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis – Mountain House Incorporation (Underway) Malaga County Water District / Malaga (Fresno Co.) Initial Fiscal Analysis – Malaga Incorporation (Completed 2018) Placer LAFCO Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis – Olympic Valley Incorporation (Completed 2015)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
13 San Bernardino LAFCO Rim Communities Incorporation Feasibility Study (Completed 2015) MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS Orange LAFCO Southwest Region MSR Update (Underway) West Region MSR Update (Underway) Siskiyou LAFCO Fire Services MSR Update (Underway) Riverside LAFCO 28 City MSR and SOI Update (Scheduled July 2022 Completion) Los Angeles LAFCO La Mirada and Whittier MSR and SOI Update (Completed 2021) Consolidated Fire Protection District MSR and SOI Update (Completed 2020) Yolo LAFCO Water Districts MSR and SOI Update (Completed 2013) ANNEXATION STUDIES City of Huntington Beach (Orange Co.) Bolsa Chica Annexation Study (Completed 2009, Updated 2013, New Update Underway) City of Martinez (Contra Costa Co.) Sphere of Influence Annexation Study (Completed 2021) Alhambra Valley / North Pacheco Annexation Study (Completed 2015) City of San Carlos (San Mateo Co.) 252 Club Drive Annexation (Completed 2020) Hyde Park Estates Annexation (Completed 2019) Cranfield Annexation (Completed 2015) City of Belmont (San Mateo Co.) Old County Rd/Harbor Bl Annexation (Completed 2021) 1304 Elmer Street Annexation (Completed 2018) Desert Healthcare District (Riverside Co.) AB 2414 Annexation Fiscal Analysis (Completed 2017) Berger Foundation / Cathedral City (Riverside Co.)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
14 SOI Expansion and Annexation Fiscal Analysis (Completed 2013) OTHER REORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES City of Portola / Local Emergency Services Study Group (Plumas Co.) Portola/East Plumas Fire Protection Reorganization (Underway, with Planwest Partners) County of San Bernardino CSA 79 Reorganization Fiscal Analysis (Completed 2018, Updated in 2022) City of Nevada City (Nevada Co.) SOI Update and Annexation Plan (Completed 2017) OTHER FISCAL OR OPERATIONAL STUDIES March Joint Powers Authority (Riverside Co.) JPA Sunsetting Services (Underway)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
15 CALAFCO Update Map of Statewide Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (Completed 2022) Riverside LAFCO Update Map of Statewide Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (Completed 2021) City of Carlsbad (San Diego Co.) Custodial Service Level Study (Completed 2020) Public Works Paint Shop Cost Benefits Analysis (Completed 2016) Public Works Department Lines of Business Operational Study (Completed 2013) Street & Signal Maintenance Division Business Plan (Completed 2011) City of Irwindale (Los Angeles Co.) General Fund Fiscal Plan and Sustainability Model (Completed 2018) City of Grand Terrace (San Bernardino Co.) General Fund Sustainability Analysis (Completed 2011) City of South Gate (Los Angeles Co.) Housing Division Efficiency Study (Completed 2021) FISCAL/ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS City of San Carlos (San Mateo Co.) 642 Quarry Road Life Sciences Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) *^ 405 Industrial Life Sciences Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) *^ 803-851 Old County Road Life Sciences Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) *^ 501 Industrial Hotel Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) *^ Alexandria District Phase II Life Sciences Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) *^ 1030 Brittan / MBC Biolabs Project (Completed 2020) *^ 888 Bransten Life Sciences Project (Completed 2020) *^ 655 Skyway Airport Hangar/Office Project (Completed 2020) *^ 1091 Industrial Hotel Project (Completed 2017) Trestle / Transit Village Mixed Use Project (Completed 2018) ^ Marriott Residence Inn / Landmark Hotel Project (Completed 2016) *^ Alexandria District Phase I / Windy Hill (Completed 2015) *^ * Included feasibility analysis ^ Included community benefits analysis
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
16 City of Los Angeles, Office of Chief Legislative Analyst Venice Hope Mixed Use Project (Completed 2020) * AECOM Capital Hotel Project (Completed 2019) * Grand Avenue Los Angeles Mixed Use Project (Completed 2016) * Westfield Village at Topanga (Completed 2012) * * Included feasibility analysis Toll Bros Multifamily (Orange Co.) Dana Point Multifamily Project (Scheduled 2022 Completion) Santa Ana 4th & Main Mixed Use Project (Completed 2019) Vineyards Development / Santa Ana (Orange Co.) Bowery (Santa Ana) Multifamily Project (Completed 2020) 2525 Main Multifamily (Santa Ana) Project (Completed 2019) Dyer Road / Heritage (Santa Ana) Multifamily Project (Completed 2015) The Concord Group 4th & Cabrillo (Santa Ana) Mixed Use Project (Completed 2020) 4th & Mortimer (Santa Ana) Mixed Use Project (Completed 2020) Town Madison (Madison, AL) Interchange (Completed 2020) 651 Sunflower / Legacy (Santa Ana) Multifamily Project (Completed 2019) The Gulch / Atlanta Mixed Use Project (Completed 2017) Ridgeline (San Bernardino) Retail Project (Completed 2015) Basking Ridge Development (Basking Ridge NJ) (Completed 2015) East Hartford (CN) Outlet Mall (Completed 2015) City of Belmont (San Mateo Co.) Artisan Crossing Mixed Use Project (Completed 2018)
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
17 KEY STAFF The team would be led by Jim Simon, Principal. Mr. Simon would be assisted by RSG staff members Suzy Kim, Mark Sawicki, Kevin Ham and Brandon Fender. Additional RSG staff will be assigned support roles as needed. Resumes of key consulting staff assigned to this engagement are on the following pages. APPROACH TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT The staff at RSG strives to be trusted advisors to our clients, providing them with essential data and guidance. At the root of our services is the innate desire of our staff members to seek answers, and in every engagement, our clients’ questions become our own. What should we do? How do we get there? What is best for our community? Our staff’s problem-solving skills are products of training and experience, but it is also our tenacious desire to unearth practical solutions that pervades our corporate conscience. RSG dedicates a Principal to each project assignment and creates a core group of project managers and staff who work on the individual assignments on a consistent basis throughout all stages of the contract engagement. Our staff is focused, committed, and passionate about the work we do. We conduct our engagements around our Core Values and are proud of it. We pride ourselves on our ability to appropriately allocate our time and resources to ensure that a project is completed on time and within budget. PROJECT AND TEAM MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RSG manages staff allocation weekly to ensure that clients experience consistent, timely, and high-quality services. When responding to a proposal, RSG considers the expertise needed as well as the availability of personnel and makes assignments at that stage—even before getting a contract. This early commitment of resources minimizes the personnel turnover on engagements, so clients have a consistent team of consultants working on their project. Each month, employees submit a forecast of their three-month (3) workload (after collaborating with project managers and principals) to RSG’s resource management team for a review of overall hourly commitments to ensure adequate time allocation for the highest quality work products. Project management is a critical part to RSG’s operations, and we use several tools that all consulting staff employ as part of their daily activities. RSG employs WorkFlowMax, a project and time management application, daily to manage and track hours and milestones on assignments. On a weekly basis, all RSG team members provide updates on each project assignment in Microsoft Teams, and the Principals conduct weekly one-on-one meetings with each of our staff to review all assignments, actual hours, projected hours, and deliverables to ensure jobs are completed on time, within budget, and at our quality standards.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) JIM SIMON Principal & President 714.316.2120 [email protected]
www.webrsg.com | 17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350, Irvine CA 92614 | 714.541.4585 PROFILE “With determination and imagination, I serve myself and others to discover our capacity for what is possible by designing solutions for a complex world so we can cherish and nurture our communities.” OUT & ABOUT CALED 40 at 40 Honoree for contributions to California Economic Development Co-Chair, CALED EDFRE Technical Committee Member, CALED Legislative Committee “Business Retention and Attraction” – Advanced Certification Program Instructor (CALED) “Community Economic Development” – Keys Program Housing California ABOUT JIM Inspired to improve the Golden State in his work, Jim delivers intelligence, innovation, and passion to projects requiring his unparalleled expertise in fiscal health, real estate, and economic development. For over 30 years, Jim is proud to have led projects that have resulted in the investment of over $10 billion in private and public capital, transforming cities and communities across California. As President of RSG, Jim is helping to shape the next generation of the firm’s legacy - leading RSG’s team of inspired, creative and insightful consultants that serve over 100 communities each year.
EDUCATION Jim joined RSG in 1991 and has served as a Principal and shareholder since 2001. He received a BA in Business Administration with a concentration in entrepreneurial management from California State University, Fullerton. In 2014, Jim was selected as an Advisory Board member of the California Association for Local Economic Development, where he serves as Co-Chair of CALED’s Economic Development, Real Estate and Finance technical committee. Jim is also an Advisory member of the Legislative Committee for the California Association of LAFCOs (CALAFCO), and active in other professional organizations including NAIOP, ICSC, NPH, and SCANPH.
RECENT ENGAGEMENTS Oversaw acquisition and disposition of housing authority and housing successor assets in South Gate, including the surplus land act purchase of a 1 acre site from the LA County Office of Education. Prepared fiscal impact analysis for several annexations proposals within city SOIs, including Martinez, San Carlos, and Belmont. Served as engagement manager for the most recent incorporation comprehensive fiscal analysis (Olympic Valley, Placer County) in which RSG’s work withstood substantial public scrutiny including DOF review. Evaluated development proposals for the acquisition and development on behalf of the City and County of Los Angeles for the mixed used, mixed income redevelopment of the West LA Courthouse and Civic Center.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) SUZY KIM Director 714.316.2116 [email protected]
www.webrsg.com | 17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350, Irvine CA 92614 | 714.541.4585 PROFILE “I value the close relationships I develop with clients while creating solutions driven by a genuine interest in improving our communities.” OUT & ABOUT California Community Economic Development Association Association of California Cities Orange County (ACCOC) Orange County Business Council California Association for Local Economic Development Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California Housing California San Diego Housing Federation ABOUT SUZY Since joining RSG in 2006, Suzy has collaborated with over 80 jurisdictions throughout California, from rural unincorporated areas to large coastal cities. She has a broad range of expertise; her work ranges from creating economic development strategies, implementing loan programs to assist low-income homeowners, underwriting affordable housing financing requests, marketing City properties to meet placemaking goals, and monitoring the fiscal health of public funds. Suzy is a talented project manager who prides herself on producing quality work for clients that responds to the unique needs of each project. She challenges herself to constantly evolve and learn from the diverse range of projects we have the privilege of working on at RSG. Suzy is inspired by clients and colleagues who are passionate about creating positive change in the world.
EDUCATION Suzy joined RSG in 2006. She received a dual BA in Sociology and Asian American Studies from Scripps College, and a Master of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of California, Irvine. Suzy anchors RSG’s Berkeley office and has worked from the Bay Area since 2009.
RECENT ENGAGEMENTS Lead property disposition efforts for city-owned properties subject to surplus lands, housing successor, and redevelopment dissolution requirements. Advise on navigating multiple complex legal requirements while listing properties for sale, soliciting offers, and negotiating sales agreements. Recently assisted Merced, Pinole, Pleasant Hill, and Tulare in such efforts. The sales have culminated in market rate and affordable housing projects, and commercial projects that meet economic development goals. Created an Offering Memorandum for a P3 project in the City of Rancho Cordova. The City offered $35 million and City-owned land to create a vibrant mixed-use district. Coordinated proposal requirements, Bidder’s Conference, and proposal submission.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) MARK SAWICKI Director 714.316.2194 [email protected] www.webrsg.com | 17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350, Irvine CA 92614 | 714.541.4585 PROFILE “I am at my best solving complicated problems, being both logical and creative, as I seek to understand, enhance, and improve programs, policies, systems and organizations for the benefit of California communities.” OUT & ABOUT Urban Land Institute (ULI) San Francisco Planning and Urban Research (SPUR) Municipal Managers Association of Northern California (MMANC) California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (NPH) San Diego Housing Federation Housing California ABOUT MARK Mark seeks to understand complex matters through analysis, synthesizing and summarizing information, developing effective, efficient, and pragmatic policy solutions, and presenting them in clear and persuasive ways. Mark has forged a unique 30+ year career across both the public and private sectors, from real estate asset management and small business startups to economic and community development, which informs his approach to municipal consulting services. His work includes real estate advisory services, developer selection and negotiations, public private partnerships, affordable housing development, fiscal and economic impact analyses, municipal service reviews, and economic development policy analysis. Mark joined RSG in 2020 after leadership roles in economic development, community development, workforce development, and housing with the cities of Oakland, Vallejo, and San Carlos. He was previously a San Francisco Bay Area-based consultant for California cities, counties, and redevelopment agencies. Mark was appointed and served five years on the Housing Advisory Commission with the City of Berkeley and currently serves on the Budget Advisory Commission with the City of Oakland. Earlier in his career he managed a national portfolio of real estate limited partnership investments and co-founded an outsourced financial consulting and accounting firm.
EDUCATION Mark earned a Masters in Public Policy from the Goldman School at the University of California, Berkeley, and a Bachelor of Science in Finance, cum laude, from New York University, as well as a Certificate in Real Estate Finance and Analysis from NYU.
RECENT ENGAGEMENTS Evaluated proposals to acquire and convert market rate housing into restricted middle-income housing under three Joint Powers Authority bond financing programs for Irvine Community Land Trust, and the cities of Chula Vista, Pleasant Hill, and South Gate.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) KEVIN HAM Director 714.316.2137 [email protected]
www.webrsg.com | 17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350, Irvine CA 92614 | 714.541.4585 PROFILE “I firmly believe relevant experience with a positive outlook can win the day. I appreciate the differences that make each community unique and look to foster and amplify those qualities for their benefit. Find your strengths and share them with the world!” OUT & ABOUT California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) International Economic Development Council’s (IEDC) – CEcD and HLM California Academy or Local Economic Development (The Academy) – Regent and Treasurer Vista Community Clinic Community - Board of Trustees San Diego Food Bank – North County Advisory Board ABOUT KEVIN Kevin was born in Detroit, Michigan and has spent most of his life in San Diego County. Kevin enjoys working on complex issues with diverse parties. Kevin’s 35+ years of experience has been in multiple fields. He has worked in local government, state government, nonprofits, and the private sector. Kevin has worked in the fields of transportation, health care, insurance, retail, economic development, redevelopment, community development, and has co-owned a computer import and retail sales and support company. He has also dedicated time to non-profits in the fields of healthcare, food insecurity, transportation, and economic Development. He has served as the past Chair of California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) and is the current Treasurer for the California Academy for Local Economic Development (The Academy). Kevin also teaches college level courses in planning and economic development. Kevin has been recognized with multiple awards including the prestigious International Economic Development Council’s (IEDC) Jeffrey A Finkel award.
EDUCATION Kevin began work with RSG in 2022 after leadership roles in economic development and transportation for the cities of Vista, Coronado, and a transportation partnership of several cities in North San Diego County. Kevin holds the designation of CEcD from International Economic Development Councils (IEDC), the ACE designation from the California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED), and the CED designation from San Diego State University. Kevin graduated Suma Cum Lauda from National University with a Bachelor of Business Arts and an emphasis in Marketing. RECENT ENGAGEMENTS - Relevant pre-RSG Key architect of a five-city economic development initiative called Innovate 78. This initiative involved bringing together five cities to create a brand strategy/marketing plan and an annual program of work. Although councils and staff have changed and the program of work, we've been able to maintain the partnership for over eight years.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting) BRANDON FENDER Associate 714.316.2106 [email protected]
www.webrsg.com | 17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350, Irvine CA 92614 | 714.541.4585 PROFILE “I enjoy creating equitable and sustainable urban spaces for communities. I thrive in a challenging environment and seek to provide innovative solutions.” OUT & ABOUT Advisory Board member for the CALAFCO Legislative Committee International Council of Shopping Centers San Diego Housing Federation Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California Housing California ABOUT BRANDON Brandon specializes in providing support in real estate feasibility, economic and fiscal impact analyses, and housing administration. He is most engaged when his research translates to solutions for local governments and access to healthy and safe environments for their citizens. In 2014, Brandon became an entrepreneur, starting the Good Beer Company, the first brewery and tasting room in Santa Ana. After five years of success from concept, to business plan and fundraising, to opening a warehouse location, Brandon sold the brewery and returned to RSG, with a direct appreciation for the life of the small business owner which he applies to his work at the firm.
EDUCATION Mr. Fender initially joined RSG in 2009 while attending the University of California, Irvine where he earned a BA in Social Ecology. As a member of numerous project teams, Mr. Fender gained experience in housing administration, economic and market analyses, housing construction and development, municipal finance, and development feasibility.
