CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
November 14, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson 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.
InPerson 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 COVID19.
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 16699009128 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 observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), 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 ParmerLohan, Adam Rak
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Declaring November 13 – 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week.
5. 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.
6. 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 Mayor 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 advised 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 future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for OnCall Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year.
e. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. f. Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
g. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update. h. Authorize Cancellation of the December 26, 2022 City Council Meeting. i. Adopt Ordinance 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of the Following Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046051080): (1) Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (2) Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial to Planned Development; and (3) Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property LLC.
9. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive an Update and Provide Direction on the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III.
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–700 Block of Laurel Street (During the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–During Farmers’ Market.
11. 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 Directing Staff to Prepare a Letter to Elected State Officials Urging them to Allow Remote Meetings to Continue for Regional Meetings.
12. 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.
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) 8024222 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.
1 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
November 14, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson 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.
InPerson 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 COVID19.
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 16699009128 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 observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), 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 ParmerLohan, Adam Rak
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Declaring November 13 – 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week.
5. 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.
6. 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 Mayor 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 advised 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 future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for OnCall Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year.
e. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. f. Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
g. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update. h. Authorize Cancellation of the December 26, 2022 City Council Meeting. i. Adopt Ordinance 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of the Following Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046051080): (1) Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (2) Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial to Planned Development; and (3) Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property LLC.
9. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive an Update and Provide Direction on the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III.
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–700 Block of Laurel Street (During the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–During Farmers’ Market.
11. 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 Directing Staff to Prepare a Letter to Elected State Officials Urging them to Allow Remote Meetings to Continue for Regional Meetings.
12. 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.
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) 8024222 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.
2 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
November 14, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson 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.
InPerson 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 COVID19.
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 16699009128 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 observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), 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 ParmerLohan, Adam Rak
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Declaring November 13 – 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week.
5. 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.
6. 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 Mayor 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 advised 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 future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for OnCall Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year.
e. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. f. Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
g. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update. h. Authorize Cancellation of the December 26, 2022 City Council Meeting. i. Adopt Ordinance 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of the Following Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046051080): (1) Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (2) Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial to Planned Development; and (3) Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property LLC.
9. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive an Update and Provide Direction on the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III.
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–700 Block of Laurel Street (During the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–During Farmers’ Market.
11. 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 Directing Staff to Prepare a Letter to Elected State Officials Urging them to Allow Remote Meetings to Continue for Regional Meetings.
12. 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.
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) 8024222 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.
3 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
November 14, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson 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.
InPerson 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 COVID19.
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 16699009128 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 observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), 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 ParmerLohan, Adam Rak
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Declaring November 13 – 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week.
5. 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.
6. 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 Mayor 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 advised 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 future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for OnCall Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year.
e. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. f. Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
g. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update. h. Authorize Cancellation of the December 26, 2022 City Council Meeting. i. Adopt Ordinance 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of the Following Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046051080): (1) Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (2) Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial to Planned Development; and (3) Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property LLC.
9. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive an Update and Provide Direction on the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III.
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–700 Block of Laurel Street (During the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–During Farmers’ Market.
11. 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 Directing Staff to Prepare a Letter to Elected State Officials Urging them to Allow Remote Meetings to Continue for Regional Meetings.
12. 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.
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) 8024222 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.
4 October 10, 2022 1
San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Special Meeting
Collaboration Room, City Hall – 600 Elm Street, San Carlos October 10, 2022, 6:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember (Remote Pursuant to AB 361) John Dugan, Councilmember
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor
Staff Present: Adam Aronson, Economic Development and Housing Manager Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Al Savay, Community Development Director
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:04 AM by Mayor Sara McDowell.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
3. CLOSED SESSION
a. Conference with Real Property Negoti ators Aronson, Maltbie, Rubens and Savay - (Closed Session Held Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) to Discuss the Price and Terms of the Potential Sale of Property Located at 1232-1244 Cherry Street (APNs: 050-132-100, 050-680-040, and 050-132-110) Between the City and Cherry Street Commons L.P.
b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators Aronson, Maltbie, Rubens and Savay (Closed Session Held Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) to Discuss Potential Acquisition of Real Property Locate d at 1336 Arroyo Avenue, San Carlos (APN: 050-163-490).
4. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
None.
5. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 PM.
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
7.b
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 5
October 10, 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, CA 94070
October 10, 2022 7:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember (Remote, Pursuant to AB 361) John Dugan, Councilmember
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor
Staff Present: Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager
Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner Consultant
Adam Lokar, Senior Sustainability Analyst
Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Dave Pucci, Deputy Fire Chief
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Chris Valley, Building Official
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Sara McDowell called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor McDowell led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
City Manager Jeff Maltbie reported that there are no changes to the order of the agenda from staff. He highlighted that there will be a study session held in January to review the Reach Code and that the subject will not be discussed tonight under I tem 8a - Updates to Building and Fire Codes.
4. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Greg Rubens noted that there are no reports from the Closed Sessions held this evening.
7.c
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 6
October 10, 2022 2
5. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Designating October 2022 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
Mayor McDowell presented a proclamation to Dr. Karen A. Ferguson, CEO of CORA (Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse), designating October 2022 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
Dr. Ferguson shared about CORA’s background and the services they provide and introduced their pilot initiative - Speak Up.
Public Comment
Deacon Lauren P. McCombs, resident , publicly acknowledged the tragic death of Karina Castro. She spoke in support of the City providing a grant to CORA and shared tips on how to empower one’s self.
John Durkin, resident, expressed concerns regarding the findings identified in a July 21, 2022 letter from the State W ater Resources Control Board on the San Carlos collection system final inspection report.
Mayor McDowell requested staff to follow-up with John Durkin’s public comment.
6. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
The City Council provided accolades to the Parks and Recreation Department for their work on the Art and Wine Faire and thanked the community volunteers for their contribution.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor McDowell requested an amendment be made Item 8b - August 25, 2022 Special City Council Meeting Minutes.
RESULT: Adopt City Council Consent Calendar Items ‘a’ – ‘i’, with an amendment to Item ‘b’ to add, under the utility graffiti item, “Mayor McDowell presented a series of photos of utility graffiti or markings left from utility companies on sidewalks, streets and utility poles around San Carlos.”
MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES: Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the August 25, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes.
7.c
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 7
October 10, 2022 3
c. Approve the September 12, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes.
d. Authorize the City Manager to Send a Letter in Response to the 2021-2022 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report “Waiter! There’s a Car in My Soup!”
e. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement for Professional Services for Arborist Consultant Services for a Period of Three Years, with the Option of Two, One Year Extensions, in an Amount not to Exceed $200,000 Annually with HortScience | Bartlett Consulting (HBC). Resolution 2022-105
f. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement for Website and Intranet Design, Development, Implementation, and Hosting Services to Revize Government Websites in an Amount Not to Exceed $219,392 for a Four Year Term, with Two, Two Year Options to Extend. Resolution 2022-106
g. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Final Map for the 1525 San Carlos Avenue Development, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 050-123-010. Resolution 2022-107
h. Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards.
i. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. Resolution 2022-108
9. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending and Modifying San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 Technical Building Codes to Adopt the 2022 California Building Code Series; and Introducing an Ordinance Adopting the 2021 Edition of the International Fire Code with the 2022 California Fire Code Amendments.
Building Official Chris Valley provided an overview on the proposed updates to the Building and Fire Code Series and emphasized that a study session will be held in January to review the Reach Code. Sr. Sustainability Analyst Adam Lokar responded to Council questions.
Public Comment
Peter Hartzell, resident, voiced his eagerness for the City to remain at the forefront of the climate change mitigation efforts.
Brett Ehrlich, resident, emphasized the need to be more ambitions with the building code and requested a study session on electrifying buildings in January.
Kathleen GoForth, resident and member of the Peninsula Clean Energy Citizen Advisory Committee , recommended the City Council eliminate exceptions in the current Reach Code tonight.
Dashiell Leeds, resident, spoke against blanket exemptions and listed a number of items for Council to consider at the Reach Code study session in January.
7.c
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 8
October 10, 2022 4
Vice Mayor Rak requested Kathleen Goforth’s comments be brought forth for discussion as part of the Reach Code study session in January.
RESULT: Introduced [Unanimously] Ordinance 1589 Amending the San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 - Technical Building Codes - to Adopt the 2022 Editions of the California Administrative Code, California Building Code (Volumes 1 and 2), California Residential Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Energy Code, California Historical Code, California Existing Building Code, California Green Building Standards Code, California Referenced Standards Code, 1997 Uniform Security Code, the 2021 Edition of the International Property Maintenance Code with Amendments and Modifications, and Safety Assessment Program (SAP) Placards.
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: John Dugan
AYES: Rak, Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
RESULT: Introduced [Unanimously] Ordinance 1590 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Section 15.04.110 – California Fire Code – to Adopt the 2021 Edition of the International Fire Code and the 2022 California Fire Code Including all Adopted Standards as Specified Prescribing Regulations Governing Conditions Hazardous to Life and Property from Fire, Hazardous Materials, or Explosion, and for Providing the Fire Safety Inspection Process for Hazardous uses or Operations, and Establishing a Bureau of Fire Prevention (San Carlos Fire Ordinance).
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES: Parmer- Lohan, Rak, Dugan, Collins, McDowell
10. AGENDA SETTING
a. Consideration of Agendizing an Item to Consider a One Time Grant to CORA (Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse).
Mayor McDowell and Vice Mayor Rak requested Council consider agendizing an item for a grant to CORA to help spread awareness to the community.
Council supported agendizing the item.
11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:48 PM.
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
7.c
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 9
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for On-Call Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years, with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements for professional services for on-call legal services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, each for an amount not to exceed $200,000 and a term of two years, with an option to extend the term by one year.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no fiscal impact or 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 both of the firms, selecting the best firm based on cost, timeliness, and approach. Funding for on-call legal services on economic development and housing matters will come from the General Legal Services Account.
BACKGROUND:
Many of the City’s current projects require specialized legal services, such as eminent domain proceedings, disposition and development agreements, and below market rate housing transactions and agreements. Frequently, outside legal counsel is used to provide these specialized services. As projects related to economic development and housing move forward, such as the redevelopment of 1232 Cherry Street and the acquisition of other property for economic development or housing purposes, these specialized legal services are increasingly needed. Using the services of outside counsel allows staff to proceed with these projects quickly and in a cautious and conservative manner. In the past, the City has contracted with Burke, Williams, & Sorensen LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP to provide these services on an on-call basis. Special Counsel will work under the direction of or in consultation with the City Attorney.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 10
On August 18, 2022, the City released a request for quotes (RFQ) soliciting responses from qualified firms to provide on-call legal services on economic development and housing matters (Attachment 2). The City received three responses, which were reviewed by staff for completeness and ranked by submitters’ qualifications and experiences. Staff opted to recommend two firms for on-call contracts.
ANALYSIS:
The intent in selecting two firms for on-call legal 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 anticipates will be needed over the next several years. (See Attachment 3 for Statements of Qualifications for both firms; please note that work samples have been removed.) The staff selection committee, consisting of the Community Development Director and Economic Development Coordinator, recommends contracting with Burke, Williams, & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP to provide on-call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters.
Burke, Williams, & Sorensen, LLP (“Burke”)
Burke is a public law firm that has expertise in real estate, affordable housing, economic development, and eminent domain. Burke has worked on multiple projects under the previous on- call agreement, including two housing development projects, developer inclusionary housing regulatory agreements, and developing community benefits proposals for negotiation.