RECENT ENGAGEMENTS Formulated objective criteria for analyzing and negotiating community benefit agreements between the City of San Carlos and developers of large infill redevelopment projects, including conducting a market analysis of investment and real estate trends in that sector. Conducted a comprehensive assessment of a proposed hotel incentive agreement for the City of Los Angeles and a major developer, including evaluation of the fiscal impacts (revenues and expenditures) as well as employment and other economic impacts. Assisted the City of San Carlos with feasibility analyses and redevelopment of industrial and commercial space ultimately resulting in a 200-room midscale hotel at the City’s Landmark site. Analyzed the financial feasibility, and fiscal and economic impacts associated with the proposed development the 600,000 square foot Westfield Topanga regional mall on behalf of the City of Los Angeles.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
23 REFERENCES The projects below demonstrate RSG’s recent experience comparable to the services requested in this RFP. We encourage you to contact our references or follow up with additional questions. Real Estate Market Study and Reuse Strategies – Los Angeles County RSG was engaged by the Los Angeles County Development Authority (LACDA, formerly known as the Community Development Commission of the County of Los Angeles) on multiple projects. Tasks include: • RSG evaluated development proposals for the acquisition and development on behalf of the City and County of Los Angeles for the mixed-use, mixed-income redevelopment of the West Los Angeles Courthouse and Civic Center. • Willowbrook – RSG worked with Van Meter Williams Pollack on a real estate study to evaluate potential public-private partnership options between the Compton Unified School District and the County for redevelopment of a closed school campus near MLK Medical Center and Charles Drew University. • West Altadena – RSG completed a reuse study for the Business Technology Center, which involved a real estate market and feasibility study for the project and alternative redevelopment options for County consideration. • Assistance with RFSQ – RSG completed a Request for Statement of Qualifications for the LACDA to seek a master developer for County-owned properties along Lincoln Boulevard. Next steps in this effort included engaging stakeholders to gain input on community goals that may be shared with short-listed developers who would be invited to participate in an RFP. The services provided to the County of Los Angeles have given RSG experience in preparing market studies for multiple real estate projects, including mixed-use projects with an affordable housing component. We evaluated market conditions to help the County determine various types of development that would best suit the needs of the community. Contact: Albert Sou, Assistant Project Manager, Economic Development Unit, WDACS 213-610-4394 / [email protected] Real Estate and Economic Development Services – South Gate RSG has assisted the South Gate Successor Agency, Housing Authority and Public Works department with various real estate acquisition and disposition activities, including negotiating and preparing two building lease agreements, acquisition and due diligence on property assembly for a housing project, and broker consulting services for the disposition of former redevelopment assets. RSG employed our proprietary real estate marketing and management tools that leverages conventional commercial brokerage services with our unique insight around public agency transactions that carry with them the expectation of more than simply the highest price. In this case, we worked closely with staff to identify and prioritize criteria for disposition, listed the property, provided print and digital promotions, maintained records and provided the client with regular reports, offer summaries, presentations and negotiation points. RSG also drafted purchase and sale agreements, brochures, and signage, as well as online marketing via CoStar, Loopnet, and RSG’s website.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
24 Contact: Dianne Guevara, Formerly with City of South Gate, now Deputy Director of Community Development for City of Jurupa Valley / 951-332-6464 x203 / [email protected] Economic Development Strategic Plan - Corona RSG is creating an Economic Development Strategic Plan, focused on maximizing the effectiveness of current programs while bolstering capacity to network with businesses with RSG acting as an extension of City Economic Development staff. In collaboration with the City, RSG developed a list of 20-25 active commercial brokers and property managers and conducted surveys to ascertain how the City can improve communication and access to key resources they need, as well as understand the specific challenges their tenants are facing. RSG collected this feedback, analyzed the results, and reported back to the City on key opportunities for immediate attention. RSG then identified a representative list of small businesses in the City and suggested parameters for outreach, including industry subsector, COVID-19 closure threats, and neighborhood/commercial districts. We conducted a bilingual phone survey around issues facing these businesses and placed follow-up calls to 15 of these small businesses to seek input on key needs the business community is facing. Feedback was compiled, analyzed, and shared with staff. RSG fully engaged the resident community in Corona by creating four different resident surveys to understand the obstacles and barriers they face. Topics included workforce needs and financial wealth building; shopping, dining, and entertainment; starting or owning a business in Corona; and small business needs. RSG and the City hosted a workshop in Spanish geared towards the topics covered in these surveys in order to ensure well-rounded and inclusive input. RSG also engaged economic development partners during a public workshop to understand their working relationship to the city, capacity, and key strengths that may not be fully leveraged, as well as developed input for a SWOT analysis. As part of these interviews, RSG gained perspectives on emerging economic data findings. Throughout the development of the Strategy, RSG presented updates and received direction from Executive Leadership and City Council Committee of the Whole. Contact: Jessica Gonzales, Economic Development Director / 951-736-2297 / [email protected] Site Specific Financing/Mixed Use Projects – Los Angeles RSG served as the Chief Legislative Analyst’s (CLA) independent consultant on two site-specific subvention agreements: the $335 million Village at Westfield Topanga lifestyle center which opened in 2015, and the $950 million Frank Gehry/Grand Avenue Los Angeles project agreement negotiated with Related Companies. Both projects involved extensive analysis of the developer’s capital stack for the various uses (with Grand Avenue entailing a luxury hotel, inclusionary rental units, market rate rentals, parking, and retail/restaurant uses), evaluation of their pro forma, fiscal and economic impact analysis, and analysis of the gap in context of the City’s underwriting criteria. RSG was subsequently retained by the City and Westfield to perform a post-construction cost reconciliation for the Village project, which entailed review of the developer’s accounting records, contracts and retentions for purposes of making any adjustments to the final subvention terms. Both projects included a community benefits agreement in addition to the subvention agreement. RSG also prepared a valuation of a subordinate note held by the former CRA/LA on the Grand Central Market mixed-use project that secured the affordability of inclusionary units. Finally, RSG is frequently retained to prepare feasibility studies as part of development applications
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
25 with the City of Los Angeles Planning Department for third-party developers seeking feasibility studies for off-menu density bonus incentives. Contact: Oscar Ixco, Legislative Analyst /213.473.5705 / [email protected] City Loan Repayment and Successor Agency Services – San Pablo Successor Agency In 2021, RSG was retained by the City of San Pablo Successor Agency to prepare an analysis requested by the Department of Finance in an effort to appeal to the DOF’s rejection of a $1.9 million city advance for incorrect determinations on past ROPS by the DOF. In reviewing ROPS 21-22, DOF denied the Successor Agency’s loan repayment, which set the stage for a new attempt for ROPS 22-23. The Successor Agency has 27 separate funds and RSG had to go back and analyze trial balances, DOF determinations, RPTTF records, and other information in order to trace the reason(s) for the loan. This led to RSG reaching the conclusion that the DOF itself was at fault and provided documentation to support this. Despite the facts provided, the DOF initially denied the loan during their initial review in April 2022, which led to RSG drafting and leading the discussion in the meet and confer in which we reiterated the position of the Successor Agency and facts of the matter. In May 2022, the Successor Agency received approval for this funding and the loan will be repaid beginning on ROPS 22-23. During this process, RSG also assisted the Successor Agency with the PPA for 19-20 and preparation of the ROPS itself. RSG is now under contract with the Successor Agency to take over administration of the ROPS beginning in 2022-23. Contact: Norm Veloso, Director of Finance / 510-215-3021 / [email protected]
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
26 COMPENSATION RATES AND POLICIES Our Billing Rates are as follows: Principal / Director $ 275 Senior Associate $ 200 Associate $ 185 Senior Analyst $ 150 Analyst $ 135 Research Assistant $ 125 Technician $ 100 Clerical $ 60 RSG does not charge clients for travel or mileage (except direct costs related to field work/surveys), parking, standard telephone/fax expenses, general postage, or incidental copies. However, we do charge for messenger services, overnight shipping/express mail costs and teleconferencing services. We also charge for copies of reports, documents, notices, and support material more than five (5) copies. These costs are charged back at the actual expense plus a 10% surcharge. RSG issues monthly invoices payable upon receipt, unless otherwise agreed upon in advance. Invoices identify tasks completed to date, hours expended and the hourly rate.
6.i.3
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: Statements of Qualifications (On-Call Econ Dev Consulting)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Commissions pursuant to Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no financial impact associated with adopting the proposed Resolution.
BACKGROUND:
On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom of California proclaimed a state of emergency in response to the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID -19). Then on March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N -29-20, easing Brown Act restrictions to allow local legislative bodies to hold their meetings via teleconference. This enabled the San Carlos City Council and staff to continue to safely conduct public meetings with public participation via teleconference, while still adhering to the County of San Mateo Health Officer’s "shelter -in- place" order.
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom approved AB 361 with the goal to “improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID -19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access t hrough teleconferencing options.” The bill contains an urgency clause, which made the bill effective upon signing with a sunset date of January 1, 2024.
AB 361 allows local legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely if they met three criteria:
1. The local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor;
2. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and
3. Legislative bodies have determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
6.j
Packet Pg. 166
2 Pursuant to AB 361, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021 -093 on September 27, 2021, declaring the need for the City Council and Commission s to continue conducting remote meetings. Since October 25, 2021, the City Council has adopted a Resolution each month renewing its declaration to continue meeting remotely for the next 30 days.
As of May 9 , 2022, the City Council and Planning Commission meetings have been conducted in-person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission and Youth Advisory Council have also transitioned to in- person meetings. The Parks, Recreation and Cultur e Commission, Residential Design Review Committee, and Transportation and Circulation Commission have remained as remote meetings.
ANALYSIS:
While the City Council and Planning Commission have transitioned to in-person meetings, there are other City commissions that have opted to continue remote meetings. Adopting the proposed Resolution will provide those commissions with the option to continue remote meetings. In addition, members of the City Council and Planning Commission will have the flexibility to participate via teleconference in the event of a potential COVID -19 exposure or COVID-19 related concerns, such as an asymptomatic infection or concerns that an infection might occur at a remote location when a councilmember or commissioner has an acti ve infection. If the Council approves the proposed Resolution, staff will present a staff report to Council every thirty days to verify that the circumstances continue to exist.
If the Council does not adopt a Resolution this evening to authorize remote meetings pursuant to AB 36 1, beginning August 9, 2022, all commissions will need to transition back to in -person public meetings and any remote participation from members of the City Council and Commissions would need to be done according to the Brown Act ’s teleconferencing requirements, which include identifying the teleconference location on the agenda of the meeting and allowing members of the public to attend the meeting at the teleconference location.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the Council include:
1. Adopt a Resolution making findings and authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Commissions pursuant to AB 361; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution and proceed to transition all Commissions to in -person meetings beginning August 9, 2022; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
6.j
Packet Pg. 167
3 Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. AB 361
6.j
Packet Pg. 168
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
MAKING FINDINGS AND AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361. ____________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for broader spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19); and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services of the City of San Carlos, proclaimed the existence of a local emergency within the City; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020 -013 ratifying and extending the Director of Emergency Services’ proclamation of the existence of a local emergency caused by COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID -19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and
WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N -29-20, City staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361 into law as an urgency measure that went into effect immediately; and
WHEREAS, AB 361 authorizes local legislative bodies to continue to conduct meetings using teleconferencing without complying with the Ralph M. Brown Act’s standard teleconferencing requirements if certain conditions are met; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-093 making findings on the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue to teleconference in order to ensure the health and safety of the public; and
WHEREAS, each month since the passing of Resolution 2021-093, the City Council has reviewed the situation and adopted a Resolution renewing its declaration for the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducti ng meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361; and
WHEREAS, as of May 9 2022, the City Council and Planning Commission meetings have been conducted in -person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission and Youth Advisory Council have also transitioned to in-person meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, Residential Design Review Committee, and Transportation and Circulation Commi ssion have opted to remain as remote meetings; and
6.j.1
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: Resolution (Assembly Bill 361)
WHEREAS, adopting a Resolution making findings and authorizing the option for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361, provides Commissions who aren’t ready to meet in person the option to continue remote meetings; and
WHEREAS, adopting a Resolution making findings and authorizing the option for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting meetings rem otely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361 and provides members of the City Council and Commissions who have returned to in -person meetings with the flexibility to participate via teleconference in the event of potential COVID-19 exposure, future orders restricting attendance, a new variant causing the need to return to full remote meetings or other COVID-19 related concerns.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby makes the following findings, in compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference under the modified Brown Act requirements:
a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; b. The Governor’s proclamation for a state of emergency issued on March 4, 2020 remains in effect;
c. Full return to in -person meetings would cause imminent risk to attendees who are vulnerable or where staff or councilmembers may have an asymptomatic, or where they are only able to attend remotely due to an infection, and it would be unsafe for the public to attend at their remote meeting location; and d. State and local officials continue to strongly recommend masks be worn by all individuals in indoor settings.
*****
I, Crystal Mui, City Clerk, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 8th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
6.j.1
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: Resolution (Assembly Bill 361)
Assembly Bill No. 361
CHAPTER 165
An act to add and repeal Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, and to amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of, and to add and repeal Section 11133 of, the Government Code, relating to open meetings, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
[Approved by Governor September 16, 2021. Filed with
Secretary of State September 16, 2021.]
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 361, Robert Ri vas. Open meetings: state and local agencies:
teleconferences.
(1) Existing la w, the Ralph M. Bro wn Act requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency, as those terms are defined, be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act contains specified provisions regarding the timelines for posting an agenda and pro viding for the ability of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public.
The act generally requires all regular and special meetings of the legislative body be held within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, subject to certain exceptions. The act allows for meetings to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, that members of the public be allo wed to address the le gislative body at each teleconference location, that the le gislative body post an agenda at each teleconference location, and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the local agenc y’s jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as defined. The act authorizes the district attorney or any interested person, subject to certain pro visions, to commence an action by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of obtaining a judicial determination that specified actions taken by a legislative body are null and void.
Existing la w, the California Emer gency Services Act, authorizes the Governor, or the Director of Emer gency Services when the go vernor is inaccessible, to proclaim a state of emergency under specified circumstances.
Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the Ralph M. Bro wn Act’s requirements for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the legislative body at the meeting, and that a legislative body of a local agency has a procedure for receiving and swiftly
92 6.j.2
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for indi viduals with disabilities, as specified.
This bill, until January 1, 2024, w ould authorize a local agenc y to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Ralph M. Bro wn Act when a le gislative body of a local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emer gency, as that term is defined, when state or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, during a proclaimed state of emergency held for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and during a proclaimed state of emergency when the legislative body has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, as provided.
This bill w ould require le gislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allo w members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the le gislative body. The bill would require the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which pre vents the public agenc y from broadcasting the meeting, or in the e vent of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored. The bill would specify that actions taken during the disruption are subject to challenge proceedings, as specified.
This bill w ould prohibit the le gislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and would specify that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. The bill would prohibit the le gislative body from closing the public comment period and the opportunity to register to provide public comment, until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed, as specified. When there is a continuing state of emergency, or when state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, the bill w ould require a le gislative body to mak e specified findings not later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting pursuant to these pro visions, and to mak e those findings e very 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under these abbre viated teleconferencing procedures.
Existing law prohibits a le gislative body from requiring, as a condition to attend a meeting, a person to re gister the person’s name, or to pro vide other information, or to fulfill an y condition precedent to the person’ s attendance.
92 — 2 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
This bill would exclude from that prohibition, a registration requirement imposed by a third-party internet website or other online platform not under the control of the legislative body.
(2) Existing law, the Bagle y-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body. The act requires at least one member of the state body to be ph ysically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
The Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the requirements of the Bagle y-Keene Open Meeting Act for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic, provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allo wed to observe and address the state body at the meeting, and that a state body has a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for indi viduals with disabilities, as specified.
This bill, until January 31, 2022, w ould authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a state body to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and to mak e public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically , to all members of the public seeking to observ e and to address the state body . With respect to a state body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of e xisting law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the state body at each teleconference location. Under the bill, a state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and of fer public comment. The bill w ould require that each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as pro vided. The bill w ould urge state bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(3) Existing law establishes the various campuses of the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and authorizes the establishment of student body organizations in connection with the operations of California State University campuses.
The Gloria Romero Open Meetings Act of 2000 generally requires a legislative body, as defined, of a student body or ganization to conduct its business in a meeting that is open and public. The act authorizes the legislative body to use teleconferencing, as defined, for the benefit of the public and the legislative body in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law.
This bill, until January 31, 2022, w ould authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a le gislative body, as defined for purposes of the act, to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and 92 Ch. 165 — 3 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
to mak e public meetings accessible telephonically , or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body. With respect to a le gislative body holding a public meeting pursuant to these pro visions, the bill w ould suspend certain requirements of e xisting la w, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location.
Under the bill, a le gislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically w ould satisfy an y requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and of fer public comment. The bill w ould require that each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pro vide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge legislative bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(4) This bill would declare the Le gislature’s intent, consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20, to impro ve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future emergencies by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options.
(5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by AB 339 to be operative only if this bill and AB 339 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts la ws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (7) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (8) This bill w ould declare that it is to tak e effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 89305.6 is added to the Education Code, to read:
89305.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other pro vision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a legislative body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing 92 — 4 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
and mak e public meetings accessible telephonically , or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body.
(b) (1) For a le gislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the le gislative body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a le gislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the le gislative body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the legislative body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observ e and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically , consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdi visions (d) and (e), shall ha ve satisfied any requirement that the le gislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A legislative body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a legislative body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the legislative body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from indi viduals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving an y doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is gi ven of the means by which members of the public may observ e the meeting and of fer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for , each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
92 Ch. 165 — 5 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
(2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observ e the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observ ation and comment, or an y instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a legislative body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication a vailable at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the le gislative body’s internet website.
(f) All legislative bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparenc y and pro vide the public access to legislative body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in ef fect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2. Section 11133 is added to the Government Code, to read:
11133. (a) Notwithstanding an y other pro vision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a state body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observ e and to address the state body.
(b) (1) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the state body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the state body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the state body be ph ysically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observ e and address the meeting telephonically 92 — 6 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
or otherwise electronically , consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisfied any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A state body need not mak e available any physical location from which members of the public may observ e the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a state body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allo ws members of the public to observ e and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the state body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from indi viduals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving an y doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is gi ven of the means by which members of the public may observ e the meeting and of fer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for , each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
(2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observ e the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observ ation and comment, or an y instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a state body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication a vailable at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the state body’ s internet website.
(f) All state bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to state body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in ef fect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
92 Ch. 165 — 7 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agenc y, except as otherwise pro vided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agenc y in connection with an y meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable pro visions of la w relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with an y meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agenc y. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the le gislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the local agenc y e xercises jurisdiction, e xcept as pro vided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the le gislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a le gislative body, the members of which are in dif ferent locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agenc y from pro viding the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall tak e action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdi vision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be tak en. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Di vision 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
92 — 8 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that w ould establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if an y, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdi vision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and an y advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances:
(A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials ha ve imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
(B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority v ote, whether as a result of the emer gency, meeting in person w ould present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emer gency, meeting in person w ould present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdi vision shall do all of the following:
(A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter.
(B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3. 92 Ch. 165 — 9 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also gi ve notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and of fer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment.
(C) The le gislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which pre vents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the e vent of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall tak e no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1.
(E) The le gislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must pro vide an opportunity for the public to address the le gislative body and offer comment in real time.
This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local le gislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to re gister as required by the third-party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to re gister, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to pro vide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed.
(ii) A legislative body that does not pro vide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to re gister pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that pro vides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to re gister, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. 92 — 10 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 180
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
(3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the le gislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdi vision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.1. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the le gislative body of a local agenc y in person, e xcept as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal ci vil rights la ws, including, b ut not limited to, an y applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agenc y in connection with an y meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable pro visions of la w relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with an y meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agenc y. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the le gislative body 92 Ch. 165 — 11 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 181
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the local agenc y e xercises jurisdiction, e xcept as pro vided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the le gislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a le gislative body, the members of which are in dif ferent locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agenc y from pro viding the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall tak e action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdi vision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be tak en. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Di vision 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that w ould establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if an y, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdi vision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and an y advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 92 — 12 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances:
(A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials ha ve imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
(B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority v ote, whether as a result of the emer gency, meeting in person w ould present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emer gency, meeting in person w ould present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdi vision shall do all of the following:
(A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter.
(B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3.
In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also gi ve notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and of fer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment.
(C) The le gislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which pre vents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the e vent of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall tak e no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1.
(E) The le gislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must pro vide an opportunity for 92 Ch. 165 — 13 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
the public to address the le gislative body and offer comment in real time.
This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local le gislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to re gister as required by the third-party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to re gister, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to pro vide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed.
(ii) A legislative body that does not pro vide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to re gister pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that pro vides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to re gister, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. (3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the le gislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdi vision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting 92 — 14 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 184
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
of the legislative body of a local agenc y, except as otherwise pro vided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agenc y in connection with an y meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable pro visions of la w relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with an y meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agenc y. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the le gislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the local agenc y e xercises jurisdiction, e xcept as pro vided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a le gislative body, the members of which are in dif ferent locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agenc y from pro viding the public with additional teleconference locations
(c) (1) No legislative body shall tak e action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdi vision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be tak en. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Di vision 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, 92 Ch. 165 — 15 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 185
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that w ould establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if an y, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdi vision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and an y advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.
SEC. 4.1. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the le gislative body of a local agenc y, in person e xcept as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal ci vil rights la ws, including, b ut not limited to, an y applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agenc y in connection with an y meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable pro visions of la w relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with an y meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the 92 — 16 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
legislative body of a local agenc y. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the le gislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the local agenc y e xercises jurisdiction, e xcept as pro vided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall pro vide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a le gislative body, the members of which are in dif ferent locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agenc y from pro viding the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall tak e action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdi vision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be tak en. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Di vision 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that w ould establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory o ver which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if an y, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdi vision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint 92 Ch. 165 — 17 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 187
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and an y advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.
SEC. 5. Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 54953 of the Go vernment Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 339. Those sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become ef fective on or before January 1, 2022, but this bill becomes operati ve first, (2) each bill amends Section 54953 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 339, in which case Section 54953 of the Government Code, as amended by Sections 3 and 4 of this bill, shall remain operative only until the operative date of Assembly Bill 339, at which time Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill shall become operative.
SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to improve and enhance public access to state and local agenc y meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options consistent with the Go vernor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, permitting expanded use of teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
SEC. 7. The Legislature finds and declares that Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, further, within the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdi vision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to the meetings of local public bodies or the writings of local public officials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the Legislature makes the following findings:
This act is necessary to ensure minimum standards for public participation and notice requirements allo wing for greater public participation in teleconference meetings during applicable emergencies.
SEC. 8. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that during the COVID-19 public health emergency, certain requirements of the Bagle y-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Di vision 3 of Title 2 of the Go vernment Code) were suspended by Executive Order N-29-20. Audio and video teleconference were widely used to conduct public meetings in lieu of physical location meetings, and public meetings conducted by teleconference during the COVID-19 public health emergency have been productive, have increased public participation by all members of the public re gardless of their location in the state and ability to travel to physical meeting locations, have protected the health and safety of civil servants and the public, and have reduced travel costs incurred by members of state bodies and reduced work hours spent traveling to and from meetings.
92 — 18 — Ch. 165
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 188
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
(b) The Legislature finds and declares that Section 1 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, Section 2 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 11133 of the Go vernment Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, all increase and potentially limit the public’s right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
(1) By removing the requirement that public meetings be conducted at a primary ph ysical location with a quorum of members present, this act protects the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a ph ysical location o ver members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location. (2) By removing the requirement for agendas to be placed at the location of each public official participating in a public meeting remotely, including from the member’s private home or hotel room, this act protects the personal, private information of public officials and their f amilies while preserving the public’ s right to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business.
SEC. 9. This act is an ur gency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.
The facts constituting the necessity are:
In order to ensure that state and local agencies can continue holding public meetings while pro viding essential services lik e w ater, po wer, and fire protection to their constituents during public health, wildfire, or other states of emergencies, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.
O
92 Ch. 165 — 19 —
6.j.2
Packet Pg. 189
Attachment: AB 361 (Assembly Bill 361)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt Ordinance 1585 Adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code Establishing a Child Care Development Impact Fee for New Nonresidential Developments in the City of San Carlos.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance 1585 adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code establishing a child care development impact fee for new nonresidential developments in the city.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As a per square foot fee derived from new nonresidential developments, potential revenues will vary depending on the sizes of future projects.
BACKGROUND:
One of the City Council’s (“Council”) ongoing strategic goals is to increase access to child care by reducing regulatory and financial barriers to the creation and expansion of child care facilities in the city. In October 2017, the Council received an informational presentation from staff describing potential strategies to address the shortage of child care facilities serving our community. This presentation was a response to information provided by San Mateo County’s Early Learning Support Services which highlighted the need for additional child care.
At that time, there was a shortage of more than 650 spaces for infant and preschool -aged children in San Carlos.
At the Council’s direction, staff initiated efforts to study the issue. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (“EPS”) was retained to conduct an initial study of regulatory and financing options to increase the supply of child care facilities and develop strategies to mitigate future demand based on the expected increase in residents and employers in San Carlos. In 2021, the Council approved the following changes to the Municipal Code to remove reg ulatory barriers:
Updated Municipal Code Sections 18.04 and 18.05 to remove the minor use permit requirement for commercial child care centers in specific zoning districts. Updated Municipal Code Section 18.23.090 (Standards for Specific Uses and Activit ies) to (1) remove the outdoor space requirement; (2) allow staff level review for pick -up and
6.k
Packet Pg. 190
2 drop-off plans and require a minor use permit for parking non -compliance; and (3) update hours of operation.
Updated Municipal Code Sections 18.23.090, 18.23.04 0, and 5.04.020 to ensure compliance with State law for small and large family in-home day care.
Beyond the changes to San Carlos’ local regulations summarized above, staff and consultants were asked to evaluate different approaches to creating new child c are spaces, specifically focusing on child care development impact fees. In July 2020, EPS presented the Council with information on child care development impact fees . Following the presentation, the Council requested further evaluation of funding options. Since then, Staff held two collaborative working sessions with the City Council Child Care Subcommittee (“Subcommittee”) in June 2021 and November 2021 to review findings and develop preliminary recommendations for the Council to discuss and provide feedback.
During these working sessions, the Subcommittee evaluated a range of funding strategies and considered options for potential partnerships with the Child Care Coordinating Council (4Cs) of San Mateo County. Because development of onsite child care m ay not always be appropriate from a land use compatibility perspective and/or may not be feasible for smaller projects, the Subcommittee indicated that an onsite requirement (with an associated in -lieu fee option) may not be viable at this time.
On March 14, 2022, the Council held a study session to discuss the parameters of a proposed child care development impact fee program. Staff received direction to move forward with crafting a fee program that only applied to nonresidential developments with a provision to allow a build on-site option.
On June 27, 2022, the Council introduced Ordinance 1585 adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code establishing a child care development impact fee for new nonresidential developments in the City. The Coun cil approved the Ordinance with minor changes to Section
8.52.060, Alternative Means of Satisfying Fee Obligation, as summarized below:
Specify that the child care impact fee obligation may be met by building appropriately sized and feasible child care space onsite where a 5,000 square foot facility is presumed to be appropriately sized and feasible; and
Specify that the Council may approve other sized onsite child care facilities if economic and operation feasibility is demonstrated by the developer.
Specifically, the redlines below show the exact minor edits requested by Council in Section
8.52.060, Alternative Means of Satisfying Fee Obligation:
New nonresidential projects of 50,000 sq.ft. or larger may meet the child care impact fee obligation by building appropriately sized and feasible child care space onsite, at a ratio of 10% of total square footage, and contracting with a licensed child care provider. A 5,000 square foot child care facility shall be presumed to be appropriately sized and feasible . City Council may approve other sized child care onsite facilities if economic and operation feasibility is demonstrated by the developer, consistent with the demand ratios articulated in the Nexus Study. Any child care provided through this option would need to meet state licensing requirements and local regulatory requirements (as specified in Section 18.23.090 of the Municipal Code). and would need to be mutually agreed upon by the Developer and the City.
6.k
Packet Pg. 191
3 ANALYSIS:
Nexus-Based Fees.
Development impact fees authorized under the Mitigation Fee Act require the preparation of a nexus study to evaluate the impact of new development on the need for the identified facilities.
The study must ensure that the fee levels are proportionate to their impact. EPS pr epared the Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study (“Nexus Study”) in January 2020 and updated it in July 2021 (see attachment 2). The Nexus Study was adopted by the Council via Resolution 2022 - 077 on June 27, 2022. The Nexus Study evaluates the impact of new re sidential and non - residential development; however, the Subcommittee and the Council previously provided direction not to apply the fee to new residential development. The nexus -based fees are the maximum fees that can be justified given the current cost o f developing new child care spaces.
The Council indicated their interest in adopting the reduced fees (lower than the nexus -justified fees) as a policy decision, based on feasibility and/or other considerations.
This fee is a one -time charge on new devel opment set according to “nexus logic.” The funds collected can only be used to fund capital projects (not maintenance or operations). For instance, the City could potentially use the funds to contribute to the construction of new child care facilities, land acquisition costs , or loans and/or grants to providers seeking to create or expand capacity. It is important to note that these funds cannot be used to subsidize operations or direct assistance with child care costs.
The amount of the proposed fee esta blished by the Nexus Study or subsequent nexus studies will be adjusted annually based on the Construction Cost Index published by the “Engineering News Record” or a reasonable replacement index. The information below focuses on the potential maximum fee amount that the City can adopt and the methodology.
Nexus Methodology.
Based on data reported in the 2017 San Mateo County Early Learning Facilities Study, the demand for child care spaces resulting from new nonresidential development is approximately four spaces per 100 employees. At an estimated cost of $80,391 per space (including land), the cost per employee is $3,352. Based on employment density assumptions, the cost per employee can be expressed as a cost per square foot as seen in the table below:
Maximum Fees for Non-Residential Development
Office/R&D $10.07 per sq.ft.
Retail $5.03 per sq.ft.
Hotel $3.35 per sq.ft.
Industrial $3.35 per sq.ft.
Feasibility Considerations.
In considering a potential new child care development impact fee and appropriate fee levels, it is helpful to understand how similar fees and programs are being implemented in comparable jurisdictions. The table below compares child care policies and fee programs in three Bay Area jurisdictions.
6.k
Packet Pg. 192
4 Overview of Comparable Jurisdictions
Redwood
City
Robust city-led child care program housed in the Parks and Recreation and Community Services Department
Employs a full-time Child Care Coordinator who works with other departments and the community to implement programs to increase the quantity and quality of child care and early education
Waives the planning fees associated with large family child care facilities Does not charge child care impact fees
South
San
Francisco
Child care program housed in the Parks Division Program includes three preschools for children ages 2.5 to 5 years Child care impact fee program for nonresidential development San
Mateo
The City partners with the Child Care Coordinating Council (4Cs) to support parents, providers, and local communities in finding, planning for, paying for, and accessing affordable, quality child care San Mateo has a child care impact fee program for nonresidential development
Other Bay Are a cities that charge child care impact fees include San Francisco, Berkeley, Livermore, San Ramon, and Clayton. In Southern California, Santa Monica has a robust child care impact fee program. While the table below highlights the fee ranges from a few cities, Attachment 3 provides a comprehensive overview.
City Fees per Square Feet of Nonresidential Development South San Francisco $0.18 to $0.68
San Mateo $1.08
San Francisco $1.95
Berkeley $0.75 to $1.50
Livermore $5.00 to $7.00 (broader “Social and Human Services Fee”) Santa Monica $3.00 to $7.00
Fee Burden Analysis.
In addition to reviewing what other cities are doing, the Subcommittee also requested an analysis of how adding a new child care development impact fee changes the existing fee burden. Currently, the fee burden for all Office/R&D, Retail, Hotel, and Industrial Developments includes the sewer capacity fee, commercial linkage fee, and the traffic impact fee. The table below shows the impact on the existing aggregate fee levels for nonresidential development if a new child care development impact fee were to be implemented, both at the maximum -allowed and 50 percent reduced fee levels.
For example, new office development is currently required to pay, in aggregate, approximately $30.00 per square foot of new development. At a maximum-allowed fee of $10.07 per square
6.k
Packet Pg. 193
5 foot, the child care impact fee would increase the existing fee burden by 34% and at a reduced fee of $5.00 per square foot, the child care impact fee would increase the existing fee burden by 17%. At the reduced fee levels, the child care fee represents 14% of the aggregate fee burden for office, 16% of the aggregate fee burden for R&D, 7% of the aggregate fee burden for retail and hotel, and 19% of the aggregate fee burden for industrial.
Land Use Current Fee
Obligation
Total Fee Obligation
with Max-Allowed
Child Care Fee
%
Increase
at Max
Total Fee
Obligation with
50% Reduced
Child Care Fee
(Recommended)
%
Increase
at
Reduced
Office/R&D $29.89 per sq.ft. $39.96 per sq.ft. 34% $34.89 per sq.ft. 17% Retail $31.79 per sq.ft. $36.82 per sq.ft. 16% $34.29 per sq.ft. 8% Hotel $20.21 per sq.ft. $23.56 per sq.ft. 17% $21.81 per sq.ft. 8% Industrial $6.84 per sq.ft. $10.19 per sq.ft. 49% $8.44 per sq.ft. 23%
At the March Study Session, Council asked staff to assess the aggregate fee burden (per sq.ft.) through a comparative analysis with other cities that implement child care fees. The purpose behind this analysis is to understand how San Carlos’ aggregate fees (with and withou t child care fees) compare to other cities to assess where San Carlos falls within the fee spectrum. For most of the nonresidential land use categories, the aggregate fees (including child care fees) for San Carlos align well with other cities. See Attachment 4 for the full analysis chart.
At the March Study Session, City Council also directed staff to develop a Resolution adopting the reduced child care impact fee levels (highlighted in blue in the table above). This is because adopting the maximum -justified child care development impact fees may affect the interest of some developers building in the City of San Carlos if the fees are considered too high. Higher fees will also impact the amount of community benefit dollars that would otherwise be availabl e for other City Council community priorities such as the Downtown, housing, parks, and open space amenities. Thus, staff recommends adopting the reduced fee levels under a separate Resolution to address the issue of child care shortage without impacting t he aggregate fees dramatically. Adopting the reduced fee levels is consistent with other jurisdictions and justified within the Nexus Study.
Fee Program Recommendations
Child Care Development Impact Fee Parameters.
Based on the City Council ’s direction, feedback from the Child Care Subcommittee, and the preceding feasibility evaluation, the following fee program parameters are recommended:
Apply the child care development impact fee only to new nonresidential development. Adopt the following reduced fee levels (50% reduced from the maximum fee levels) under a separate Resolution at an upcoming Council meeting.
Office/R&D $5.00 per sq.ft.
Retail $2.50 per sq.ft.
Hotel $1.60 per sq.ft.
Industrial $1.60 per sq.ft.
6.k
Packet Pg. 194
6 Child Care Build Onsite Option.
It is also recommended that a build onsite option is included so developers have the option to build the child care facility onsite as an alternative to paying the child care development impact fee. The build onsite option summarized below includes the minor edits requested by the Council at the June 27, 2022 meeting.
Any new nonresidential development may meet the child care impact fee obligation by building appropriately sized and feasible child care onsite and contracting with a licensed child care provider. A 5,000 square foot facility is presumed to be appropriately sized and feasible. City Council may approve other sized child care facilities if economic and operation feasibility is demonstrated by the developer, consistent with the demand ratios arti culated in the Nexus Study.
For example, a 50,000 sq. ft. development could provide a 5,000 sq. ft. onsite child care facility to meet the impact fee obligation. A child care center (as opposed to a daycare in a family home) needs to be a minimum of appr oximately 5,000 square feet to operate effectively and efficiently.
To ensure implementation, a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the developer would be needed to establish the appropriate size of an onsite child care center. Any onsite child care facility provided through this option would need to meet state licensing requirements and local regulatory requirements (as specified in Section 18.23.090 of the Municipal Code).
Potential Use of Fee Revenue.
A development impact fee program will generate revenue for the creation of new child care spaces at existing or new facilities. As stated above, fee revenue can be applied to the construction of new child care facilities, land acquisition for child care facilities, or a revolving loan or grant program for home daycare providers who need funding assistance for capital improvements that result in increased capacity. The Mitigation Fee Act is clear that impact fee revenue cannot be used to subsidize operations or provide direct assistance with child care costs.
Summary of Recommendations
Child Care Development Impact Fee Parameters.
Staff recommends adopting Ordinance 1585 adding Chapter 8.52 to the Municipal Code establishing a Child Care Development Impact Fee that only applies to new nonresidential developments.
Build Onsite Option.
Staff recommends including an option within Ordinance 1585 for new nonresidential developments to meet the child care impact fee obligation by building appropriate ly sized and feasible child care onsite and contracting w ith a licensed child care provider. A 5,000 square foot facility is presumed to be appropriately sized and feasible. City Council may approve other sized child care facilities if economic and operation al feasibility is demonstrated by the developer and is consistent with the demand ratios articulated in the Nexus Study.
Next Steps.
6.k
Packet Pg. 195
7 If the second reading of proposed Ordinance 1585 is approved at the August 8, 2022 City Council meeting, the Ordinance would become effective on September 8, 2022. The associate d fees would take effect 60 days after a separate resolution to set the fee levels is adopted.
ALTERNATIVES:
The options available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt Ordinance 1585 Adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code Establishing a Chi ld Care Development Impact Fee for New Nonresidential Developments in the City; or
2. Do not Adopt Ordinance 1585; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Lisa Porras,
Planning Manager
Sajuti Haque, Senior Management
Analyst
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee
2. Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report
3. Appendix A-1 - Model Update
4. Aggregate Fee Burden
6.k
Packet Pg. 196
1 ORDINANCE NO. _1585__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS ADDING CHAPTER 8.52 TO THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING A
CHILD CARE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR NEW NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, as part of the 2022 City Council Strategic Goals, the City Council expressed interest in adopting a Child Care Development Impact Fee (“Fee”) under the authority of Sections 66000 et seq. of the California Government Code (“Mitigation Fee Act”) that applies to nonresidential development projects in the City to address the shortage of child care facilities in San Carlos; and
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Child Care Needs Assessment prepared by the San Mateo County Child Care Partnership C ouncil in 2017 states that there is a shortage of more than 650 spaces for infant and preschool-aged children; and
WHEREAS, in 2019, staff retained Economic & Planning Systems Inc. (“EPS”) to conduct an initial study of regulatory and financing options to increase the supply of child care facilities and develop strategies to mitigate the future demands based on an expected increase of residents and employers in San Carlos; and
WHEREAS, in January 2020 and July 2021 a study was prepared and then updated for the City by EPS entitled Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study (“Nexus Study”) which established the maximum child care development impact fees justifiable under the Mitigation Fee Act that could be required of new development in the City of San Carlos; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2022, a City Council Study Session was held to discuss and evaluate the feasibility of implementing a child care development impact fee; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including testimony and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said study session; and
WHEREAS, on June 27, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code establishing a child care development impact fee for new nonresidential developments; and
WHEREAS, ten (10) days advance notice of the public hearing at which this Ordinance was introduced was given by publication in accordance with Government Code Section 6062a; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, the proposed project does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of CEQA in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and therefore does not require environmental review. The proposed Ordinance also is exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) since there would be no possibility of a significant effect on the environment, in that its provisions requiring the provision of affordable housing would not have any effect on the physical environment.
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 197
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 2 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby finds and declares that the forgoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated into this Ordinance as though fully set forth herein. The City Council further finds as follows:
1) The City Council established priorities that acknowledge the critical role that child care plays in facilitating the lives of working parents and guardians in the City and directed City staff to evaluate options to encourage an adequate and diverse supply of child care facilities citywide and to implement a child care impact fee on new nonresidential development due to its impacts on child care needs; and
2) New, nonresidential development can reasonably be anticipated to increase the capacity for new businesses and new job growth in the City, and some new employees occupying the new development may require child care services so that their children may be well-cared for while they work; and
3) An Early Learning Facilities Needs Assessment conducted by San Mateo County Human Services Agency, First 5 San Mateo County, and the Child Care Partnership Council established that there is already a shortage of quality child care options in San Carlos, and, if unmitigated, new development will place additional, and cumulatively overwhelming, burdens on the child care system; and
4) As a condition of project approval, new nonresidential development must mitigate its adverse impact of increased demand for child care generated by the development. Child care impact fees are a necessary financing tool to generate revenue that can be used to expand the capacity of the child care system so that new development does not exacerbate the existing child care shortage. A child care impact fee program further enables developers of new development to pay their fair share of the costs needed to build more child care to mitigate the impact of new development; and
5) As established by the Nexus Study, adopted by the City Council on June 27, 2022, there is a reasonable relationship between the type and amount of new development and the number of new child care spaces required; and between the number of new child care spaces required and the use of the fee; and
6) The fee established by the Nexus Study and under this Ordinance is proportional to the impacts created by voluntary development in the City; and 7) The amount of the proposed fee shall be established by City Council resolution and not exceed the fee established by the adopted Impact Fee Nexus Study dated July 14, 2021 or subsequent nexus studies, which shall be adjusted annually based on the Construction Cost Index published by the Engineering News Record or a reasonable replacement index.
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 198
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 3 The purpose of this chapter, therefore, is to provide funding to expand the number of quality child care spaces available to residents and employees in San Carlos through the use of development fees consistent with state law, in order to implement the child care policies prioritized in the 2022 City Council Strategic Goals. The intent of this chapter is not to raise general revenues. Instead, the intent is to provide for the capital improvements and augmentation to the child care system to help satisfy the child care needs generated by growth from new development, in a balanced and efficient manner which will mitigate the adverse impacts on the child care system and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
SECTION 2: Chapter 8.52: CHILD CARE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES is added to the municipal code as follows:
Chapter 8.52
CHILD CARE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
8.52.010 Authority.
8.52.020 Purpose.
8.52.030 Definitions.
8.52.040 Application and Payment of Fee
8.52.050 Fee payment.
8.52.060 Alternative Means of Satisfying Fee Obligation.
8.52.070 Exemptions.
8.52.080 Credits and fee adjustments and appeals.
8.52.090 Use of fee.
8.52.100 Refund of fee.
8.52.110 Annual review.
8.52.010 Authority.
This chapter is enacted pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act contained in Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.
8.52.020 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide funding to expand the number of quality child care spaces available to residents and employees in San Carlos through the use of development fees consistent with state law, in order to implement the child care policies prioritized in the 2022 City Council Strategic Goals. The intent of this chapter is not to raise general revenues.
Instead, the intent is to provide for the capital improvements and augmentation to the child care system to help satisfy the child care needs generated by growth from new development, in a balanced and efficient manner which will mitigate the adverse impacts on the child care system and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
8.52.030 Definitions.
As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
A. “Building permit” includes full structural building permits as well as partial permits such as foundation-only permits.
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 199
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 4 B. “Child care development impact fee” means the fee charged to new nonresidential development in the City of San Carlos on a per square foot of floor area basis.
C. “Development Agreement” means a written agreement with applicants for development projects as provided by Municipal Code Chapter 18.37.
D. “Floor area measurement” includes exterior façade of building wall planes or from the center line of party walls; parking areas and exterior walkways are not included.
E. “Mitigation Fee Act” authorizes a local government agency to impose development impact fees on specific development projects to defray the cost of new or additional public facilities that are needed to serve those developments.
F. “Nonresidential development” includes land uses categories identified in the City’s Zoning Code, Title 18 of the Municipal Code, including office/R&D, retail, hotel and industrial.