Goldfarb & Lipman, LLP
Goldfarb & Lipman is a full-service, Oakland-based firm with expertise in affordable housing, land use, community economic development, and eminent domain. Additionally, Goldfarb & Lipman assisted in representing the City on major development projects, as well as revising the City’s inclusionary housing requirements.
Conclusion.
The proposed agreements for professional services have a term beginning upon execution and ending October 31, 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 not to exceed amount of $200,000 annually.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1.Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements for professional services for on-call legal services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, each for an amount not to exceed $200,000 and a term of two years, with an option to extend the term by one year; or
2.Do not adopt the resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 11
Respectfully submitted by:
Al Savay, Community Development Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. RFQ – Legal Services Economic Development and Housing
3. Statement of Qualifications
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 12
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 LEGAL SERVICES WITH BURKE, WILLIAMS, & SORENSEN,
LLP AND GOLDFARB & LIPMAN LLP, EACH FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $200,000 AND A TERM OF TWO YEARS, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM BY ONE YEAR.
WHEREAS, many of the City’s current projects require specialized legal services, such as eminent domain proceedings, disposition and development agreements, and below market rate housing transactions and agreements; and
WHEREAS, in the past, outside legal counsel has been used to provide these specialized services; and
WHEREAS, as projects related to economic development and housing move forward, such as the redevelopment of 1232 Cherry Street and the acquisition of other properties for economic development and housing purposes, these specialized legal services are increasingly needed; and
WHEREAS, the City released a Request for Quotations (RFQ) soliciting firms to provide on-call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters; and WHEREAS, the City received three responses, which were reviewed by a selection committee for qualifications, experience, and price; and WHEREAS, the selection committee recommends Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP be contracted with to provide on-call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters.
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 legal services for initial terms beginning upon contract execution and ending October 31, 2024; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to extend the agreements for professional services for on-call legal services for an additional one-year period following the initial term at his 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 thereof held on the 14th day of November 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 13
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 14
REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS:
On-Call Legal Services Related to Economic Development
and Housing
Issue Date: August 18, 2022
Submittals Due: September 08, 2022
City Hall
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA
cityofsancarlos.org
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 15
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.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 16
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 Focused General Plan Update (Land Use, Housing, and Safety Element Updates, Accompanying Zoning Ordinance Update, and Environmental Impact Report) specifically centers on the City’s Housing and Environmental Safety Element updates as mandated by the State. The project also includes changes to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, particularly to increase residential densities to meeting the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The project is halfway through a two-year initiative to guide housing decisions for the next eight years and to accommodate at least 2,735 new housing units from 2023-2031. This project will also review and update the City’s Environmental Safety Element, which focuses on reducing the potential short and long-term risks resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, and other hazards.
More information here: https://www.sancarlos2040.org/
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 17
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
4 | P a g e
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.
CONSULTING SERVICES NEEDED
The City of San Carlos is seeking proposals from qualified firms or individuals to provide on-call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters. 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:
Real Estate
Consultant's services will include providing assistance with real property transactions concerning disposition and/or development of City lands, including evaluation and advice regarding deal structure and terms, the negotiation and preparation of Development Agreements, Disposition and Development Agreements, Purchase and Sale Agreements, and Ground Leases, and related services as requested by the City.
Affordable Housing
Consultant's services will include the review and drafting of affordable housing agreements, including developer agreements, resale restriction agreements, regulatory agreements, loan and financing documents and related documents; the provision of advice regarding compliance with state and federal law and regulations; review and drafting of updates to City housing policies and ordinances; the review and negotiation of lender and investor documents, assistance with escrow and closing, general assistance to Economic and Community Development Department staff, and related services as requested by the City.
Eminent Domain
Consultant's services will include provision of advice and representation of the City in connection with potential eminent domain actions as requested by the City.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 18
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. 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, Thursday, September 08, 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.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 19
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 September 02, 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.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 20
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
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 21
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.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 22
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
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 23
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 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
required to the extent applicable to
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 24
Agreement for Professional Services 5 Revised 04/08/2022 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
Consultant shall furnish the CITY with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates
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]
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 25
Agreement for Professional Services 6 Revised 04/08/2022 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.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 26
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, recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 27
Agreement for Professional Services 8 Revised 04/08/2022 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: Cristian Padilla
CONSULTANT: _____________________
Address
Phone
Attention: ______________
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.
21. Mediation. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, the parties shall meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 28
Agreement for Professional Services 9 Revised 04/08/2022 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.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written by their respective officers duly authorized in that behalf.
CITY OF SAN CARLOS:
Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTEST:
Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Crystal Mui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 29
Agreement for Professional Services 10 Revised 04/08/2022
Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Gregory J. Rubens, City Attorney
CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR/VENDOR:
I acknowledge that I have full authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the Consultant/Contractor/Vendor, and have read, understand, and agree to comply with the provisions of this Agreement, including the Insurance and indemnity requirements set forth herein.
Dated: _______________ ______________________________
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 30
Proposal to Provide
Legal Services to the
City of San Carlos
Proposed Lead Attorney
Anna C. Shimko
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: 415.655.8115
e: [email protected]
Submitted September 8, 2022
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 31
Los Angeles – Inland Empire – Marin County – Oakland – Orange County – Palm Desert – San Diego – San Francisco – Silicon Valley – Ventura County Direct No.: 415.655.8115
[email protected]
1 California Street - Suite 3050
San Francisco, California 94111- 5432
voice 415.655.8100 - fax 415.655.8099
www.bwslaw.com
September 8, 2022
Via email to [email protected]
Cristian Padilla
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, California 94070
Re: Proposal to Provide On-Call Legal Services Related to Economic Development and Housing
Greetings:
On behalf of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP (“Burke”), I am pleased to submit this response to the Request for Qualifications issued by the City of San Carlos (“City”). Burke is extremely interested in providing legal services to the City related to real estate, affordable housing, economic development, and eminent domain.
Founded in 1927, Burke is a diverse, dynamic, and preeminent public law firm. For over 90 years, the representation of public agencies has been the cornerstone of Burke’s legal practice.
The firm currently serves the legal needs of over 200 local governmental entities, including cities, counties, joint powers authorities, and water and school districts. At the same time, Burke represents many private landowners and developers in the real estate acquisition, entitlement and development process. Our knowledge of both private and public real estate negotiations and development allows our team to use its insights and expertise to assist the City in its endeavors.
As described in the attached materials, we propose that I serve as lead attorney. I would be assisted by a team selected to provide able legal repr esentation tailored to the City’s specified needs, including Susan E. Bloch, Brenda Aguilar -Guerrero, Eric S. Phillips , and Meghan E.
Nihan.
As you know, Burke and its attorneys have represented the City for many years. Greg Rubens , now a Burke partner, serves as your City Attorney and I have represented the City for more than 15 years on complex land use development projects , CEQA review and litigation , and real estate deals. Such work has included all entitlements and CEQA review, and negotiation of a Development Agreement with City-recovered opportunity costs associated with development by the Palo Alto Medical Center of a new hospital campus. Current work involves two housing development projects and work with staff on several proposed development projects, developing community benefits proposals to negotiate with entities desiring to increase allowed
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 32
Cristian Padilla
City of San Carlos
September 8, 2022
density and uses on their lands. Eric Phillips has represented the City of San Carlos in connection with the disposition of City -owned property for a ffordable housing development.
Tasks included negotiating and drafting a non-binding term sheet with the developer, identifying Surplus Land Act, CEQA, and NEPA compliance options, negotiating and drafting a DDA for the City’s property, and preparing supporting City documents. Susan Bloch has assisted Economic and Community Development staff with affordable housing matters, including developer inclusionary housing regulatory agreements and first time buyer resale restriction agreements.
In addition, Burke attorneys have represented the City in connection with several eminent domain matters.
Thank you for considering us. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, or if you would like additional information, please feel free to contact me at the number listed above. I look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Anna C. Shimko
Partner and Chair
Real Estate, Law Practice Group
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 33
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page i Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP .................................................................................. 1 About Burke ........................................................................................................................ 2 QUALIFICATIONS .................................................................................................................... 3 Affordable Housing .............................................................................................................. 3 Representative Affordable Housing Matters .................................................................. 4 Real Estate ......................................................................................................................... 5 Representative Real Estate Matters .............................................................................. 6 Eminent Domain .................................................................................................................. 7 Representative Eminent Domain Matters ...................................................................... 8 CEQA .................................................................................................................................. 9 Representative CEQA Matters .....................................................................................10 PROPOSED TEAM ..................................................................................................................13 Anna C. Shimko – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA ........................................................13 Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero – Eminent Domain ......................................................................13 Susan E. Bloch – Affordable Housing .................................................................................14 Meghan E. Nihan – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA ......................................................14 Eric S. Phillips – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA ...........................................................15 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................16 RATES .....................................................................................................................................16 Hourly Rates ......................................................................................................................16 Adjustments .......................................................................................................................16 Reimbursements ................................................................................................................17 Billing Format and Procedure .............................................................................................17 CONCLUSION .........................................................................................................................17 ATTACHMENT A – RESUMES
ATTACHMENT B – EXCERPTS OF WORK
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 34
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 1 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP is a California limited liability partnership. Burke is comprised of 25 owners under the leadership of a Management Committee and Managing Partner. Firm management includes owners who practice substantially or entirely in the area of municipal law, and the firm has a longstanding commitment to the needs of its municipal clients. Details of our firm are listed below.
Firm Name Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Founded 1927
Name, Address, Telephone Number, and
Email Address of the Proposer’s Point of
Contact
Anna C. Shimko
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: 415.655.8115
Email: [email protected]
Number of Attorneys/Staff 139/70
Headquarters Office Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, California 90071
Tel: 213.236.0600 | Fax: 213.236.2700
Additional Firm Offices
Inland Empire
1770 Iowa Avenue, Suite 240
Riverside, California 92507
Tel: 951.788.0100 | Fax: 951.788.5785
San Diego
501 West Broadway, Suite 1600
San Diego, California 92101
Tel: 619.814.5800 | Fax: 619.814.6799
Oakland
1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900
Oakland, California 94612
Tel: 510.273.8780 | Fax: 510.839.9104
Silicon Valley
60 South Market Street, Suite 1000
San Jose, California 95113
Tel: 408.606.6300 | Fax: 408.606.6333
Orange County
1851 East First Street, Suite 1550
Santa Ana, California 92705
Tel: 949.863.3363 | Fax: 949.863.3350
San Rafael
181 Third Street, Suite 200
San Rafael, California 94901
Tel: 415.755.2600 | Fax: 415.482.7542
Palm Desert
73-929 Larrea Street, Suite 4A
Palm Desert, California 92260
Tel: 760.776.5600 | Fax: 760.776.5602
Ventura County
2310 East Ponderosa Drive, Suite 25
Camarillo, California 93010
Tel: 805.987.3468 | Fax: 805.482.9834
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 35
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 2 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
About Burke
For over 90 years, the representation of public agencies has been the cornerstone of Burke’s legal practice. Burke provides public entities with a full range of legal, advisory, transactional, and litigation services organized into nine practice groups: Public Law; Labor and Employment Law; Construction Law; Litigation; Environmental, Land Use and Natural Resources ; Real Estate and Business Law ; Insurance Coverage and Litigation; Intellectual Property; and Education Law. The firm’s 139 attorneys serve clients from ten offices throughout California, as well as modern modes of communication and travel . W e can easily be where our clients need us to be when they need us to be there.