G. “Nexus Study” is the study prepared by Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) on July 14, 2021 that established the maximum child care development impact fees justifiable under the Mitigation Fee Act that could be required of new development in the City of San Carlos. “Zoning administrator” means the Zoning Administrator of the City of San Carlos, or his or her designee. (Ord. 1533 § 1 (Exh. A (part)), 2018: Ord. 1525 § 2(3) (Exh. C (part)), 2017)
H. “Use Permit” means a discretionary permit, such as a minor use or conditional use permit, which may be granted by the appropriate City of San Carlos authority to provide for the accommodation of land uses with special site or design requirements, operating characteristics, or potential adverse effects on surroundings, which are not permitted as of right but which may be approved upon completion of a review process and, where necessary, the imposition of special conditions of approval by the permit granting authority.
8.52.040 Application and Payment of Fee.
The child care development impact fee enabled in this chapter is charged to new nonresidential development in the City of San Carlos on a per square foot of floor area basis. Floor area measurement shall be to the exterior facade of building wall planes or from the center line of party walls. Parking areas and exterior walkways are not included in the child care impact fee calculation.
This chapter does not replace normal subdivision map exactions or other measures required to mitigate site specific impacts of a development project including, but not limited to, mitigations pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; regulatory and processing fees; fees required pursuant to a development agreement; funds collected pursuant to a reimbursement agreement that exceed the developer’s share of public improvement costs; or assessment district proceedings, benefit assessments, or taxes.
A. General. The amount of the proposed fee shall be established by City Council resolution and not exceed the fee established by the adopted Impact Fee Nexus Study dated July 14, 2021 or subsequent nexus studies, which shall be adjusted annually based on the Construction Cost Index published by the Engineering News Record or a
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 200
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 5 reasonable replacement index. The fee imposed under this chapter is based on the consideration that new development contributes to expanding the need for additional quality child care spaces in the City, based on employment generation and employee demand for child care.
B. Types of Development Subject to the Fee. The fee shall be applicable to new development and redevelopment projects which require a planning application, expansion of floor area of existing uses which require a planning application, and changes of use requiring a use permit as follows:
1. Nonresidential Construction. Fees shall be charged based on employment generation and employee demand for child care, as established in the Child care Impact Fee Nexus Study. No fee is applicable for remodeling or restoration only, where the floor area is improved or replaced but not increased.
Floor area measurement shall be to the exterior facade of building wall planes or from the center line of party walls. Parking areas and exterior walkways are not included in the child care need generation calculation.
2. Changes of Use Requiring a Use Permit. Fees shall be charged upon the incremental difference between the fee calculated for the floor area of a prior legal use and the fee calculated for the floor area of the proposed new use.
C. Land Use Categories Subject to the Fee. All nonresidential land use categories identified in the City’s Zoning Code, Title 18 of the City’s Municipal Code, which generate employment are subject to the fee.
D. Authority of Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall have authority to render final determinations regarding the appropriate classification of land use and the correct calculation of gross building floor area for a particular development project. (Ord. 1562 § 2 (part), 2020; Ord. 1400 § 1 (part), 2008)
8.52.050 Fee payment.
The child care impact fee shall be paid in full to the City of San Carlos before the first building permit is issued. If no building permit is required, the fee shall be paid before a conversion of use may take place. The fee shall not apply to any project submitted for a building permit or to any project application that was submitted and considered complete prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, except where otherwise subject to an existing development agreement. (Ord. 1400 § 1 (part), 2008)
8.52.060 Alternative Means of Satisfying Fee Obligation.
New nonresidential projects may meet the child care impact fee obligation by building appropriately sized and feasible child care space onsite and contracting with a licensed child care provider. A 5,000 square foot child care facility shall be presumed to be appropriately sized and feasible. City Council may approve other sized child care onsite facilities if economic and operation feasibility is demonstrated by the developer, consistent with the demand ratios
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 201
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 6 articulated in the Nexus Study. Any child care provided through this option would need to meet state licensing requirements and local regulatory requirements (as specified in Section
18.23.090 of the Municipal Code).
If mutually agreed upon by the Developer and the City, alternative means of satisfying the fee obligation may be identified and articulated in a Development Agreement, or similar mutually agreed upon Agreement.
8.52.070 Exemptions.
The following exemptions from the requirements for fees and exactions are imposed:
1. Any type of project determined by the city council to have a reduced or insignificant child care impact.
2. Residential uses. Residential uses including single family, multifamily, senior housing, affordable housing, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units.
3. Repairs or Replacement. No fee is applicable for repairing, remodeling, modifying, reconstructing, replacing only, where the floor area is improved or replaced but not increased. This includes residential and nonresidential square footage being replaced due to natural disaster.
4. Public Project. Projects undertaken by a public agency except projects undertaken by a private developer on public property, and except property not used exclusively for a governmental purpose.
5. Project with Complete Application Prior to Effective Date of Ordinance. Project submitted for a building permit or any project application that was submitted and considered complete prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, except for any project which is required to comply with these measures pursuant to the provisions of a development agreement.
8.52.080 Credits and Fee Adjustments and Appeals.
A. Credits. If a project is changing its use and adding net new square footage, a credit in the amount offsetting the impact of its prior use shall be applied. For example, a development project converting existing industrial square footage into office/R&D will have the fee for the proposed office/R&D space (including any addition) calculated and the fee for the existing industrial space calculated, and the existing industrial space will be credited against the new office/R&D use. In the event that the credit exceeds the new fee, the fee shall be zero and no refunds are applicable. No credits or exemptions will be given to properties that have been vacant for more than three years by the time of applying for building permit.
B. Fee adjustments and appeals. The developer of a project subject to this chapter may appeal the imposition and/or calculation of the fee.
1. The appeal shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 1.25 of this code.
An appeal by a developer of a project not requiring a planning application shall be to the zoning administrator.
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 202
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 7 2. Notice of the appeal shall be provided in accordance with applicable provisions of this code.
3. The appellant shall state in detail the factual basis for the appeal and shall bear the burden of proof in presenting substantial evidence to support the appeal.
4. The appeal body shall uphold the fee and deny the appeal if it finds that there is a reasonable relationship between the development project’s impact on employee generation and the need for child care spaces and the amount of the fee. The appeal body shall consider the land use category determination, and the substance and nature of the evidence, including the fee calculation method, supporting technical documentation, and the appellant’s technical data. Based on the evidence, the appeal body may also modify the fee. (Ord. 1400 § 1 (part), 2008)
8.52.090 Use of Fee.
Upon receipt, child care impact fees shall be deposited, invested, accounted for, and expended as required per the Mitigation Fee Act, Government Code Section 66001, or successor statute.
Revenues, along with any interest earnings on the account, shall be used to fund contributions towards the expansion of new child care spaces in the City, including but not limited to:
1. Acquiring land on which a new child care facility may be developed
2. Funding child care facility development costs
3. Providing loans or grants to licensed in-home child care providers
4. And/or other capital expenditures related to expanding child care in the City otherwise consistent with the law.
8.52.100 Refund of fee.
Under certain circumstances, refund of the fees paid may be warranted.
A. If a building permit or use permit expires, is canceled, or is voided and any fees paid pursuant to this chapter have not been expended, no construction has taken place, and the use has never occupied the site, the Director of Community Development may, upon the written request of the applicant, order return of the fee and interest earned on it, less administrative costs.
B. The City Council shall make a finding with respect to any fee revenue not expended or committed five years or more after it was paid. If the City Council finds that the fee revenue is not committed, it shall authorize a refund to the then owner of the property for which the fee was paid, pursuant to Government Code Section 66001 or successor legislation. (Ord. 1400 § 1 (part), 2008)
8.52.110 Annual review.
The child care impact fee authorized by this chapter, implementing Council resolutions, and supporting documentation, shall be reviewed annually by the City Council in order to make any findings required by State law, and to make any adjustments in the amount of the fee. (Ord. 1400 § 1 (part), 2008)
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 203
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) 8 SECTION 3: The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on the 27th day of June, 2022 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Carlos held on the 8th day of August, 2022 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
6.k.1
Packet Pg. 204
Attachment: Ordinance 1585 - Child Care Dev Impact Fee (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Draft Report
Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Prepared for:
City of San Carlos
Prepared by:
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
July 14, 2021
EPS #211028
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 205
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Table of Contents
1. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF FEES ......................................................................... 1 Summary of Maximum Fee Levels ............................................................................. 1 Report Background and Legal Context ........................................................................ 2
2. DEMOGRAPHIC, EMPLOYMENT, AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS .............................................. 4 Current Population and Households in San Carlos ........................................................ 4 Age Cohorts ........................................................................................................... 5 Labor Force Participation .......................................................................................... 5 Child Care Choice .................................................................................................... 6 Population Density .................................................................................................. 7 Employment Density ............................................................................................... 8
3. CHILD CARE FACILITY COST ESTIMATES ....................................................................... 9
4. CHILD CARE FEE CALCULATIONS .............................................................................. 10 Residential Fees .................................................................................................... 10 Nonresidential Fees ............................................................................................... 11
5. MITIGATION FEE ACT NEXUS FINDINGS ...................................................................... 13
6. FEE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION ................................................... 14 Fee Collection and Amount ..................................................................................... 14 Annual Review and Five-Year Review ....................................................................... 15 Accounting, Reporting, and Updates ........................................................................ 16
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 206
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Child Care Impact Fees by Land Use Category ................................... 2 Table 2. Population and Households ............................................................................... 4 Table 3. Age Cohorts in City and County ......................................................................... 5 Table 4. Labor Force Participation .................................................................................. 6 Table 5. Child Care Choice ............................................................................................ 7 Table 6. Population and Households by Number of Units in Structure .................................. 8 Table 7. Employment Density ........................................................................................ 8 Table 8. Average Cost per Child Care Space by Type of Facility .......................................... 9 Table 9. Child Care Fees for Residential Development ..................................................... 10 Table 10. Child Care Fees for Nonresidential Development ................................................ 11
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 207
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
1. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF FEES
This report establishes the maximum child care development impact fees justifiable under the Mitigation Fee Act that could be required of new development in the City of San Carlos. In October 2017, the City Council considered strategies to address the shortage of child care facilities serving the community. This was a response to a study initiated by the San Mateo County’s Office of Education, which identified significant shortages of child care spaces in the County, generally, and San Carlos, specifically. At Council’s direction, staff was directed to study the regulatory and financing options available to the City to increase the supply of child care facilities and develop strategies to mitigate the future demand based on the expected increase in residents and jobs in San Carlos.
The issues were studied, and the Council’s Child Care Subcommittee held collaborative working sessions with City staff to review findings and develop strategies. In the fall of 2019, the City Council affirmed that addressing the City’s child care needs is a priority, and one of the funding strategies identified was to explore various fees or charges on new development to mitigate the demand for child care from new residents and employees in the City. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) was retained to develop the technical analysis and prepare the required Nexus Study to support potential implementation of a child care development impact fee, as authorized by the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code 66000 et seq.).
While this Nexus Study supports the maximum-justifiable fee levels, the Council may choose to adopt fees below the maximum, charge only certain land use categories, or not adopt fees at all.
Summary of Maxi mum Fee Levels
At the Council’s discretion, a new child care development impact fee could be charged to all new residential and/or nonresidential development and at fee levels up to the maximum justifiable through this Nexus Study. The technical analysis included in this report presents the methodology and analysis to support the maximum-justifiable fee levels in the City of San Carlos, as shown below in Table 1.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 208
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Table 1. Summary of Child Care Impa ct Fees by Land Use Category
Report Background and Legal Context
This report is designed to provide the necessary technical analysis supporting a schedule of development impact fees intended to mitigate the demand for child care spaces in the City that results from new residential and commercial development. The City currently has several development impact fees, none of which is for child care. A new fee program for child care, if approved, will need to be enacted through the adoption of a new City Ordinance(s) supporting the addition of a new fee category for child care facilities. The new enabling Ordinance would allow the City to adopt, by Resolution, a fee schedule consistent with the supporting technical analysis and findings provided in this Report. The Resolution approach to setting the fee allows periodic adjustments of the fee amount without requiring amendments to the enabling Ordinance.
The key requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act that determine the structure, scope, and amount of the proposed Fee Program are as follows:
Collected for Capital Facility, Equipment, and Infrastructure Improvements. Impact fee revenue can be collected and used to cover the cost of constructing capital facilities and infrastructure improvements required to serve new development and growth in the City.
However, impact fee revenue cannot be used to cover the operations and maintenance costs of these or any other facilities and infrastructure.
Cannot Fund Existing Needs. Impact fee revenue cannot be collected or used to cover the cost of existing needs/deficiencies in City capital facilities or infrastructure. Thus, the cost of capital projects or facilities designed to meet the needs of the City’s existing population must be funded through other sources to meet overall funding requirements.
Land Use Category
Residential
Single Family $12,257 per unit
Multifamily $9,355 per unit
Non-Residential
Office/R&D $10.07 per sq.ft.
Retail $5.03 per sq.ft.
Hotel $3.35 per sq.ft.
Industrial $3.35 per sq.ft.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Maximum Fee [1]
[1] The analysis assumes that 100 percent of preschool-aged children, regardless of their parents’ working status, require child care. This is in support of the County’s overall policy to promote Universal Preschool.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 209
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Must Be Based on a Rational Nexus. An impact fee must be based on a reasonable nexus, or connection, between new growth and development and the need for a new facility or improvement. As such, an impact fee must be supported by specific findings that explain or demonstrate this nexus. In addition, the impact fee amount must be structured such that the revenue generated does not exceed the cost of providing the facility or improvement for which the fee is imposed.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 210
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
2. DEMOGRAPHIC, EMPLOYMENT, AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
This Chapter describes the demographic, employment, and land use assumptions utilized in this Study that are important drivers of the maximum development impact fee estimates. The estimates are used for the following primary purposes in the fee calculations:
Population and household count data is used to relate the number of children in the City to the supply of housing units. This data is shown on Table 2. Estimates of the number of children within certain age cohorts (e.g., infant, preschool, school-age) are used to estimate potential demand from each cohort and are shown on Table 3.
Estimates of parental labor force participation by age cohort are used to understand the share of households needing child care and are shown on Table 4. Estimates of the share of children whose parents/guardians need a child care arrangement and who will choose a child care center type of facility are provided in Table 5. Estimates related to population density (e.g., persons per housing unit) are shown on Table 6 and are used to differentiate costs between residential land uses. Estimates related to employment density (e.g., employees per square foot) are shown on Table 7 and are used to differentiate costs between non-residential land uses.
Current Population and Ho useholds in San Carlos
Population and household counts are shown in Table 2 and are used to relate the number of children in the City to the overall population as well as to the supply of housing units.
Table 2. Population and Households
Item Total
Population in Households 30,024
Total Households 11,689
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American
Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Economic &
Planning Systems, Inc.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 211
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Age Cohorts
EPS developed a distribution of the number of children within certain age cohorts based on data from the California Department of Finance and the U.S. Census American Community Survey (5-year estimate, 2015-2019). Because parents/guardians make different child care decisions at different times in their children’s lives, this data is used to support estimates of child care demand for different age cohorts. The Census-based age breakdown of children at the City level is not as detailed as the Department of Finance’s estimates for San Mateo County. Accordingly, EPS used the County’s age cohort distribution and applied those shares to the City’s population under 18 years of age. These estimates are provided in Table 3.
Table 3. Age Cohorts in City and County
Labor Force Participation
The U.S. Census American Community Survey (5-year estimate, 2015-2019) reports the number of children whose parents are working. The data reports the number of children in single parent households in which that parent is working, as well as the number of children in two-parent households in which both parents are working. These estimates are provided in Table 4.
Item Number
Percent of
Total
San Mateo County
Total Population under 18 Years of Age 170,296
Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 17,183 10.1%
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 31,932 18.8%
School Age (5 to 18 Years) 121,182 71.2%
San Carlos [1]
Total Population under 18 Years of Age 7,469
Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 754 10.1%
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 1,400 18.8%
School Age (5 to 18 Years) 5,315 71.2%
[1] County age distribution among population under age 18 (DOF, 2019) is applied to City's total population under age 18 as reported by Census.
Source: CA Department of Finance: Total Estimated and Projected Population for California Counties: July 1, 2010 to July 1, 2060 in 1-year Increments; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Communi ty Survey 5-Year Estimates; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 212
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Table 4. Labor Force Participation
Child Care Choice
There are a range of child care options potentially available to families requiring non-parental child care, including other relatives, nanny shares, live-in au pairs, child care centers, home- based day care, etc. As such, another adjustment to the data is needed to estimate the number of children whose parents/guardians need a child care arrangement and who will choose a child care center type of facility (i.e., the type of facility for which the impact fee revenue can be used). Table 5 draws upon data collected by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, which reports the number of children participating in various early childhood programs.
Item Estimate
Total Children [1] 7,341
Under 6 Years 2,382
Living with Two Parents 2,238
Both Parents in Labor Force 1,587
Living with One Parent 144
Parent in Labor Force 137
All Parents in Labor Force 1,724
Labor Force Participation 72.4%
6 to 17 Years 4,959
Living with Two Parents 4,131
Both Parents in Labor Force 2,897
Living with One Parent 828
Parent in Labor Force 763
All Parents in Labor Force 3,660
Labor Force Participation 73.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American
Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Economic &
Planning Systems, Inc.
[1] Universe of data is "Own children under 18 years
in families and subfamilies."
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 213
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Table 5. Child Care Choice
Population Density
EPS has developed persons per household estimates based on data from the California Department of Finance and the U.S. Census American Community Survey (5-year estimate, 2015-2019). This data has been used to develop estimates of the number of persons per occupied household specific to each residential development type. These estimates are provided in Table 6.
Age Cohort
Number of
Children in
Survey
Children in
Parental Care
Arrangements
Children in
Non-Parental Care
Arrangements
Number Percent
Total 21,362 8,609 12,753 7,742 60.7%
Infant
Under 1 Year Old 4,724 2,487 2,237 888 39.7%
1 to 2 Years Old 8,552 3,932 4,619 2,504 54.2%
Weighted Average 13,276 6,420 6,856 3,392 49.5%
Preschool [1]
3 to 5 Years Old 8,087 2,190 5,897 4,350 73.8%
[1] While the data suggests that 73.8% of preschoolers who need childcare will opt for center-based care or care in a non- relative's home, the analysis assumes that 100 percent of preschool-aged children require child care. This is in support of the County’s overall policy to promote Universal Preschool.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Early Childhood Program Participation Survey of the National Household Education Surveys Program (ECPP-NHES:2016).
Children in Center-Based
Care or Care in a Non-
relative’s Home
Note: Numbers are in thousands.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 214
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Table 6. Population and Households by Number of Units in Structure
Employment Density
The gross building square footage assumptions of workspace required on average to accommodate jobs in different land use categories are generally consistent with industry- standard employment densities and are reflected in Table 7. As shown, the average square feet required per job ranges from 333 square feet on average for office/R&D development to 1,000 square feet on average for industrial development. Stated in another way, office developments are assumed to have the highest employment density with about 3 jobs per 1,000 square feet relative to 1 job per 1,000 square feet of industrial development.
Table 7. Employment Density
Item
Single Family
1-Unit in Structure
Multifamily [1]
2 + Units in Structure Total
Total Households 8,590 3,099 11,689
Share 73.5% 26.5% 100.0%
Population in Households 23,542 6,482 30,024
People per HH 2.74 2.09 2.57
[1] Total includes mobile homes to account for the City's total population in households.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Co mmunity Survey 5-Year Estimates; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Item
Employment Density by Land Use Category
Square Feet per Job
Office/R&D 333 sq.ft. per job
Retail 667 sq.ft. per job
Hotel 1,000 sq.ft. per job
Industrial 1,000 sq.ft. per job
Jobs per Square Foot
Office/R&D 0.0030 jobs per sq.ft.
Retail 0.0015 jobs per sq.ft.
Hotel 0.0010 jobs per sq.ft.
Industrial 0.0010 jobs per sq.ft.
Assumption
Sources: City of San Carlos Linkage Fee Nexus Study, Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc. and Strategic Economics; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 215
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
3. CHILD CARE FACILITY COST ESTIMATES
The high cost of real estate and limited availability of land are factors that greatly influence the supply of child care facilities in high-cost counties, such as San Mateo. Of course, the cost of providing new child care spaces will vary on a project-by-project basis, depending on the size of the facility and the overall development program. Typical costs associated with developing new child care spaces in San Mateo County, excluding land, are provided in the 2017 San Mateo Early Learning Needs Assessment and shown below in Table 8. Costs range from $27,500 to $58,000 per space in 2021 dollars depending on the type of facility and include the structure, site design, preparation, general site improvement, and installation—but not land. The average cost is $43,391 per space, which is considered a reasonable average planning-level cost estimate for the purposes of establishing this fee. With land costs included, the cost per space is higher, at $80,391 per space.