The legal environment in which public entities are required to function is both diverse and complex. Recognizing this, our Public Law Practice Group contains many sub- groups and teams allowing our attorneys to specialize in particular areas of public law while still maintaining general public law expertise. These sub-groups include, but are not limited to, the following:
Real Estate and
Development
Land Use and Environmental
Law
Construction Law
Surplus Land Act
Negotiating Agreements
Letters of Intent
Disposition and
Development Agreements
Purchase and Sale
Agreements
Financing Agreements
Ground Leases
Real Property Disposition
Entitlements
Due Diligence
Title and Survey Review
Property Management
Landlord/Tenant Matters
Financing
Land Use Planning and
Zoning
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)
Development Agreements
Growth Management
Historic Preservation
Annexation and
Incorporation – LAFCO
Proceedings
Redevelopment and
Economic Development
Endangered Species
Sustainability and Green
Building
Water Law and Public Trust
Advising, preparing,
negotiating, and
resolving construction
claims
Complex construction
litigation, arbitrations
Construction contracts
and documentation
Construction project
insurance
General construction
advice and counseling
Public works
construction advice,
claims, litigation
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 36
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 3 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
QUALIFICATIONS
Our experience is described below , including some of our recent projects. Some excerpts of our relevant work are included in Attachment B.
Affordable Housing
Burke attorneys represent public agencies and private and nonprofit housing developers in all aspects of affordable housing development and financing, and the development and implementation of affordable housing programs and policies. Collectively, we have assisted in the development of thousands of units of affordable housing in California in developments funded with state and federal low -income housing tax credits, taxable and tax -exempt bond proceeds, local housing trust fund monies, redevelopment tax increment and housing successor funds, project -based Section 8 and VASH vouchers, CDBG, HOME, funds provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, conventional loans, and other sources.
Burke’s proposed team has extensive experience representing housing authorities, cities, counties, and former redevelopment agencies in connection with complex real estate and affordable housing transactions, including the acquisition, development, rehabilitation and disposition of property via purchase and sale and ground leases. In addition, our team provides expertise in land use matters, environmental remediation, public bidding and procurement, and in the negotiation and drafting of architect’s agreements and construction contracts. Our construction lawyers are well- versed in all aspects of procurement requirements and construction law, and our land use lawyers provide expertise in all aspects of land use entitlements.
We regularly advise public agencies regarding compliance with federal and state requirements pertaining to the development and management of affordable housing, including relocation requirements, prevailing wage, Davis -Bacon, CEQA/NEPA, ADA and fair housing issues , state and local land use and zoning laws, rent stabilization ordinances, density bonus law, the Surplus Land Act, Article 34, state and federal relocation requirements, California and federal fair housing laws, and state statues pertaining to agencies that have assumed the housing obligations and assets of former redevelopment agencies.
We have assisted in the design and implementation of program guidelines, development agreements, loan documents, regulatory agreements, and resale restriction agreements for first- time homebuyer, density bonus, inclusionary housing, rehabilitation loan programs, and other local affordable rental and homeownership programs.
On behalf of our public agency clients , we have negotiated and drafted documentation for ground lease transactions, multi -phase developments, and m ixed use projects that include ground floor retail and public purpose uses. In many cases, the transactions include the public agency’s retention of rights of first refusal or options to purchase the improvements at the end of the 15-year tax credit compliance period. We have extensive experience representing housing authorities, cities, and counties in connection with the financing of affordable housing rehabilitation and construction in transactions involving predevelopment, acquisition,
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 37
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 4 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
rehabilitation, and construction/permanent financing structured as residual receipts loans. We represent public agencies in their roles as seller/ground lessor and as lender in connection with the review of developer limited partnership agreements, equity investor documents, including development agreements and right of first refusal/option agreements, and private and public agency construction and permanent loan documents, including the negotiation and drafting of subordination and inter -creditor agreements. We have negotiated and document ed dozens of public agency affordable housing loan transactions, including the preparation of disposition and development agreements, ground leases, predevelopment loan agreements, seller “carryback” loan documents, construction and permanent loan agreements, promissory notes, deeds of trust, indemnity and guaranty agreements, assignment and security agreements, affordable housing regulatory agreements for multi -family projects, and regulatory agreement/resale restriction agreements for affordable ownership projects. We handle title review, escrow and closing.
Representative Affordable Housing Matters
Currently representing the Richmond Housing Authority and the City of Richmond on ground lease/disposition and financing matters relating to the conversion of the Authority’s public housing portfolio. We have represented the Richmond Housing Authority on these matters since the Spring of 2021, and the City of Richmond on land use, labor and employment, and other matters since 2010. Currently representing the Santa Clara County Housing Authority on matters related to the management, operations, and financing of the Buena Vista Mobilehome Park, including leasing and tenant relocation matters. We have represented the Housing Authority on real estate and housing matters since 2015. Currently representing the City of Petaluma in connection with the financing of affordable housing projects financed with City and County funds, CDBG -DR, Serna farmworker financing, and Project Homekey financing provided by HCD, and tax credit and tax - exempt bond financing. We have represented the City of Petaluma and its former redevelopment agency in similar matters for over 10 years. Currently representing the City of Mountain View in connection with the disposition/ground lease of several City -owned properties for development of affordable housing, the refinancing of CDBG and HOME-financed developments, and in connection with affordable housing policy, development and finance matters, including projects developed using a combination of City housing trust funds, HOME funds, CDBG funds, low-income housing tax credits, tax -exempt bonds, and other sources. We have represented the City of Mountain View in these matters since 2013. Currently representing the City of Napa and the Housing Authority of the City of Napa in connection with the financing of affordable housing projects financed with City and County funds, CDBG -DR and Serna farmworker, and Project Homekey financing provided by HCD, and tax credit and tax -exempt bond financing. We have represented the City of Napa and the Housing Authority in similar matters for over 10 years.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 38
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 5 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Currently representing Christian Church Homes in connection with purchase and sale/development and joint venture agreements for development of affordable senior housing on sites in California, Colorado, and Tennessee, and in negotiations with HCD and CalHFA regarding refinancing transactions. We have represented CCH on such matters since the Fall of 2020.
Currently representing Renewal Ent erprise District, a joint powers agency of the City of Santa Rosa and Sonoma County and its affiliated nonprofit, the RED Housing Fund, as general counsel, and in connection with operation of an affordable housing loan fund.
Our representation includes provision of advice regarding Brown Act, conflict of interest, governing board composition and operating procedures, public records act issues, preparation and review of agendas and board packets, negotiation and drafting of consulting contracts, and the preparation and negotiation of loan documents. We have represented these entities since their formation in the Spring of 2020. Currently representing YWCA Golden Gate Silicon Valley and YWCA Apartments, Inc., in connection with refinancing of public agency l oans, and property management issues for a HUD Section 202 senior apartment project. We have represented these entities since 2014.
Currently representing the City of Morgan Hill on affordable housing policy matters including density bonus and inclusionar y housing, finance and transactional matters including disposition, development and loan transactions for multi -family acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction projects, and the administration of first -time homebuyer programs. We have represented the City on these matters since 2013.
Real Estate
Burke attorneys regularly represent public agencies (as well as private development entities) throughout California in connection with land disposition and development transactions, including the sale of lar ge blocks of previously undeveloped real estate such as former military base properties. Our real estate and disposition and development work includes advising public agency clients regarding compliance with the State Surplus Land Act (Government Code section 54220 et seq.), including evaluation of potential exemptions, and where exemptions are not available, preparation of notices of availability, negotiation with preferred housing sponsors, drafting of declarations of restrictive covenants to comply with Government Code sections 54233 and 54233.5, and preparation and submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of requests for compliance determination as desired. Burke attorneys have extensive experience drafting and negotiating exclusive negotiating agreements, letters of intent, sale disposition and lease disposition and development agreements, purchase and sale agreements, ground leases and leases for interim operation, management and security. In addition to our real p roperty transactional expertise, Burke attorneys have a broad range of experience with all manner of real property development including entitlement, due diligence, title and survey review, asset management, loan administration, property management and landlord/tenant matters, subdivision matters, statutory development agreements, allocation of environmental risks in acquisitions, sales, and leasing transactions, financings, formation of community facilities and assessment districts, and review and drafting
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 39
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 6 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
of CC&Rs. Burke attorneys offer a broad range of knowledge and experience that enables us to effectively negotiate and document all aspects of complex real estate transactions, and to protect and enforce our clients’ interests in litigation when called upon.
Representative Real Estate Matters
Currently representing the City of Santa Clara concerning all real estate and land us e aspects of the public-p rivate partnership between the City of Santa Clara and Related Companies for phased development of 240 acres of City-o wned, former municipal landfill property . We negotiated and drafted the Dispos ition and Development Agreement, the Development Agreement and the form leas es for Related to ground lease the land from the City in about 7 phases consisting of 9.1 million square feet of retail, entertainment, hotel, office and residential uses. Our team advised on all aspects of the environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the project and suc cessfully defended the EIR in court. We helped to c raft the new General Plan des ignation and other General Plan amendments, and the new Mas ter Community Plan (zoning document) to guide all future development with a balance of clear standards and flexibility to accommodate future market shifts, as well as the Infrastructure Master Plan to ens ure fair and timely pairing of development with infrastructure. We continue to work on projec t implementation, including negotiating and drafting implementation agreements concerning landfill operation and maintenance, insurance levels, road construction and maintenance, CC&Rs, reimbursement for extra polic e services, and funding of transportation improvements; removing title ex ceptions; and further discretionary approvals for the forthcoming initial phases of the project. Currently advising the City of San Carlos with respect to development agreement negotiations and community benefits packages for proposed projects, including the Alexandria Center for Life Science and the proposed development at 405 Industrial. Represented the City of Fos ter City with disposition of a 15-a cre surplus City -owned property to a developer for development of the Foster Square mixed use project whic h includes 200 for sale homes, 66 affordable housing units, 150 assisted living units and 30,000 square feet of neighborhood retail s urrounding a privately owned and maintained, publicly accessible plaza area. The sale transaction included provision of City-seller carryback financing which was repaid in full prior to successful completion of the project. Burke also represented the City of Foster City in connection with a mas ter development agreement and various phase specific development agreements for the Foster City Pilgrim Triton mixed use project which includes commercial office uses, neighborhood serving retail and 800+ residential units, including 60+ live/work units, and a large privately owned and maintained and public ly accessible plaza area. This multi- phased development required coordination among multiple property owners/developers. Represented the City of Vallejo in connection with the negotiation and drafting of a disposition and development agreement for the sale of 125 acres of North Mare Island property to the Nimitz Group that was approved in April 2022.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 40
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 7 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Currently representing City of Menlo Park in all CEQA review and entitlements , and negotiating development agreement with Meta (formerly Facebook) , for approximately 3 million square foot mixed -use project. The development is at the City’s bonus level of density, requiring that the applicant provide community amenities valued at half the amount of the increased value to the developer from the bonus level development. Currently assisting the City of Oakland in negotiating and preparing a developm ent agreement for the proposed Oakland A’s new ballpark and mixed- use project at Howard Terminal in Oakland, which will be coordinated with Port of Oakland ground lease documents and a public facilities financing plan. We are also working on all entitlements documents, including General Plan amendment, a new zoning designation, a Planned Development permit and a tentative map.