Table 8. Average Cost per Child Care Space by Type of Facility
Construction Type
Avg. Cost /
Space (2017)1
Avg. Cost /
Space (2021)2
Development Cost
New Building $43,183 $46,743
New / Existing Commercial Space $53,800 $58,235
Expansion of Existing Center $37,003 $40,053
Portable Building $25,412 $27,507
Employer-based Center $41,033 $44,415
Average, Development Cost $43,391
Land Cost (Rounded)
3 $37,000
Total, Land and Average Development Costs $80,391
[1] Average cost per early learning space for child care facilities in San Mateo County, according to the San Mateo Early Learning Needs Assessment (2017). [2] Average cost per early learning space has been adjusted for inflation at an annual rate of 2%.
Sources: San Mateo Early Learning Needs Assessment (2017); Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
[3] Assumes 175 square feet of land area per child care space, reflecting the indoor, outdoor, administrative, public, and mechanical functions. The per acre land value assumption is $9 million based on current land values in San Carlos.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 216
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fee Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San Carlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
4. CHILD CARE FEE CALCULATIONS
The Mitigation Fee Act maximum child care development impact fee calculations are driven by:
(1) demand for child care from residential and nonresidential development, (2) child care facility cost estimates, and (3) persons per household and employment density assumptions. The residential fees are shown in Table 9 and the nonresidential fees are shown in Table 10.
Residential Fees
Table 9. Child Care Fees for Residential Development
As shown in Table 9, the demand for child care spaces resulting from new residential development is approximately 6 spaces per 100 residents. At a cost of $80,391 per space, the Item Assumption Amount Notes
Total Population 30,024 See Table 2
Total Households 11,689 See Table 2
Population Under Age 18 7,469 See Table 3
Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 10.1% 754 See Table 3
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 18.8% 1,400 See Table 3; Includes 1/2 of 5-year olds Population per Household
Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 0.06
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 0.12
Population per Household, Needing Childcare
Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 72.4% 0.05 See Table 4
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 72.4% 0.09 See Table 4
Population per Household, Choosing Center-based Care or Non-relative Care in Someone Else's Home Infant (Birth to 24 Months) 49.5% 0.02 Reflects weighted average of under 1 and 1-2 year olds cohorts; See Table 5
Preschool (2 to 5 Years) 100.0% 0.12 Reflects Countywide Universal Preschool Policy Objective
Childcare Spaces Needed in Licensed Centers 1,670 Spaces needed for every 11,689 households Childcare Spaces per Resident 0.0556
Cost per Childcare Space $80,391 See Table 8
Cost per Resident $4,472
Number of people per Single Family Household 2.74 See Table 6 Number of people per Multifamily Household 2.09 See Table 6 Cost per Single Family Household $12,257
Cost per Multifamily Household $9,355
Sources: CA Department of Finance: Total Estimated and Projected Population for California Counties: July 1, 2010 to July 1, 20 60 in 1- year Increments; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Early Childhood Program Participation Survey of the National Household Education Surv eys Program (ECPP-NHES:2016), Table was prepared December 2017; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 217
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx cost per resident is $4,472. Based on the residential density assumptions, the cost per resident can be expressed as a cost per residential unit.
Nonresidential Fees
As shown in Table 10 and based on data reported in the 2017 San Mateo County Early Learning Facilities Study, the demand for child care spaces resulting from new nonresidential development is approximately 4 spaces per 100 employees. At a cost of $80,391 per space, the cost per employee is $3,352. Based on the employment density assumptions, the cost per employee can be expressed as a cost per square foot.
Table 10. Child Care Fees for Nonresidential Development
As shown, the maximum development impact fees are:
Single-Family. $12,257 per single family unit.
Multifamily. $9,355 per multifamily/apartment unit.
Accessory Dwelling Units. Note that Senate Bill 13 (effective 1/1/2020 – 12/31/2024) precludes jurisdictions from charging impact fees on ADUs under 750 square feet. Office/R&D. $10.07 per office/R&D building square foot. Retail. $5.03 per retail building square foot.
Hotel. $3.35 per hotel building square foot.
Industrial. $3.35 per industrial building square foot.
While these maximum child care development impact fees are driven by marginal demand and average costs (rather than the City’s capital improvement list), the City has provided some examples of how it may use the revenue to invest in child care facility expansion throughout San Item Notes
Cost per Childcare Space $80,391 See Table 8
Childcare Space Demand per Employee 0.0417 San Mateo County ELF Study, 2017 Cost per Employee $3,352
Jobs per Square Foot
Office/R&D 0.0030 jobs per sq.ft.
Retail 0.0015 jobs per sq.ft.
Hotel 0.0010 jobs per sq.ft.
Industrial 0.0010 jobs per sq.ft.
Fee by Land Use Category
Office/R&D $10.07 per sq.ft.
Retail $5.03 per sq.ft.
Hotel $3.35 per sq.ft.
Industrial $3.35 per sq.ft.
Sources: Brion Economics Team; City of San Carlos Linkage Fee Nexus Study, Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc. and Strategic Econom ics; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Assumption
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 218
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Carlos. More detailed plans will be developed as part of the City’s future planning efforts and/or through negotiations with prospective developers.
City contribution to new child care facilities located within new or existing private developments.
Loans or grants to providers operating Small or Large Family Child Care Homes, seeking to create/expand capacity.
Loans or grants to providers operating Child Care Centers, seeking to create/expand capacity.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 219
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
5. MITIGATION FEE ACT NEXUS FINDINGS
Development impact fees can be charged to new development under the Mitigation Fee Act.
Nexus findings are provided below addressing: 1) the purpose of the fee, 2) the specific use of fee revenue, 3) the relationship between the facility improvements and the type of development, 4) the relationship between the need for the facility improvements and the type of development, and 5) the relationship between the amount of the fee and the proportionality of cost specifically attributable to development. The technical information and calculations provided support these nexus findings/requirements.
Purpose
The fee will support provision of adequate levels of child care facility spaces in the City as new development occurs and will help ensure that new development pays its fair share of child care facility costs.
Use of Fee
Fee revenue will contribute funding towards the creation or expansion of new child care spaces in the City.
Relationship
New residential and nonresidential development and the associated new residents and workers in San Carlos will increase demand for child care spaces. Fee revenue from this new development will be used to increase the number of child care spaces thereby increasing the availability of child care spaces and addressing demand from the new residents and workers.
Need
There is a demonstrated shortage of child care spaces in the City, and each new residential and nonresidential development project adds to the need for quality child care spaces. While this fee program cannot be used to address existing deficiencies, new child care spaces are necessary to avoid exacerbating the current shortage.
Proportionality
The marginal demand for child care spaces from new residents and employees in the City and the average cost of developing those spaces are used to ensure that new development funds a sufficient number of child care spaces to mitigate its own demand, but no more. In this way, the contribution of new development is proportional to its impact and is not expanded beyond its appropriate share.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 220
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx
6. FEE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION
The child care development impact fee will need to be adopted by City Resolution as enabled by a new Ordinance. The Ordinance will allow the City Council to adopt, by Resolution, a fee schedule consistent with supporting technical analysis and findings provided in this Report. The Resolution approach to setting the fee allows periodic adjustments of the fee amount that may be necessary over time, without amending the enabling Ordinance. It is anticipated that the City will develop a new Ordinance as part of this study process. This new Ordinance addresses the primary implementation and administrative issues and procedures associated with the fee program. A brief summary of the key implementation and administrative elements is provided below.
Fee Collection and Amount
Applicable Land Uses
All new development that occurs within the City of San Carlos, except as specifically exempted by the Ordinance, shall pay the child care development impact fee. While the maximum fee amount will be determined by the Mitigation Fee Act Nexus Study, the City may elect to charge less for a variety of reasons and under certain circumstances, as [will be] described in the Ordinance. In any case, the applicable fees will be published in a Fee Schedule made available by the City and updated periodically. The amount will vary by land use, as shown in Table 1.
It is possible that certain projects may not fit neatly into the identified categories. In cases where such ambiguity exists, the City’s Community Development Director will need to make a determination as to the applicable fees. The Fee Ordinance articulates guidelines for resolving discrepancies and/or disputes.
Exemptions
The City may also elect not to impose fees for certain categories of development, though alternative funding sources to offset a loss in fee revenue would need to be provided. For example, the City may elect to exempt developers from paying fees on any affordable housing units they build. Likewise, the City may enter into a Development Agreement that specifically exempts all or a portion of the City fees.
Alternative Means of Satisfying Fee Requirement
As [will be] described in the Ordinance, the City may specify alternative means of satisfying the child care fee requirement, when doing so accelerates or enhances the number of child care spaces available in the City. For example, new non-residential development greater than 50,000 square feet may meet its fee obligation by building child care space onsite at a ratio of 10 percent, such that a 50,000 sq.ft. development provides at least 5,000 sq.ft. of child care space) and contracting with a licensed child care provider to operate the child care facility. This threshold of 50,000 sq.ft. ensures that the size of the child care facility is sufficient to serve enough children (approx. 50) to support efficient operations. This option may only be exercised if a child care use onsite is consistent with the General Plan and zoning. In addition, the City will
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 221
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx need to coordinate with the applicant to ensure that the child care space will be able to meet state licensing requirements (for indoor and outdoor space).
The City also may be willing to consider the development of an off-site child care center in-lieu of paying the child care impact fees.
Timing of Establishing Effective Fees
Senate Bill 330, the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019,” requires jurisdictions to charge the fees in effect at the time an application for development is submitted, regardless of when the fees are to be paid. Jurisdictions may not increase fees during a project’s application period, unless the increase is related to an annual fee adjustment as described below.
Fee Escalation
The ordinance allows for an automatic adjustment of the fee to keep pace with inflationary increases in construction costs. This allows the fee level to keep pace with inflation without requiring an annual approval process. This adjustment is based on the Construction Cost Index (CCI) published by the Engineering News Record (ENR), a source widely used in the construction industry, and by many jurisdictions as a basis for making annual inflation adjustments to their development impact fees. ENR’s CCI has been published consistently every month since 1967. As such ENR is one of the most reliable and consistent indices that track trends in construction costs.
Senate Bill 330, the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019,” allows fee increases during a project’s application period if the fee increases are the result of an annual fee adjustment based on an independently published cost index and referenced within the relevant establishing ordinance or resolution.
Timing and Manner of Payment
The City’s Ordinance addresses issues related to the timing and manner of payment for the fee including the potential for fee deferrals, payment plans, credits and reimbursements, exemptions, and related adjustments.
Annual Review and Five-Year Review
Annual Review
This Report and the technical information contained herein should be maintained and reviewed periodically by the City as necessary to ensure alignment of facility needs and new development and to enable the adequate programming of funding sources. To the extent that improvement requirements, costs, or development potential changes over time, the Fee Program may need to be updated. Specifically, AB 1600 (at Gov. Code §§ 66001(c), 66006(b)(1)) stipulates that each local agency that requires payment of a fee make specific information available to the public annually within 180 days of the last day of the fiscal year. This information includes the following:
A description of the type of fee in the account
The amount of the fee
The beginning and ending balance of the fund
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 222
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx The amount of fees collected and interest earned
Identification of the improvements constructed
The total cost of the improvements constructed
The fees expended to construct the improvement
The percent of total costs funded by the fee
If sufficient fees have been collected to fund the construction of an improvement, the agency must specify the approximate date for construction of that improvement. Because of the dynamic nature of growth and infrastructure requirements, the City should monitor development activity, the need for improvements, and the adequacy of the fee revenues and other available funding. Formal annual review of the fee program should occur, at which time adjustments should be made.
Five-Year Review
Fees will be collected from new development within the City immediately; however, use of these funds may need to wait until a sufficient fund balance can be accrued. Per Government Code Section 66006, the City is required to deposit, invest, account for, and expend the fees in a prescribed manner. The fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the Fee account or fund, and every five years thereafter, the City is required to make all of the following findings with respect to that portion of the account or fund remaining unexpended:
Identify the purpose for which the fee is to be put;
Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged;
Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements; and
Designate the approximate dates on that the funding referred to in the above paragraph is expected to be deposited in the appropriate account or fund.
Once sufficient funds have been collected to complete the specified projects, the City must commence construction within 180 days. If they fail to do this, the City is required to refund the unexpended portion of the fee and any accrued interest to the then current owner.
Accounting, Reporting, and Updates
Accounting
Surplus Funds
AB 1600 also requires that if any portion of a fee remains unexpended or uncommitted in an account for five years or more after deposit of the fee, the City Council shall make findings once each year: (1) to identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put, (2) to demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it was charged, (3) to identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements, and (4) to designate the approximate dates on which the funding identified in (3) is expected to be deposited into the appropriate fund.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 223
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 17 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx If adequate funding has been collected for a certain improvement, an approximate date must be specified as to when construction on the improvement will begin. If the findings show no need for the unspent funds, or if the conditions discussed above are not met, and the administrative costs of the refund do not exceed the refund itself, the local agency that has collected the funds must refund them.
Credits and Reimbursements
It is recommended that, under certain and limited circumstances as determined by the City, the Impact Fee Ordinance allow developers subject to the fee to obtain credits, reimbursements, or exemptions. Fee credits, reimbursements, or exemptions should not be allowed by right but rather should be subject to a case-by-case review by City staff and Council to ensure that such credits or reimbursements are warranted and appropriate.
A fee credit—as defined by an annual cost review or other recent evaluation of cost—may be allowed if a developer provides a particular off-site facility or improvement that is of citywide benefit. For example, the City may elect to offer a fee credit to developers who develop child care facilities off-site and of citywide benefit. In the event there is a discrepancy between the estimated and actual costs of construction for a project where a fee credit is being provided, if the actual construction costs are less than the estimate, the City will not reimburse the developer for any difference between the actual and estimated costs; and if the actual construction costs are more than the estimate, the City will not provide any additional funding to the developer.
Reimbursements should be considered for developers who contribute more funding and/or build and dedicate infrastructure items that exceed their proportional obligation if the project funded is of high priority. Such reimbursements should be provided as fee revenue becomes available and should include a reasonable factor for interest earned on the reimbursable amount. It should not compromise the implementation of other priority capital projects. A provision for including such interest payments as additional costs in subsequent fees can be included in the Ordinance.
Reimbursements would be granted on a discretionary basis only and not granted as a right.
Internal Loaning of Funds
Loans between the impact fee funds may be used from time to time to facilitate the construction of needed facilities and assure adequate cash flow. Any such loan shall be made in accordance with applicable law, as interpreted by the City Attorney of the City of San Carlos, and all funds shall be placed in separate accounts.
Reporting
AB 1483 (at Gov. Code §§ 65940.1(a)) requires all jurisdictions make available on their website the following:
A current schedule of fees, exactions, and affordability requirements; All zoning ordinances and development standards;
The current and five previous annual fee reports or annual financial reports; and An archive of impact fee nexus studies conducted on or after January 1, 2018.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 224
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study
Draft Report 7/14/21
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211028_San Carlos Childcare Fe e Update\Report\211028_Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study_San C arlos_Draft Report_2021July14.docx Updates
Additionally, it is common for cities to undertake a comprehensive update of nexus studies and associated development impact fee programs every five to eight years to account for changes in facility development costs among other factors.
6.k.2
Packet Pg. 225
Attachment: Child Care Impact Fee Nexus Study Draft Report (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee) Appendix A-1
Childcare Development Impact Fee Survey
San Carlos Childcare Fee Study, EPS #181090
Residential Commercial
San Francisco San Francisco Child Care Impact Fee 2016 (Residential) 1985 (Commercial) 2021 $1.18 - $2.35 per sq.ft. depending on project size $2.02 per sq.ft.
Replacement of use and plan area fees
are different. Some plan area fees have
a percentage going to child care.
Link
Santa Monica Los Angeles Child Care Linkage Fee 2006 2019 $154.69 per unit (multifamily) Hotel $3.68 per sq.ft.
Retail $5.25 per sq.ft.
Office $7.34
per sq.ft.
Link
Berkeley Alameda Child Care Mitigation Fee 1993 2012 N/A Hotel $1.50 per sq.ft
Retail/Restaurant $1.25 per sq.ft
Office $1.25 per sq.ft
Industrial/Manufacturing $0.75 per sq.ft
Warehouse/Storage $0.62 per sq.ft.
R&D $0.80
per sq.ft
Link (Fee Range)
Link (Fee by Usage)
San Mateo San Mateo Child Care Development Fee 2004 2021 N/A $1.09 per sq.ft. Link South San Francisco San Mateo Childcare Impact Fee 2001 2020 $1,851 - $1,979 per unit
depending on du/ac. Other is
$1.28 per sq.ft.
Hotel $0.18 per sq.ft.
Retail/Commercial $0.68 per sq.ft.
Office/R&D $0.57 per sq.ft.
Industrial $0.54 per sq.ft.
Link
Livermore Alameda Social and Human Services
Facility Fee 2008 2021
$1,298 per unit (multifamily);
$1,415 per unit (single family
attached); $1,677 per unit (single
family detached)
Service $5 per sq.ft.
Retail $5 per sq.ft.
Office $7 per sq.ft.
R&D/ Manufacturing $3 per sq.ft.
Fee revenues used for child care
facilities, senior facilities, and facilities
for the homeless.
Link
San Ramon Contra Costa School Age Child Care Fee 1988 2021 $959.18 per unit (single-family) $516.82 per unit (multifamily)
Hotel $0.17 per sq.ft.
Retail $0.28 per sq.ft.
Office $0.61 per sq.ft.
Industrial $0.19
per sq.ft.
Link
Clayton Contra Costa Childcare Fee 1988 2020 $205 per unit (single-family) $205 per unit (multifamily) $0.10 per sq. ft Fee was last updated in 2009 and remains the same in 2020. Link
Sources: Websites of individual jurisdictions; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Description Link/SourceCity County Fee Name Date Implemented Latest Fee Year Available
Fee Levels
6.k.3
Packet Pg. 226
Attachment: Appendix A-1 - Model Update (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
6.k.4
Packet Pg. 227
Attachment: Aggregate Fee Burden (Adopt Ord Child Care Development Impact Fee)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Establishing 15 Miles Per Hour Prima Facie Limit Along Qualified City Streets in School Zones When Children Are Present.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing a prima facie speed limit of 15 miles per hour along qualified City streets in school zones.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications at this time.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council has identified mobility, traffic, and transportation infrastructure as one of its strategic goals in the 2022 Strategic Pl an. One of the objectives associated with this goal is to implement the citywide Safe Routes to School initiative which seeks to improve street conditions in order to encourage children to walk or bike to school.
One way to i mprove street conditions is to reduce the speed limit in school zones in order to minimize the risk of severe or fatal conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists.
The California Vehicle Code (“CVC”) governs speed limits and Section 22352 states, “The prima facie limits are as follows and shall be applicable unless changed as authorized in this code and, if so changed, only when signs have been erected giving notice thereof:
1. On any highway, in any business or residence district unless a different speed is determined by local authority or the Department of Transportation under procedures set forth in this code.
2. When approaching or passing a sc hool building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching or passing any school grounds which are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign. For purposes of this subparagraph, standard “SCHOOL” warning signs may be placed at any distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds.
7.a
Packet Pg. 228
2 3. When passing a senior center or other facility primarily used by senior citizens, contiguous to a street other than a state highwa y and posted with a standard “SENIOR” warning sign. A local authority may erect a sign pursuant to this paragraph when the local agency makes a determination that the proposed signing should be implemented.
A local authority may request grant funding from the Active Transportation Program pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 2380) of Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, or any other grant funding available to it, and use that grant funding to pay for the erection of those signs, or may utilize any other funds available to it to pay for the erection of those signs, including, but not limited to, donations from private sources.” The prima facie speed limit can be reduced to 15 miles per hour under CVC Section 22358.4(b) which states, “A 15 mi les per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, a school building or the grounds of a school building, co ntiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour.” Furthermore, under CVC Section 2235.4(b)(2), the prima facie speed limit can only be applied to streets that have a maximum of two travel lanes and a maximum posted prima facie limit of 30 miles per hour immediately prior to and after a school zone.