Eminent Domain
Burke’s eminent domain attorneys have substantial experience, both substantively and procedurally, and have represented public entities in acquiring virtually all types of properties, involving both full take and partial takes. O ur eminent domain legal team, which consists of 14 attorneys throughout 7 offices, regularly helps public entities use eminent domain authority effectively and responsibly to build public projects. From project planning to public hearings, and from negotiation to trial and appeal, we help keep the process on track and minimize public entities’ financial risks. We work with our public entity clients to negotiate resolution of cases efficiently and economically, and to use eminent domain only as a last resort. We understand our clients’ concern over potential negative public sentiment reg arding eminent domain. When cases cannot be resolved through settlement efforts, we help educate our clients regarding the process and have an outstanding record of success using the court process to achieve our clients’ objectives. This includes obtaining pre -condemnation rights of entry, obtaining pre- judgment orders for possession, resolving “right to take” objections by demur or bench trials, and resolving valuation issues through jury trials.
Burke’s attorneys have litigated eminent domain and/or inverse condemnation matters throughout the State, including in San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Ventura, San Benito, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda , El Dorado, Calaveras, and Placer Counties. If an eminent domain action is filed, our eminent domain team handles every aspect of the litigation, including the drafting of pleadings, undertaking discovery, obtaining prejudgment orders of possession and, where necessary, taking the matters through trial and appeal. We routinely and effectively uses legal issues motions pursuant to Section 1260.040(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure to narrow the issues and drive eminent domain litigation towards settlement instead of trial. We also has substantial experience in preventing and, when necessary, successfully litigating right -to-take challenges. Burke regularly defends public agencies against inverse condemnation claims brought by property owners and businesses claiming damages stemming from, among other things, the construction of nearby public project s, the temporary/permanent re- routing of traffic and the expiration of temporary construction easements when the project is not yet complete.
In addition to litigating eminent domain actions, Burke’s attorneys routinely draft transactional documents necessary for the acquisition of real and personal property, including purchase and
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 41
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 8 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
sale agreements, possession and use agreements, rights of entry, land swaps, options, reversionary interests, deeds, leases, and other real estate transactional documents. The firm’s eminent domain attorneys are well- versed in assisting clients with issues arising under the Uniform Relocation Act and California’s Relocation Assistance Act, CEQA, and complicat ed land use issues. Burke’s attorneys have also provided advice and assisted with the disposition of excess/surplus remnant parcels at the end of a project.
Burke is proud to have provided eminent domain and condemnation advice, representation and litigation services to the following public agencies located throughout California: Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority (ACE) on behalf of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, Alameda County, Alhambra and Alhambra Redev. Ag., Banning, Beaumont, Bellflower, Buellton, Calistoga, Camarillo, Chino Hills, Concord, Contra Costa County, Council of San Benito County Governments, Danville, El Segundo, Emeryville , Fremont, Friant Water District, Hawthorne School District, Hemet, Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Industry/Industry Urban Development Agency, Inglewood, Irvine Ranch Water District, Laguna Woods, Livermore, Los Angeles County Sanitation District No. 2; Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA), Moorpark, Napa, Placentia, Pasadena, Orange County Flood Control District; Otay Water District, Pacific Gas & Electric Company; Rohnert Park, San Benito County, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, Silicon Valley Power, Santa Clarita and Santa Clarita Redev. Ag., Sonoma County Transp. District, Southwestern Community College District, Sacramento, The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), Stockton, Stanton, Santa Monica Community College District , Transportation Agency of Monterey County, and Wildomar.
Representative Eminent Domain Matters
Currently representing the City of Inglewood to acquire 10 private parcels out of 41 parcels that are needed for the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center Project.
The City has owned 31 of the parcels that sat vacant for decades. In fact, despite four decades of efforts, 25 acres, (nearly 90% of the Projec t Site) sits vacant. We assisted the City with the negotiation and drafting of a disposition and development agreement and development agreement to ensure minimal roadblocks in case the City opted to utilize eminent domain to acquire said parcels. Despite numerous right to take challenges, the City obtained early prejudgment possession which allowed construction to start within six months of filing the various actions. The City also prevailed at the Right to Take Bench trial, has settled four of the matters, and we are now preparing for the Just Compensation jury trials.
Assisted the Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) with all aspects of the right of way process and acquisitions and condemnation for the Highway 25 Bypass Project and the Highway 25 Safety Project. A total of 44 property acquisitions were required for the Bypass Project. Two properties were acquired in their entirety as full fee takes, one business was relocated, one household was relocated, and one rental tenant was relocated. The remaining acquisitions were partial fee takes, public utility easements, and temporary construction easements. We assisted COG staff and
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 42
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 9 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
consultants in preparing initial offers, staff reports, resolutions of necessity, an amendment to their joint powers agreement, in negotiating settlements, and in drafting purchase and sale agreements. We attended project meetings and assisted with coordination of all consultants and the project team which included Caltrans representatives, design personnel, utility representatives, and right of way consultants.
Sixteen cases were f iled. Most involved complex legal and valuation issues relating to severance damages, highest and best use, development potential, dedication requirements, zones of value, and benefits. Thirty roadway easements and partial fee acquisitions were needed for the Highway 25 Safety Project, but we settled them all and only ended up filing two cases which ultimately settled in the early stages of litigation. Represented BART and VTA in several multi -property acquisitions for the BART extension project from t he City of Fremont to Downtown San Jose, as well as other BART expansions over the years. For Phase 1 of BART’s extension to Silicon Valley, the acquisitions for which we assisted ranged from full takes of multi -acre industrial parks containing numerous m ultitenant masonry buildings requiring complicated relocations of numerous business tenants, to complex acquisitions involving highest and best use and project influence issues. We drafted numerous purchase and sale agreements including one for a property valued at $26 million, drafted license agreements, and obtained orders for prejudgment possession. We also assisted with complicated relocation, valuation, goodwill, and “improvements to the realty,” issues.