ANALYSIS:
In June 2022, staff retained W -Trans, Inc. to prepare engineering and traffic studies for 15 streets around Arundel Elementary, Arroyo Elementary, Brittan Acres Elementary, Central Middle School, Heather Elementary, and White Oak Elementary:
Street To From
Cedar St Cherry St Arroyo Ave
Arroyo Ave Cedar St Elm St
Chestnut St Baytree Rd Cherry St
Phelps Rd Arguello Park San Carlos Ave
Arundel Rd Arundel Elementary School San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr Phelps Rd
Belle Ave Upper Lupin Wy Knoll Dr
Tamarack Ave Elizabeth St Arroyo Ave
Dartmouth Ave San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr
Clifford Ave Eaton Ave Belle Roche Ave
Melendy Dr Portofino Dr Hewitt Dr
Cedar St Belmont Ave Saint Francis Wy
White Oak Way Park Ave White Oaks Elementary School
White Oak Way White Oaks Elementary School Chestnut St
Fairmont Ave Park Ave Cedar St
7.a
Packet Pg. 229
3 W-Trans performed engineering and traffic studies for the street segments in the chart above .
Based on the data, they concluded that all streets satisfied the criteria listed in the CVC Section 22358 and are eligible for reduction to 15 miles per hour in school zones.
Pursuant to the CVC, the reduction of the prima facie speed limit to 15 miles per hour in school zones requires engineering and traffic studies, adoption of an ordinance or resolution by the City Council, and installation of regulatory signage.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution reducing the prima facie speed limit to 15 miles per hour in school zones when children are present , including drop-off and pick-up times and recess periods, for the qualified street segments listed above.
ALTERNATIVES:
Options available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a resolution establishing a prima facie speed limit of 15 miles per hour along qualified City streets in school zones; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Steven Machida,
Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. San Carlos School Speed Zone Study
7.a
Packet Pg. 230
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT OF 15 MILES PER HOUR ALONG QUALIFIED CITY STREETS IN SCHOOL ZONES WHEN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT.
WHEREAS, the City Council has identified mobility, traffic, and transportation infrastructure as one of its strategic goals in the 2022 Strategic Plan; and
WHEREAS, one objective associated with this goal includes implementation of a citywide Safe Routes to School initiative to improve street conditions in order to encourage children to walk or bike to school; and
WHEREAS, one way of improving street conditions is to reduce the speed limit in school zones in order to minimize the risk of severe or fatal conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, the California Vehicle Code (“CVC”) governs how speed limits are established and grants local jurisdictions the authority to establish certain speed limits on qualified streets; and
WHEREAS, the CVC also defines the criteria that must be satisfied for these speed limits to be implemented. CVC 22358.4(b) permits 15 mile per hour school zones and extended 25 mile per hour school zones on streets that satisfy the following conditions: no more than two through traffic lanes; a posted speed limit of 30 mile per hour or lower; within a residence district (as defined by the CVC); and contiguous to a school; and
WHEREAS, in June 2022, staff retained W-Trans, Inc. to prepare engineering and traffic studies for 15 streets around Arundel Elementary, Arroyo Elementary, Brittan Acres Elementary, Clifford Elementary School, Central Middle School, Heather Elementary, St. Charles Elementary, Tierra Linda Middle School & Mariposa Upper Elementary School, and White Oak Elementary:
Street To From
Cedar St Cherry St Arroyo Ave
Arroyo Ave Cedar St Elm St
Chestnut St Baytree Rd Cherry St
Phelps Rd Arguello Park San Carlos Ave
Arundel Rd Arundel Elementary School San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr Phelps Rd
Belle Ave Upper Lupin Wy Knoll Dr
Tamarack Ave Elizabeth St Arroyo Ave
Dartmouth Ave San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr
Clifford Ave Eaton Ave Belle Roche Ave
Melendy Dr Portofino Dr Hewitt Dr
Cedar St Belmont Ave Saint Francis Wy
White Oak Way Park Ave White Oaks Elementary School
White Oak Way White Oaks Elementary School Chestnut St
Fairmont Ave Park Ave Cedar St
7.a.1
Packet Pg. 231
Attachment: Resolution (School Zone Speed Limits)
WHEREAS, W-Trans performed engineering and traffic studies for these street segments and based on the data, they concluded that all streets satisfied the criteria listed in the CVC Section 22358 and are eligible for reduction to 15 miles per hour in school zones; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the CVC, the reduction of the prima facie speed limit to 15 miles per hour in school zones requires engineering and traffic studies, adoption of an ordinance or resolution by City Council, and installation of regulatory signage; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution reducing the prima facie speed limit to 15 miles per hour in school zones when children are present outside of school, including drop-off and pick-up times as well as recess periods, for the qualified street segments listed.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the San Carlos City Council establishes a prima facie speed limit of 15 miles per hour along qualified City streets in school zones when children are present.
* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 8th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
7.a.1
Packet Pg. 232
Attachment: Resolution (School Zone Speed Limits)
City of San Carlos
Summary of School Zone Speed Surveys
No. Street From To
Posted Speed
Limit (per
city) (MPH)
85th %‐tile
(mph)
10 MPH
Pace (mph)
RAW
Nearest 5
mph to
85th
1 Cedar St Cherry St Arroyo Ave 25 29 21 ‐30 30
2 Arroyo Ave Cedar St Elm St 25 30 20 ‐29 30
3 Chestnut St Baytree Rd Cherry St 25 25 16 ‐25 25
4 Phelps Rd Arguello Park San Carlos Ave 25 29 20 ‐29 30 5 Arundel Rd Arundel Elementary School San Carlos Ave 25 29 21 ‐30 30 6 San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr Phelps Rd25 40 29 ‐38 40 7 Belle Ave Upper Lupin Wy Knoll Dr 25 29 20 ‐29 30
8 Tamarack Ave Elizabeth St Arroyo Ave 25 30 21 ‐30 30 9 Dartmouth Ave San Carlos Ave Wellington Dr 25 31 23 ‐31 30 10 Clifford Ave Eaton Ave Belle Roche Ave 25 31 22 ‐31 30 11 Melendy Dr Portofino Dr Hewitt Dr 25 30 22 ‐31 30 12 Cedar St Belmont Ave Saint Francis Wy 25 34 26 ‐34 35 13 White Oak Way Park Ave White Oaks Elementary School 25 28 19 ‐28 30 14 White Oak Way White Oaks Elementary School Chestnut St 25 32 24 ‐33 30 15 Fairmont Ave Park Ave Cedar St 25 32 24 ‐33 30
7.a.2
Packet Pg. 233
Attachment: San Carlos School Speed Zone Study (School Zone Speed Limits)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 9.30 Noise Control - Section 9.30.070 Exempt Activities, (B) Construction Activities.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council consider introducing an ordinance amending Section
9.30.070(B) of the San Carlos Municipal Code related to construction noise.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There will be no fiscal impact to the City of San Carlos.
BACKGROUND:
Prior to the COVID -19 pandemic, Section 9.30.070 of the San Carlos Municipal Code limited construction activities to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., on Saturdays and Sundays. No constructio n-related activities were permitted on the following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.
During the early stages of COVID -19, and to protect residents from excessive noise and other construction-related impacts while shelter ing in place, the City Manager enacted Emergency Order #1 on April 3, 2020 (Attachment 2) restricting construction noise to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
On May 26, 2020, the City Council reviewed Emergency Order #1 and adopted Resolution No. 2020-026 (Attachment 3) which temporarily established the approved construction noise hours as 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday , and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no construction-related noise on Sundays and holidays.
On April 1, 2022 , the Governor’s Executive Order N -1-22 (Attachment 4) expired, making the temporary construction noise hours established in Resolution No. 2020-026 obsolete. As such, the Council now needs to establish acceptable construction noise hours by ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
7.b
Packet Pg. 234
2 The chart below compares San Carlos’ current construction noise hours with other cities in San Mateo County (NA = Not Allowed):
City Weekday Hours Saturday Hours Sunday Hours Holiday Hours Atherton 8 to 5 NA NA NA
Belmont 8 to 5 10 to 6 NA NA
Burlingame 8 to 7 9 to 6 NA NA
Daly City 8 to 5:30 NA NA NA
Hillsborough 8 to 5 10 to 5 NA NA
Menlo Park 8 to 6 NA NA NA
Redwood City 7 to 8 NA NA NA
Palo Alto 8 to 6 9 to 6 NA NA
San Mateo 7 to 7 9 to 5 12 to 4 12 to 4
S. San Francisco 8 to 8 9 to 8 10 to 6 10 to 6
San Carlos 8 to 5 9 to 5 NA NA
As reflected in the table above, t he current construction noise hours for San Carlos may be considered reasonable and consistent with the construction noise hours of neighboring jurisdictions in San Mateo County.
Since the adoption of the current hours on May 26, 2020 , the community has grown accustomed to the allowable days and timeline (s) and has received f ewer noise complaints.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City maintain the construction noise hours described in Resolution 2020-026: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday , and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no construction-related noise on Sundays and holidays.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Consider introducing an ordinance amending Section 9.30.070(B) of the San Carlos Municipal Code related to construction noise; or
2. Do not introduce the Ordinance; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Lisa Porras,
Planning Manager
7.b
Packet Pg. 235
3 Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Ordinance - Construction Noise
2. City Manager Emergency Order No. 1
3. City Council Resolution 2020-026
4. Governors Executive Order N-1-22
7.b
Packet Pg. 236
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS AMENDING SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.30 NOISE CONTROL – SECTION 9.30.070 EXEMPT ACTIVITIES, (B) CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of San Carlos does ordain as follows:
WHEREAS, San Carlos Municipal Code Section 9.30 establishes reasonable levels of noise control in San Carlos; and
WHEREAS, Section 9.30.070 B. Construction activities, establishes noise hours and allowable days for residential and commercial construction activities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that San Carlos Municipal Code Section
9.30.070 B. Construction activities, needs to be updated to formally adopt the construction noise hours that were adopted under Resolution No. 2020-026 – Temporary Construction Hours in response to the Governor’s COVID-19 Executive Orders; and
WHEREAS, the Governor determined that the Covid-19 Declaration of Emergency is no longer necessary and thereby ended the Declaration of Emergency in San Carlos, thus rendering the temporary construction hours under Resolution 2020-026 ineffective; and
WHEREAS, the construction noise hours adopted under Resolution No. 2020 -026 have been deemed reasonable, that they do not unduly impact the orderly development of housing and construction activities and are consistent with the construction noise hours of neighboring jurisdictions in San Mateo County.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby approves the Municipal Code Ordinance amendments to Chapter 9.30 – Noise Control , as follows (new language is shown with bold underline and removed language is shown in strikethrough):
9.30.070 Exempt activities:
B. Construction activities; such activities, however, shall be limited to the hours of eight a.m. to six five p.m. Monday through Friday, and nine a.m. to five p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. No construction noise-related activities on Sundays and the following holidays:
New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. All gasoline -powered construction equipment shall be equipped with an operating muffler or baffling system as originally provided by the manufacturer, and no modification to these systems is permitted (the Building Official shall have the authority to grant exceptions to construction noise - related activities);
SECTION 3: Severability. That the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable, and, if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
7.b.1
Packet Pg. 237
Attachment: Ordinance - Construction Noise (Construction Noise Hours) SECTION 4: Publication. This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.
* * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was i ntroduced on the 8th day of August, 2022 and passed and adopted as an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting ther eof held on _ ___ day of __ ______, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: ________________________________________________
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: ________________________________________________
ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS: _______________________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
7.b.1
Packet Pg. 238
Attachment: Ordinance - Construction Noise (Construction Noise Hours)
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES/CITY MANAGER EMERGENCY ORDER NO.1
WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) has stated that based on current information a novel coronavirus named “COVID-19” is a serious public health threat; and
WHEREAS, a complete clinical picture of this respiratory disease is not yet fully understood; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2020, and pursuant to Section 101080 of the California Health and Safety Code, the San Mateo County Health Officer (the “Health Officer”) declared a local health emergency throughout San Mateo County related to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”); and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors ratified and extended this declaration of local health emergency; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California declared a state of emergency to help the state prepare for the spread of COVID-19; and WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Health Officer issued a statement on March 10, 2020, that evidence exists of widespread community transmissions of COVID-19 in San Mateo County; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Emergency Services Director, proclaimed the existence of an emergency in San Carlos due to the anticipated impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the City Council of the City of San Carlos ratified and extended this declaration of local health emergency, empowering the City Manager to take measures necessary to respond to the emergency under San Carlos Municipal Code 2.28; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2020, the Health Officer prohibited all public or private gatherings of 50 or more people and urged the cancelation of all gatherings of 10 or more people in a single confined space; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the Health Officer issued an order that, among other things, directs all individuals currently living within San Mateo County to shelter in their place of residence (“Shelter-in-Place Order”), and authorizes individuals to leave their residences only for certain “Essential Activities,” Essential Governmental Functions,” or to operate “Essential Businesses,” all as defined in the Shelter-in Place Order; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order No. N-33-20 ordering all individuals in the State of California to stay home or at their place of residence except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of the federal critical infrastructure sectors; and
WHEREAS, the Governor empowered local cities to take actions to preserve and protect the health and safety of their communities in light of their own circumstances; and DocuSign Envelope ID: 28B5036C-2665-4CA1-9A5E-60D494C2AC39
7.b.2
Packet Pg. 239
Attachment: City Manager Emergency Order No. 1 (Construction Noise Hours) WHEREAS, on March 31, 2020, the Health Officer issued a new order that supersedes and clarifies the order of March 16, 2020 that, among other things, prohibited construction activities, except in limited circumstances:
a. Projects immediately necessary for maintenance, operation or repair of Essential Infrastructure (utilities, airports, transportation, sewers, trash, telecommunications “business infrastructure”, etc.).
b. Projects for Healthcare Operations, including creating or expanding such operations, provided they are directly related to the COVID-19 response. c. Affordable housing, multi-family, and mixed-use developments with at least 10% affordable units.
d. Public Works Projects identified as Essential Governmental functions by the City. e. Shelters and temporary housing for the homeless (not hotels or motels). f. Projects to provide critical non-commercial services to homeless persons. g. Construction to safely shut down and secure a construction site. h. Construction to ensure safe, sanitary or habitable residences or Essential Businesses that cannot be delayed.
WHEREAS, the City has extremely limited construction inspection services and protective gear to prevent inspectors from contaminated job sites and the Federal and State governments have requested that such protective gear be preserved for essential health workers; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to do what it can to help slow the spread of COVID-19, reduce the load on local hospitals and emergency rooms, protect residents from excessive noise, dust, access, parking and other impacts while they are required to shelter in place at their residences that may be near the construction projects that are allowed to proceed under the March 31, 2020 Order; and
WHEREAS, during the existence of this local emergency, pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 2.28, the City Manager, as Director of Emergency Services, is empowered to make and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Manager does hereby make the following order:
1. Effective immediately and until this order is terminated by the City Manager, all construction activity in San Carlos allowed under the Governor’s Order 33-20 and the County Health Officer dated March 31, 2020 shall be limited to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, including set up and securing of the site.
2. The City Manager will regularly review the need for this order to be in place and may elect to modify it should local circumstances or applicable law change.
3. Upon advance approval of the City Manager or his designee, construction activity for public works projects may exceed these time limits, but only to the minimum DocuSign Envelope ID: 28B5036C-2665-4CA1-9A5E-60D494C2AC39
7.b.2
Packet Pg. 240
Attachment: City Manager Emergency Order No. 1 (Construction Noise Hours) extent possible and only for reasons related to health and safety for workers or residents or for inspection work.
4. The City Manager or designee may authorize limited exceptions to Section 1 of this order to protect life, health or safety provided they are consistent with Executive Order No. N33-20 and/or subsequent applicable State or County orders.
Dated: _____________ _____________________________________ Jeff D. Maltbie, City Manager
Acting as Director of Emergency Services
DocuSign Envelope ID: 28B5036C-2665-4CA1-9A5E-60D494C2AC39 April 3, 2020
7.b.2
Packet Pg. 241
Attachment: City Manager Emergency Order No. 1 (Construction Noise Hours)
7.b.3
Packet Pg. 242
Attachment: City Council Resolution 2020-026 (Construction Noise Hours)
7.b.3
Packet Pg. 243
Attachment: City Council Resolution 2020-026 (Construction Noise Hours)
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXECUTIVE ORDER N-1-22
WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, I proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COYID-19; and WHEREAS on March 12, 2021, I issued Executive Order N-25-20, paragraph 11, and on March 17, 2020, I issued Executive Order N-29-20, paragraph 3, waiving certain requirements that public meetings of state bodies occur in-person; and
WHEREAS on June 11, 2021, I issued Executive Order N-08-21 to roll back certain provisions of my COVID-19-related Executive Orders and to clarify that other provisions remained necessary to help California respond to, recover from, and mitigate the impacts of the COYID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS paragraph 42 of Executive Order N-08-21 specified that the waiver of requirements that public meetings of state bodies occur in person would be valid through September 30, 2021; and
WHEREAS on September 16, 2021, I signed into law Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which amended the Government Code and Education Code to provide additional flexibility for state bodies to conduct public meetings via teleconference through January 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS since Thanksgiving, the statewide seven-day average case rate has increased by 805% and the number of COVID-19 hospitalized patients has increased by 154%; and
WHEREAS this surge is being driven by the recent emergence of the Omicron variant, which has recently been estimated to account for approximately 70% of cases sequenced nationally; and
WHEREAS early data suggest that the Omicron variant is more transmissible than the Delta variant; and
WHEREAS requiring large numbers of individuals to gather, and potentially travel long distances, for in-person public meetings could potentially, and unnecessarily, expose numerous people to COYID-19, further contribute to the ongoing surge in cases caused by the Omicron variant, compound disruptions to our economy, and undermine public health measures during the current State of Emergency; and WHEREAS when the Legislature considered AB 361 this past fall, the Omicron variant had not emerged, and the virus had not demonstrated the ability to evade immunity; and
WHEREAS in light of the present surge in cases due to the Omicron variant, and to protect the public health and safety, it is necessary to temporarily extend the flexibilities for state bodies to conduct teleconferences under AB 361 beyond January 31, 2022, to provide state bodies the option of conducting public meetings remotely to reduce the risk of in-person exposure to members of the staff body, staff, and members of the public; and
7.b.4
Packet Pg. 244
Attachment: Governors Executive Order N-1-22 (Construction Noise Hours) WHEREAS under the provisions of Government Code section 8571, I find that strict compliance with the statutes specified in this Order would prevent, hinder, or delay appropriate actions to prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and statutes, and in particular, Government Code sections 8567, 8571, and 8627 do hereby issue the following Order to become effective immediately:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The sunset dates in Education Code section 89305.6, subdivision (g), and Government Code section 11133, subdivision (g), are suspended until March 31, 2022.
2. This Order shall expire at 11 :59 p.m. on April 1, 2022.
I FURTHER DIRECT that as soon as hereafter possible, this Order be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Order.
This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other person.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have
hereunto set my hand and caused
the Great Seal of the State of
California to be affixed this 5th day
of January 2022.
GAVIN NEWSOM
Governor of California
ATTEST:
SHIRLEY WEBER, PH.D.
Secretary of State
7.b.4
Packet Pg. 245
Attachment: Governors Executive Order N-1-22 (Construction Noise Hours)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter Urging Sutter Health to Reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool in San Mateo.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter addressed to Sutter Health on behalf of the City Council to reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool at the Mills Health Cent er in San Mateo or consider the Peninsula Health Care District’s offer to pay all costs to repair, reopen, and manage the pool.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with this action.
BACKGROUND:
The Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool was constructed in the City of San Mateo over 25 years ago using charitable contributions from the residents of San Mateo County. For over 25 years, thousands of residents of San Mateo County used the therapeutic pool to address health issues related to permanent disabilities, debilitating injuries, autoimmune disorders, and mobility impairments.
Sutter Health temporarily closed the p ool in March 2020 due to the Coronavirus pandemic. It then permanently closed the pool in June 2021.
The Mickelson pool is the only facility of its kind in San Mateo County. Closing the Mickelson Therapy Pool removes a valuable healthcare resource for people in San Mateo County to assist them in daily activities.
Over 4,300 patients , caregivers, and community members have signed a petition to reopen Mickelson in order to increase the health, independence, and dignity of residents who rely upon it. Legislature at the County level has also supported the initiative with Speaker Pro Temp ore Kevin Mullin and Senator Josh Becker having written letters to Sutter Health asking for their commitment to find a solution. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and the Sequoia Healthcare District have both passed resolutions calling for the pool's reopening.
7.c
Packet Pg. 246
2 ANALYSIS:
The Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool is an Americans with Disabilities Act accessible warm water therapy pool. It has historically provided both preventative and interventionist therapies to resid ents of San Mateo County suffering from health issues. There are no comparable warm water therapy pools that can adequately accommodate the residents of San Mateo County who previously relied upon Mickelson Therapy Pool and who are now suffering from acute and chronic physical pain and mental anguish without it.
By submitting a letter on behalf of the City Council, the Mayor of the City of San Carlos would encourage Sutter Health to promptly reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool for community use with the same open access hours that it had prior to January of 2020 in order to preserve and improve the health of residents in San Mateo County who have historically relied upon it for their health, independence, and dignity.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Authorize the Mayor to submit the attached letter on behalf of the City Council to Sutter Health to promptly reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool for community use with the same open access hours that it had prior to January of 2020 or consider the Peninsula Health Care District’s offer to pay all costs to repair, reopen, and manage the pool; or
2. Do not authorize the Mayor to submit the attached letter; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Nil Blackburn,
Assistant City Manager
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Letter to Sutter Health re Mickelson Pool
7.c
Packet Pg. 247
August 9, 2022
Mr. James Conforti, Interim President and CEO
Sutter Health
2200 River Plaza Drive
Sacramento, CA 95833
Dear Mr. Conforti,
On behalf of the San Carlos City Council, I am writing to urge Sutter Health to reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center Therapy Pool . If this is not feasible, I strongly implore you to consider the Peninsula Health Care District’s offer to pay all costs to repair, reopen, and manage the pool.
Built using charitable contributions from residents of San Mateo County over 25 years ago, this is the only facility of its kind in San Mateo County.
Closing the Mickelson Therapy Poo l removes a valuable healthcare resource for people in San Mateo County who suffer from health issues related to permanent disabilities, debilitating injuries, autoimmune disorders, and mobility impairments.
The City of San Carlos stands with Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin, Senator Josh Becker, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, the Sequoia Healthcare District, and 4,300+ patients, caregivers, and community members who have written letters or signed a petition urging Sutter Health to reopen Mickelson Pool in order to inc rease the health, independence, and dignity of residents who rely upon it.
On behalf of the City Council of San Carlos, I respectfully urge you to promptly reopen the Mack E. Mickelson Arthritis and Rehabilitation Center therapy pool for c ommunity use with the same open access hours that it had prior to January of 2020 or consider the Peninsula Health Care District’s offer to pay all costs to repair, reopen, and manage the pool.
Sincerely,
Sara McDowell, Mayor
cc: Sutter Health Board of Directors
Janet Wagner, CEO, Sutter Health Mills-Peninsula Medical Center Peninsula Health Care District Board of Directors
Lindsay Raike, CEO, Warm Water Wellness Inc.
7.c.1
Packet Pg. 248
Attachment: Letter to Sutter Health re Mickelson Pool (Support Reopening of Mack E. Mickelson Pool)
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving a Relocation Agreement, an Assignment and Assumption of Ground Lease Agreement, and a Sublease Agreement for a Digital Billboard at 611 Industrial Road (APN 046-090-370).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving: 1) a relocation agreement; 2) an assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement; and 3) a sublease agreement for a digital billboard at 611 Industrial Road.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Upon the commencement date of the sublease agreement, the City will receive a one -time $150,000 nonrefundable payment and an ongoing 32% share of gross advertising revenue annually from the proposed billboard, with a minimum payment guarantee of $210,000 annually.
The minimum payment guarantee includes an escalation of 12.5% every fifth year. Thus, the minimum income to be received by the City under the lease agreement is about $5,700,000 for the initial 20-year term, or about $9,400,000 if the 10-year option term is exercised.
The City will pay $60,000 annually with a 2% increase every year to the property owner (“Lessor”). Orion Outdoor Media (OOM) will make a commensurate payment to the City annually to cover this amount. These payments from OOM are in addition to the 32% revenue share and minimum payment guarantee of $210,000 described above.
BACKGROUND:
In December 2013, the City entered into its first lease agreement to operate a digital billboard on City-controlled land at Bransten Road near U.S. Route 101 with Clear Channel Outdoor . At its August 27, 2018 meeting, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute agreements for the placement of a second digital billboard operated by Clear Ch annel on property along U.S. Route 101 at 815 American Street. On October 16, 2018, the City entered into a similar agreement with Outfront Media for a third digital billboard on property leased from the City. A fourth digital billboard is located in the C ity at 2 Circle Star Way but resides on private property and was built prior to the requirement that new billboards must be located on City-controlled property. A fifth digital billboard has now been proposed in San Carlos at 611 Industrial Road by Orion Outdoor Media (OOM).
7.d
Packet Pg. 249
2 In accordance with San Carlos Municipal Code §8.22 and §12.28, any new billboard must be located on City -controlled property. The property at 611 Industrial Road is owned by a private party, with whom the City will take assignment of a separate lease agreement previously executed between the property owner and OOM. Subsequently, the City will execute a Sublease Agreement with OOM. The lease agreements will allow OOM to construct an outdoor advertising structure with two 14’ x 48’ light emitting diode (LED) displays, connections, electrical supply equipment , and accessories at the leased property site. The 611 Industrial Road billboard would be physically identical to the other three billboards located on City - controlled property.
After several months of negotiations and drafts of the assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement, sublease agreement, and relocation agreement, the finalized documents were agreed upon by all parties. These agreements are included in this report as at tachments and further described in the analysis section of this report.
Map of billboards in and near San Carlos
ANALYSIS:
The documents under consideration would authorize the installation of a new digital billboard at 611 Industrial Road as approved by the Planning Commission at its February 22, 2022 meeting.
At this meeting, the Planning Commission approved a Design Review Certificate and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed digital billboard at 611 Industrial Road.
7.d
Packet Pg. 250
3 The assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement would take assignment from OOM of the existing lease agreement with R & M Dean Associates, LLC, the private property owner of 611 Industrial Road (“Lessor”). In this arrangement, the lessor leases the premises exclusivel y to the City for the purpose of entering into a sublease with OOM. The City pays annual rent of $60,000 to lessor under the lease with a 2% annual increase. The remaining terms of the lease agreement are concurrent with those of the sublease agreement, with the exception of the rent amount explained in further detail below.
The sublease agreement would be made and entered into by and between the City and OOM.
The major terms of the sublease agreement include the following:
1. Term. 20-year initial term with an option to extend for an additional 10 years.
2. Rent. The net result of the lease and sublease would be that the City will receive an amount equal to the greater of two hundred and ten thousand dollars ($210,000), or thirty-two percent (32%), of the g ross advertising revenue actually received in a calendar year by OOM for advertising places on the billboard, prorated for partial years. Additionally, OOM will pay $60,000 annually to the City with annual increases of 2%, which the City will then pass on to the Lessor as means of paying the annual sublease rent amount.
3. Community Benefits. The City shall receive $150,000 from OOM as a one -time, non- refundable payment on the commencement date of the sublease agreement.
4. City Advertising Spots. OOM will pro vide to the City, at no cost to the City, one guaranteed spot in a standard rotation on the billboard four times per calendar year during the term; provided that only one spot may be used each quarter. Each spot will run no greater than eight seconds in th e standard rotation of eight spots per digital display and continue for two weeks in duration (or a minimum of 14,000 spots during each two week period).
5. Amber Alert Messages. OOM shall make the billboard available at no cost to Caltrans for the purpose of displaying “Amber Alert” messages in accordance with the Amber Alert Guidelines set forth in Exhibit E to the Sublease Agreement.
6. City Sign and Logo. On each side of the sign structure, OOM shall upon request install, operate, maintain and repair a Ci ty sign that faces the same direction as a display area on the billboard.
7. Compliance with Laws. OOM shall conform to all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to, laws and regulations pertaining to outdoor advertising.
8. Prohibited A dvertising. OOM, within a reasonable time following written request therefor, shall remove from the billboard any advertising message that in the reasonable judgment of the City: (i) is false, misleading, or deceptive; (ii) directly promotes the sale or use of tobacco products, illegal drugs or products, or cannabis; (iii) contains "obscene matter," as that term is defined in California Penal Code section 311 on the Effective Date; (iv) advertises an adult entertainment establishment; (v) promotes or opposes a candidate or individual for public office or who is running for office, or promotes or opposes a ballot measure; or (vi) contains
7.d
Packet Pg. 251
4 language that is obscene, vulgar, profane, or scatological, or that presents a clear - and-present danger of causing riot, d isorder, or other imminent threat to public safety, peace, or order.
9. Payment in Excess of Minimum Guaranteed Rent. If the percentage rent in any sublease year exceeds the guaranteed minimum rent paid by OOM to City, the difference shall be paid to City w ithin forty -five (45) days following the end of the sublease year. On January 1 of the year after the fifth anniversary of the commencement date, and every fifth year thereafter, the minimum guaranteed rent shall be increased by 12.5%.
As outlined in the relocation agreement, OOM has reached an agreement with Cal trans to remove two static billboards located outside of San Carlos, in Shasta County. Presently there are two static billboards located in San Carlos. The owners of both billboards have indicated that they are unwilling to consider their removal or transfer their ownership at this time.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a resolution approving a relocation agreement, an assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement, and a sublease agreement for a digital billboard at 611 Industrial Road; or
2. Do not approve the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Lisa Porras,
Planning Manager
Adam Aronson, Economic Development
and Housing Manager
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard
2. Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard
3. Relocation Agreement - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard
4. Assignment and Assumption of Ground Lease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard
7.d
Packet Pg. 252
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 - _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
APPROVING A RELOCATION AGREEMENT, AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF
GROUND LEASE AGREEMENT, AND A SUBLEASE AGREEMENT FOR A DIGITAL BILLBOARD AT 611 INDUSTRIAL ROAD (APN 046-090-370).
___________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, Orion Outdoor Media ("OOM") has proposed a relocation agreement and 20- year sublease, with one, 10-year option term with the City of San Carlos for the installation of a new digital billboard at 611 Industrial Road (APN 046-090-370), (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, through an assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement the City is entering into a lease agreement with R & M Dean, LLC, the owner of the real property at 611 Industrial Road; and
WHEREAS, the sublease with OOM provides that the City of San Carlos will receive $150,000 as a non-refundable upfront payment, a 32% share of annual gross advertising revenue, minimum guaranteed payments of $2 10,000 per year escalated by 12.5% every fifth year, and that City messages can be displayed on the digital billboard; and
WHEREAS, the r elocation agreement and sublease with OOM directly benefits the City through significant annual income to assist the City in providing vital services to its residents; and
WHEREAS, the relocation a greement, assignment and a ssumption of ground lease agreement, and sublease agreement, attached to the staff report accompanying this Resolution, set forth the terms of the agreements; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 20 22, the Planning Commission approved the Design Review Certificate and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed digital billboard.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby approves as follows:
Section 1. The City hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. The City hereby approves the relocation a greement, assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement, and sublease agreement of the Property located at 611 Industrial Road, San Carlos, California as described in this Resolution and approves the form of the relocation agreement, assignment and assumption of ground lease agreement, and sublease agreement attached to the staff report accompanying this Resolution. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute this relocation a greement, assignment and a ssumption of ground lease agreement, sublease agreement and any related documents and to take all actions necessary for the implementation of the relocation agreement, sublease agreement, and lease assignment.
* * * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was p assed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting held on the 8th day of August, 2022 by the following vote:
7.d.1
Packet Pg. 253
Attachment: Resolution - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
7.d.1
Packet Pg. 254
Attachment: Resolution - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement) OTAD\54300\1253944.11
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
Sublease Agreement
Lease No. ______
THIS SUBLEASE AGREEMENT (“Sublease”) is dated as of _____________, 2022 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF SAN CARLOS (the “City”), a California municipal corporation, and Pallco Enterprises Inc. a California S Corporation DBA ORION OUTDOOR MEDIA (“OOM”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City has entered into a Lease Agreement dated as of _______________, 202 2 (the “Master Lease”) with, R & M Dean Associates, LLC a California limited liability company (the “Master Landlord”) whereby the City is leasing property and airspace along US Highway 101, located at 611 Industrial Road, San Carlos, California 94070 (APN 046-090-370), as further described and depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “ Property”); and WHEREAS, OOM is in the business of outdoor advertising; WHEREAS, the City and OOM desire to enter into this Sublease to allow OOM to construct an outdoor adverti sing structure, including, without limitation, two (2) 14’ x 48’ LED (Light Emitting Diode) displays (the “ Digital Displays”), fixture connections, electrical supply, and connections, copy and any other equipment and accessories as OOM may place thereon (collectively, the “ Sign”) on a portion of the Property as shown generally on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Premises”), to the extent necessary for placement of the Sign; WHEREAS, the City and OOM have agreed that development of the Premises for the Sign’s use is in furtherance of the City’s desire to promote civic purposes and commerce, make community announcements and develop the City as an attractive location for customers and business owners; and
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the faithful performance of the City and OOM of the terms, covenants and conditions hereof and of the payments herein provided to be made by OOM, the City and OOM hereby agree as follows:
AGREEMENTS
1. Use. The City hereby Subleases the Premises exclusively to OOM for the purpose of conducting outdoor advertising, erecting, maintaining, operating, improving, supplementing, posting, painting, illuminating, repairing, reconstructing, repositioning and/or removing the Sign, or any portion thereof. This Sublease includes all rights of ingress and egress over the Property necessary for OOM to legally access the Sign from a public roadway. OOM may license the use of the Sign, or any portion thereof, for any lawful purpose. The City makes no representations or warranties of any kind; express or implied, written or oral, about any of the following: the physical condition of the Premises; the suitability of the Premises for OOM’s anticipated use; any
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 255
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 2
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
limitations on OOM’s use of the Premises, including limitations arising from zoning laws, environmental laws, or other laws, regulations, or governmental requirements; the costs of conducting OOM’s business on the Premises; or the condition of the soils or ground waters of the Premises. By taking possession of the Premises, OOM accepts the Premises “as is” and acknowledges that the Premises is satisfactory for OOM’s purposes. OOM has ascertained the condition of the Premises through its own independent investigation and has relied solely on that independent investigation when entering into this Sublease. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent the Master Landlord makes any representations or warranties to the City with respect to the Premises concerning the subject matters described in this Section 1 or Master Landlord’s ownership of the Premises , OOM acknowledges the representations and warranties made by Master Lessor with respect to the condition and ownership of the Premises and any such representations and warranties, though nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a waiver of any rights OOM may have against the Master Lessor. The City agrees tha t, in the event that any of the representations and warranties made by Master Landlord regarding the Premises are materially incorrect or misleading and could result in any impairment of OOM’s intended use of the Premises as contemplated herein, the City will assign its rights to enforce the Master Lease to OOM for the temporary and limited purpose of to permit OOM to use the Premises as contemplated herein, and pursuing any action against the Master Landlord and recovering any losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages which OOM may incur as a result of such materially incorrect or misleading representations and warranties. This assignment will expire at the conclusion of the actions for recovery as set forth above and shall in no event act to prevent City from seeking recovery of any losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages resulting from such materially incorrect or misleading representations and warranties from Master Lessor or any and all remedies it may have against OOM.
2. Term.
2.1 The term of this Sublease shall commence on the Commencement Date and continue to a date which is twenty (20) years from the Commencement Date (the “ Initial Term”). OOM may extend the Initial Term for one (1) additional ten (10) year period (the “Extension Term ”) by providing written notice to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term of OOM’s election to extend the Initial Term. Suc h Extension Term shall commence on the date imm ediately following the twent ieth anniversary of the Commencement Date and continue to the date which is the thirtieth anniversary of the Commencement Date (any Extension Term and, together with the Initial Ter m, is sometimes referred to herein as the “ Term”). The City agrees that, if OOM exercises its right to extend the Initial Term, City shall exercise its corresponding right under the Master Lease. Furthermore, in accordance with the Master Lease, OOM may exercise such right to extend the Initial Term by providing notice to both the City and the Master Landlord and any such notice from OOM shall be deemed to be the exercise by the City of its intent to extend the term of the Master Lease.
2.2 The “ Commencement Date ” is the first day of the calendar month following the date when (i) OOM has obtained of all local, municipal and state governmental permits and approvals ( collectively, the “Governmental Approvals ”) necessary or required for
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 256
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 3
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
the erection, maintenance, and operation of the Sign, including , but not limited to , compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“ CEQA”) and CalT rans requirements, (ii) the construction of the Sign is complete, and (iii) the Sign is fully operational (i.e. the Sign is legally and functionally capable of displaying advertising on the Digital Displays, including meeting all state and federal regulations and requirements ). If the Commencement Date has not occurred within two (2) years of the Effective Date, OOM or City may terminate this Sublease upon providing thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. This Sublease expires automatically at the end of the Term (including if OOM does not exercise its right to extend the Initial Term as set forth in Section 2.1 above). Any holding over after expiration will not constitute a renewal of this Sublease (or the Master Lease) but will result in a tenancy at sufferance, and City and/or the Master Landlord may, without limiting their other rights and remedies, immediately pursue eviction of OOM. Except as provided herein, this Sublease may not be construed as creating an expectation of renewal or a right to hold over after the Term has expired.
3. Permits. OOM agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the Governmental Approvals necessary to construct the Sign at its sole cost and expense, and the City shall reasonably cooperate with OOM to obtain the Governmental Approvals from other agencies having jurisdiction to approve such a Sign. The City shall use reasonable efforts to issue all required Governmental Approvals as are necessary to allow OOM to construct, operate, and maintain the Sign within the City’s authority to review and issue (“City Permits”), pursuant to the City’s established processes and procedures. All Governmental Approvals shall remain the property of OOM. The City shall diligently process OOM’s applications for all City Permits. This Sublease does not commit the City in advance to approve the City Permits; and this Sublease does not constrain the City’s discretion to act in its governmental capacity.
4. Sign. Subject to a Force Majeure Event, within one hundred eighty (180) days, which may be reasonably extended by OOM with City approval an additional one hundred eighty (180) days, after receipt of all necessary Governmental Approvals, OOM shall commence construction of the Sign and shall thereafter complete such construction with diligence. The final design and height, final plans and specifications, and location on the Premises for the Sign shall be substantially similar to the Sign Conceptual Drawing attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein, provided that any material changes to such Sign Conceptual Drawing shall be subject to Governmental Approvals and City’s and the Master Landlord’s approval, not to be unreasonably withheld , conditioned or delayed; and provided, further, that unless such proposed changes result in a material and adverse effect on the operation of the Property, the Master Landlord shall be deemed to have approved such material change in the Sign Conceptual Drawing if City approves such change. OOM may operate the Sign from approximately 6:00 A.M. to 11:59 P.M. local time daily, and in a manner which is sufficient to render it visible at night to passing vehicles. The Digital Displays on the sign may not be illuminated during the hours of 12:00 A.M. to 5:59 A.M. local time daily without specific authorization from the City. For purposes hereof, a “Force Majeure Event” means a cause of delay that is not the fault of the party who is required to perform under this Lease and is beyond that party’s reasonable control, including the elements (including floods, earthquakes, windstorms, and unusually severe weather), fire, energy shortages or rationing, riots, acts of terrorism (including the results of such acts), war or war -defense conditions, acts of any public enemy, epidemics, the actions or inactions of any governmental entity (excluding the City ) or that entity’s agents, litigation, labor
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 257
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 4
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
shortages (including shortages caused by strikes or walkouts), and materials shortages. Except for the construction of the Sign as provided above, OOM may not make any improvement, alteration, addition or change to the Premises without the City’s and Master Landlord’s prior written consent.
5. Content.
5.1 All advertising content displayed by OOM on the Digital Displays shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to laws and regulations pertaining to outdoor advertising, and shall comply with the restrictions set forth in Sections 5.2(a) through 5.2(f) below.
5.2 Following written notice from the City, OOM, within a reasonable time following written request therefor, shall remove from the Sign any advertising message that, in the reasonable judgment of the City:
(a) Is inherently false, misleading, or libelous (i.e., speech that is incapable of being presented in a manner that is not misleading);
(b) Directly promotes the sale or use of tobacco products, illegal drugs or products, marijuana or Cannabis products containing THC content greater than 0.3 percent;
(c) Contains “obscene matter,” as that term is defined in California Penal Code section 311 as of the Effective Date;
(d) advertises an adult entertainment establishment;
(e) Promotes or opposes a candidate or individual for public office or who is running for office, or promotes or opposes a ballot measure; or
(f) Contains language that is obscene, vulgar, profane, or scatological, or that presents a clear -and-present danger of causing riot, disorder, or other imminent threat to public safety, peace, or order.
5.3 OOM may, from time to time, provide an image or representation of any proposed advertising message in advance of placement on the Sign (each a “Proposed Ad”). Within seven (7) business days following receipt by City of a Proposed Ad, City shall notify OOM whether, in the City’s reasonable judgment, the advertisement violates the restrictions set forth in Section 5.2 (each, a “ Content Notice ”). If the City deems the Proposed Ad to violate the restrictions set forth in Section 5.2, OOM shall not place the Proposed Ad on the Sign without first obtaining the City’s express or deemed approval to the Proposed Ad as it may thereafter be revised.
If the City fails timely to provide any Content Notice within such seven (7) business day time period, such Proposed Ad shall be deemed approved. Notwithstanding the foregoing, solely in the event an Proposed Ad is deemed approved pursuant to this Section 5.3 and after such Proposed Ad has been placed on the Sign, if City reasonably determines that such Proposed Ad violates the
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 258
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 5
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
restrictions set forth in Sections 5.2(a) through 5.2(f) above then City may request in writing that OOM remove such Proposed Ad from being displayed on the Sign which notice shall include an explanation for City’s determination and requested removal. OOM shall then remove such Proposed Ad within two (2) business days of OOM’s receipt of such notice requesting removal.
6. Prohibited Uses.
6.1 Hazardous Substances . OOM shall not use, handle, store, transport, generate, release or dispose of any Hazardous Substances on, under, or about the Premises, except as follows: OOM may use Hazardous Substances that OOM needs to install, operate, maintain, repair, improve, reposition, or remove the Sign in accordance with this Sublease, if the City has consented in writing before the Hazardous Substances are brought on the Premises and OOM will comply with all applicable environmental laws . Within ten (10) days of receiving the City’s written request, OOM shall disclose in writing all Hazardous Substances then being used on the Premises, the purpose and duration of the use, and the manner of storage and disposal. “Hazardous Substances” means any material or substance identified on Exhibit D attached hereto.
6.2 Unlawful Activities. OOM shall not use or permit the Premises to be used (including the operation of the Sign) in any way that violates this Sublease, the Master Lease or any statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of any federal, state, or local governmental entity (including the City) (collectively, the “ Legal Requirements”), and nothing shall be done on said Premises which will suspend the insurance upon the Sign owned by OOM. OOM shall not maintain or commit, or permit the maintenance or commission of any public or private nuisance as defined by any law applicable to the Premises . OOM hereby waives any rights to compensation it may have against the City if a court finds that the Sign constitutes a public or priv ate nuisance under any valid and applicable federal, state, or local law and for that reason orders OOM to remove or modify the Sign or to limit its operation , except that, in such event, all Rent (as defined below) amounts due hereunder shall be abated for the entirety of any period during which the Sign cannot be operated as a result of such court finding. This waiver will not apply if the court’ s finding of nuisance is in an action brought by the City or under a City ordinance.
6.3 Encumbrances. OOM shall not encumber, or permit to be encumbered, the Premises or any part of the Premises, for any purpose, without the City’s and the Master Lessor’s prior written consent, which, in the case of the City, the City may withhold for any reason (except for any encumbrances necessary for the construction and operation of the Sign, in which case, City shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay such consent), and in the case of the Master Lessor, shall be in the Master Lessor’s sole and absolute discretion (except for any encumbrances necessary for the construction and operation of the Sign, in which case, the Master Lessor shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay such consent). OOM shall keep the Premises free of all liens and other encumbrances other than those, if any, to which the City consents.
6.4 Compliance with Laws. OOM shall, at all times during the Term, at no cost to City, promptly comply with all Legal Requirements relating to (a) the operation of the Sign, or (b) the use, condition, configuration or occupancy of the Premises. In addition, if a change to the
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 259
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 6
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
Property becomes required under any Legal Requirements as a result of any alterations, additions or improvements to the Premises, the Master Landlord shall perform all such compliance work, at OOM’s sole cost and expense. OOM shall pay to the Master Landlord the cost of such compliance work within ten (10) business d ays of receiving written notice from the Master Landlord of the amount of same (along with such supporting documentation thereof requested by OOM) and prior to the date the Master Landlord commences such compliance work.
7. Exclusivity. Except for the City’s right to display outdoor advertising relating to City purposes on the City Displays (as hereafter defined), OOM shall have the exclusive right to display outdoor advertising on the Premises. Without limiting the foregoing, City shall not permit the Premises or any adjacent Property owned or controlled by City to be used for off -premise advertising.
8. City Messages.
8.1 City Guaranteed Spots. OOM agrees to provide to the City at no cost with one (1) guaranteed spot in a standard rotation on each of the Digital Displays four (4) times per calendar year during the Term; provided that only one (1) spot may be used each quarter. Each spot will run no more than eight (8) seconds in the standard rotation of eight (8) spots per Digital Display and such spot shall only continue to be displayed for a maximum of two (2) weeks in duration (or a minimum of 14,000 spots during each two (2) week period). The City shall provide two (2) weeks notice prior to requesting a spot. OOM shall use commercially reasonable efforts to accommodate such requested time periods. In addition, at the request of the City Manager or the City Manager’s designee, OOM may make the Sign available to the City, on a space available basis, as reasonably determined by OOM, for display of City Messages (defined below). Display of City Messages on a space available basis may be terminated by OOM at any time, without prior notice to the City, in the event that the space is sold or will otherwise be used by OOM in the normal course of business.
8.2 City Messages. Each of the guaranteed spots and additional space above (each, a “City Message”) shall be used by the City for the purpose of displaying the City’s own non- commercial messages, which may include such matters as events sponsored by the City or located in the City and conducted by local non -profit organizations so long as the aforesaid local non -profit organizations are not a past, current, or prospective client of OOM. Each City Message must meet OOM’s graphics-arts standards previously delivered to the City (which the City hereby acknowledges having received a copy of such standards), and as such standards may be updated by OOM from time to time, so that the City Messages are “display ready,” at no cost to OOM. OOM shall duplicate (e.g., digitalize), install, and display each City Message at no additional cost to the City. The City Messages shall be put in rotation and receive equal distribution throughout the days the messages are in place.
The City shall supply proposed advertising copy at least five (5) days prior to the posting date in a “display ready” art condition. OOM and City agree to work together on a cooperative basis.
8.3 City Indemnification. The City shall and hereby does agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless OOM and each of its officers, directors, employees and agents for, from and against, any claims, costs (including, but not limited to, court costs and reasonable attorneys’
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 260
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 7
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
fees), losses, actions or liabilities arising from or in connection with any allegation that any portion of any City Message infringes or violat es the rights, including, but not limited to, copyright, trademark, trade secret or any similar right, of any third party.
8.4 Amber Alert Messages. OOM shall make the Sign available at no cost to the California Highway Patrol, San Mateo County Sheriff, San Carlos Police Bureau, (or San Carlos Police Department if in existence) and/or CalTrans for the purpose of displaying “ Amber Alert” messages in accordance with the Amber Alert Guidelines set forth in Exhibit E attached hereto.
8.5 City Sign and Logo. Following the City’s written request therefore, OOM shall install, operate, maintain, and repair a City sign on each side of the Sign Structure so that such City sign faces the same direction as a display area on the Sign. The size and design of the City sign and logo shall substantially comply with the criteria set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto.
9. OOM Displays.
9.1 The City acknowledges and agrees that OOM shall be entitled to sell advertising space on the remaining rotating messages displayed on the Sign. City agrees that OOM may preempt messaging at any time in order to display emergency messages from federal, state, or local authorities or agencies, including the City of San Carlos or agencies which the City may have contracts to provide police, fire or other emergency services.
9.2 If, at any time during the Term, OOM is unable to obtain or maintain any necessary Governmental Approval for the ope ration of the Sign as a digital advertising structure (“Digital Operation”), or the Digital Operation of the Sign is otherwise prohibited by applicable law, OOM shall have the right a t any time thereafter to convert one or both Digital Displays to traditional, non-digital displays and to modify the Sign in any way deemed necessary by OOM in connection therewith, by providing to the City prior notice thereof. Upon the City’s receipt of such notice, the parties shall negotiate in good faith a change in Rent and other applicable provisions herein in connection with such conversion. If the parties are unable to reach agreement on such new terms and conditions within thirty (30) days of the City’s receipt of such notice pursuant to this Section 9.2, OOM shall have the right to terminate this Sublease by written notice to the City and, upon such termination, if any, the City shall refund to OOM any unused portion of prepaid monthly Rent.
10. Rent.
10.1 On the Commencement Date, OOM shall pay the City a one (1) time non - refundable payment in the amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000).
10.2 Beginning on the Commencement Date, OOM shall pay the City rent each year of the Term (the “Rent”) equal to the greater of : (a) two hundred and ten thousand dollars ($210,000.00) (the “Minimum Annual Guarantee” or “ MAG”) per calendar year or (b) thirty-two percent (32.0%) of any income actually received by OOM for the Premises (net of any commissions
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 261
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 8
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
paid by OOM to advertising agencies, not to exceed 16-2/3%, and any taxes paid or payable by Orion Outdoor in connection with the sign other than income taxes) in such calendar year for advertising placed on the Sign (“Percentage Rent”). The Rent shall be prorated for each partial year during the Term. On January 1st of the year immediately following the fifth (5th) anniversary of the Commencement Date, and on every January 1st of each fifth (5) year thereafter , the MAG s hall increase by twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) over the MAG then payable by OOM pursuant to this Sublease. The minimum annual rental payments owed to the City of San Carlos during the term of this Agreement are outlined in Attachment 1-R.
10.3 The MAG for each year during the Term shall be paid in twelve (12) monthly installments in advance. The first MAG payment shall be paid on the Commencement Date. With respect to the Percentage Rent, the calculation thereof will be calculated by OOM in its reasonable discretion and OOM will provide the City with a full and accurate statement of such calculation within forty-five (45) days following the end of each calendar year. Upon request, the City shall be entitled to an independent audit of such accounting within thirty days of receipt, at the expense of OOM if such audit discloses an underpayment of greater than 3%. The accounting of annual revenues and any audit shall be kept strictly confidential by the City, subject to the California Public Records Act (Govt. Code Section 6250 et seq.) Notwithstanding the above, City may share the results of the Audit with Master Landlord. The City shall inform OOM of any public records act requests requesting such documents within a reasonable time after receipt and before providing documents responsive to such request. OOM agrees that, if the Percentage Rent in any calendar year exceeds the MAG paid by OOM to the City for such calendar year, the difference by which the Percentage Rent exceeds the MAG shall be paid to the City within forty-five (45) days following the end of the calendar year.
10.4 Notwithstanding any contrary provision hereof, to the extent that City is required to pay any amounts pursuant to Section 9.3 of the Master Lease, then OOM agrees to reimburse City for (or, if OOM and City mutually agree, OOM shall pay directly to the Mas ter Landlord) each of the following to the extent levied against the Master Landlord or the Property, but only to the extent that any of the following strictly relate to the Sign and/or the use of the Premises for the construction and operation of the Sign: (a) any tax based upon or measured by the cost or value of the Sign or other personal property of City or OOM which strictly relates to the Sign, (b) any rent tax, sales tax, service tax, transfer tax, value added tax, use tax, business tax, gross income tax, gross receipts tax, or other tax, assessment, fee, levy or charge measured solely by the Rent (as defined in the Master Lease) or any of City’s rights or obligations described or provided in or under the Master Lease; (c) any tax assessed upon the p ossession, leasing, operation, management, maintenance, alteration, repair, use or occupancy by City or OOM of any portion of the Property; and (d) any tax assessed on this transaction or on any document to which City is a party that creates an interest or estate in the Premises.
11. Ownership; Maintenance.
11.1 OOM is the owner of the Sign, including the Digital Displays and all City permits, entitlements and state permits . Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the expiration or termination of this Sublease, OOM shall remove the Digital Displays and remove the portion
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 262
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 9
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
of the sign structure that is above grade , as well as the foundation if required by the property owner, at OOM sole cost and expense.
11.2 If for any reason, the Sign is removed, materially damaged or destroyed, all prospective Rent payments shall abate until the Sign is reconstructed and operational .
Following any such damage or destruction, OOM shall use commercially reasonable efforts to repair and rebuild the Sign, subject to compliance with the City’s then -current building and electrical code standards. In addition, if OOM is prevented from illuminating the Sign by applicable law, or other cause beyo nd OOM’s control, provided that OOM makes commercially reasonable efforts to re-illuminate and repair the Sign, the payment of Rent may be suspended for such period of non -illumination. OOM shall, at its sole cost, keep and maintain the Sign, all advertising thereon and appurtenances and every part thereof in good and sanitary order, condition and repair and in accordance with the industry standards for similar display structures in the San Francisco Bay Area. The City shall not be required to repair or maintain any portion of the Sign.
12. Insurance. OOM shall provide comprehensive general liability, which shall be primary insurance covering any liability to the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers with respect to the liabilities assumed by OOM under this Agreement, in the amounts set forth below:
Insurance Category Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation statutory minimum
Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease
Commercial General $1,000,000 per occurrence
Liability $2,000,000 aggregate for bodily
injury, personal injury and property
damage
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage
(coverage required to the extent
applicable to OOM’s vehicle usage in
performing services hereunder) and
Advertising Risk $1,000,000 per occurrence
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 263
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 10
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
Such amounts may be reasonably adjusted to the City’s standard coverage requirements every five (5) years during the Term. The aforesaid liability insurance shall also name the Master Landlord and its partners, property manager, and any other parties reas onably designated by the Master Landlord, as additional insureds.
Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the OOM’s insurance and shall not contribute with it with respect to the liabilities assumed by OOM under this agreement. An originally executed certificate or endorsement evidencing such insurance coverage shall be filed with City prior to the Commencement Date and said document shall provide that such insurance coverage will not be canceled or materially changed without at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to the City. Prior to the expiration of any such policy, a certificate showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with City. If such coverage is canceled or reduced, OOM shall, within fifteen (15) days after receipt of written notice from the City of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, but in no event later than the date of such cancellation or reduction, file with City a certificate showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or provided through another insurance company or companies. Upon failure to so file such certificate, the City may without further written notice and at its option procure such insurance coverage at OOM's expense and OOM shall promptly reimburse the City for such expense.
13. Obstruction and Off Premise Signs. The City shall not, and shall not permit it s agents, employees or other persons acting on City’s behalf, to place or maintain any object on the Property, or any adjacent property owned or controlled by the City, which, in OOM’s reasonable opinion, would obstruct the view to the face of either Digita l Display on the Sign. If City fails to remove such obstruction within five (5) days after notice from OOM, OOM may in its sole discretion: (a) terminate this Sublease upon ninety (90) days written notice and remove the Sign in accordance with this Sublea se or (b) remove such obstruction, such removal being at the cost and expense of the City and reimbursable to OOM upon demand. OOM may trim any trees and vegetation currently on the Pr operty and on any neighboring property owned or controlled by the City as often as OOM in its sole discretion deems appropriate to prevent obstructions. The City shall not permit the Pr operty or any immediately adjacent parcel owned or controlled by City to be used for off-premise advertising. City shall not be responsible for any such obstructions or Off Premise signs, but shall ensure that the Master Lease contains similar conditions and obligations of the Master Landlord.
14. Interference. If, in OOM’s reasonable opinion: (a) the view of the Sign’s advertising messages becomes entirely or partially obstructed by an object or vegetation not on the Property or any neighboring property owned or controlled by the City and is not otherwise covered by Section 13 above; (b) electrical service becomes unavailable; (c) the Premises cannot safely be used for the erection or maintenance of the Sign for any reason; (d) the Premises becomes unsightly; (e) there is a diversion, reduction or change in directional flow of traffic from the street or streets currently adjacent to or leading to or past the Premises; (f) the Sign’s value for advertising purposes is substantially diminished for any reason such that the required Rent payments are not feasible, in OOM’s sole discretion; (g) OOM is unable to obtain or maintain any necessary permit
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 264
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 11
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
for the erection, use and/or maintenance of the Sign; or (h) the Sign’s use is prevented or restricted by law, or OOM is required by any governmental entity, regulation or ordinance to reduce the number of billboards operated by it in the city, county or state in which the Sign is located (whether or not OOM is specifically required to remove the Sign ), then, in the case of any of (a) through (h), OOM may after ninety (90) days written notice terminate this Sublease.
15. Utilities. OOM shall be responsible for providing and paying for all utilities to the Sign required for OOM’s use. OOM shall obtain a separate meter for such electrical service.
16. Sublease for Cell Service . OOM shall not be entitled to sublease space on the Premises for cellular, data, telephone or other similar use without the prior written consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld if the respective, proposed sublease provides that 50% of the respective sublessee’s base rent is to be paid to the City.
17. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this Sublease shall be sufficiently given if personally delivered, or mailed by registered or certified United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the party as specified on below:
OOM:
ORION OUTDOOR MEDIA
P.O. Box 6341
Folsom, CA 95763-6341
With a copy to:
GENERAL COUNSEL
John David Pereira Esq.
3450 Palmer Drive Ste 4-298
Cameron Park, CA 95682
CITY :
City of San Carlos
Attention: City Manager
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 265
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 12
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
With a copy to:
City of San Carlos
Attention: City Attorney
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
7.d.2
Packet Pg. 266
Attachment: Sublease - 611 Industrial Digital Billboard (611 Industrial Billboard Agreement)
OTAD\54300\1253944.11 13
SJ - San Jose #4895-9838-2865 v1
08344-0022
DRAFT
MASTER LANDLORD:
R & M Dean Associates, LLC
c/o Sequoia Realty Services
1629 Main Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
If mailed, the written notice shall be deemed received and shall be effective on the earlier of the date of actual receipt by the addressee or three (3) business days after deposit in the United States mail in the State of California. If either party gives notice in writing to the other party of any change in said address, then and in that event such notice shall be given at the changed address specified in such notice.
18. Eminent Domain. If the Sign or the Premises, or any part thereof, is condemned by proper authorities; taken without the exercise of eminent domain, whether permanently or temporarily; or any right-of-way from which the Sign is visible is relocated, OOM shall have the option to relocate the Sign on the City’s remaining leased portion of the Property or to terminate this Sublease upon not less than thirty (30) days’ notice and to receive all prepaid Rent for any unexpired term of this Sublease. OOM shall be entitled to a ll compensation and other remedies provided by law, including, without limitation, just compensation for the taking of the Sign Structure, Digital screens, City and State Permits, loss of income and OOM’s leasehold interest in this Sublease, and/or relocat ion assistance. City shall assert no rights in such interests held by OOM, but City shall not be prevented from asserting its rights against the condemning authority, including any rights to payment as allowed by law for the value of the Rent and other payments it was to receive during the unexpired term of the Sublease. If condemnation proceedings are initiated, the City shall use its best efforts to include OOM as a party thereto.
No right of termination set forth anywhere in this Sublease may be exercised prior to the sale to any entity with the power of eminent domain or by or for the benefit of any entity with the power of eminent domain.
19. Authority. The City represents that it holds a long term lease or otherwise has exclusive rights to use the Property, and has the right to enter into this Sublease to bind the City hereby. The City represents and warrants that it is duly authorized under all applicable laws and regulations currently in full force and effect to perform or cause to be perfor med all of the obligations of the City under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Sublease.
The parties signing below warrant that they have the specific authority from their respective principals to execute this Sublease on their behalf and agree to provide such resolutions or other documents reasonably necessary to satisfy the other party of such authority. This Sublease is binding upon the heirs, assigns and successors of both the City and OOM. Neither the City nor OOM shall be bound by any terms, conditions or oral representations that are not set forth in this Sublease, the Relocation Agreement of which it is a part, and the respective exhibits. This Sublease represents the entire agreement of OOM and City with respect to the terms stated herein.