CEQA
Burke attorneys regularly represent public agencies throughout California in connection with real estate development matters including CEQA compliance, land use, entitlement, zoning and permitting matters, and California’s increasingly stringent housing development laws . Burke attorneys offer a broad range of knowledge and experience that enables us to effectively function as key and integral members of the City’s team of staff and other consultants. We roll up our sleeves and pitch in where needed to achieve the City’s legal and policy objectives.
Burke’s CEQA and land use attorneys have substantial experience advising our clients on the development of general plans, specific plans, and zoning codes, and litigating challenges thereto. Burke’s team often work on master plan approvals for lar ge campus-like areas (including for Pixar’s Emeryville campus, VMWare’s Palo Alto campus, Kaiser’s San Francisco campuses, and the Santa Clara City Place project). In so doing, we strive to help create a CEQA envelope and land use entitlement package that w ill serve long term needs, structured creatively with sufficient flexibility to address evolving markets, service needs, and technologies.
As to CEQA compliance, Burke regularly assists public agencies with the preparation and defense of environmental documents prepared pursuant to CEQA. Even when representing private entities, our lawyers often become trusted advisors to all parties in the CEQA process because of our cooperative and straight -forward approach to the issues and the depth of our expertise. Our team deals with CEQA issues on a daily basis and provides regular legal advice, opinions, and comments regarding all aspects of the process, including strategy and adequacy of documents.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 43
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 10 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Throughout the administrative project consideration process, our CEQA/NEPA attorneys keep in mind the possibility of litigation, and build the administrative record with that as a possibility, ensuring that all necessary documents are put before the decision- maker to ensure the best possible record to support the client’s position on a project. Because many of Burke’s lawyers work at both the administrative approval and advice level and in ensuing litigation, we find ourselves well poised for seamless and cost effective litigation.
We regularly provide legal advice, opinions, and litigation services to our clients in potential or on-going CEQA lawsuits. Burke’s attorneys have served as counsel to petitioners, respondents, real parties in interest and amicus parties in CEQA litigation, including some of the higher impact CEQA decisions. While we often have been involved at the administrative level CEQA review and project approval processes that lead up to litigation, we are also sometimes called in as noted CEQA litigation experts to take on cases once litigation ensues. At both the trial and appellate court levels, we have successfully defended CEQA determinations made by our public agency clients or the public agencies that granted our private clients’ entitlements. We are well prepared at all court levels to quickly address and fend off injunctive relief and stay requests and pride ourselves on developing complete litigation plans and then successfully implementing them through strategic law and motion practice and persuasive merits briefing and oral argument. Finall y, recognizing that sometimes settlement is the best option for the client, we have frequently negotiated agreements to resolve lawsuits (sometimes even before the litigation is filed) without the need for trial or to avoid appeals.
Representative CEQA Matters
City of San Carlos. For many years, we have acted as special counsel to the City of San Carlos concerning CEQA compliance and land use assistance for large or complex projects. For instance, we represented the City with respect to the full EIR, General Plan designation, zoning amendments and detailed Development Agreement for the controversial Palo Alto Medical Facility hospital and medical center. We defended the City’s Mitigated Negative Declaration to transform fields at Highlands Park to turf fi elds, and helped negotiate and document a settlement agreement in that case. Recently, we advised the City on an EIR for lighting and other improvements at two popular parks/sports fields. In addition, we assisted the City with the EIR and entitlements f or a large new office building. We are currently assisting the City with CEQA review and Housing Accountability Act issues concerning two adjacent proposed housing projects. C
ity of Santa Clara – Tasman East. Our team represented the City with respect to all CEQA and land use aspects of the preparation of the Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”), which was adopted in November 2018 and now governs the development of a 46-acre, transit-oriented, primarily residential neighborhood (up to 4,500 dwelling units in total ), with 10 acres of open space, up to 106,000 square feet of retail uses, and potentially a new school. The Specific Plan and its EIR are expected to be used to streamline land use approvals and CEQA review for proposed residential developments within the Specific Plan Area. As such, the Specific Plan will play a key role in the City’s efforts to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals.
Our team advised on both legal and policy considerations pertaining to the Specific Plan itself, together with the drafting of amendments to the General Plan and Municipal Code
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 44
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 11 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
to reflect the creation of a new Transit Neighborhood Zoning district. We also participated in the scoping and preparation of the Specific Plan EIR, including strategizing on responses to comments on a range of issues such as the adequacy of public transit services, the preservation of aquatic habitat, and traffic and other environmental impacts specific to the establishment of a school within the Specific Plan Area.
City of Los Angeles – Target. We have defended the City in numerous CEQA and land use lawsuits. In this one, we worked closely with the City and counsel for Target to defend the City’s creation of a new specific plan designation and application of it to only the site for the West Hollywood Target, relying on an earlier EIR for the Target store.
The City had taken these actions following disapproval by the trial court of variances for the project. The lawsuit, brought by two neighborhood groups, concerned supplemental CEQA review, whether and what reasonably foreseeable future projects were required to be addressed (reminiscent of Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of California (1988) 47 Cal. 3d 376 “Laurel Heights I”), and spot zoning. Our team assembled the administrative record and briefed the issues. Anna Shimko argued for the City at the trial court. The trial court ruled against the City and an appeal followed.
Again, our team comprehensively briefed the issues and Anna argued the case at the Court of Appeal, joined by former Court of Appeal Justice Vogel on behalf of Target.
The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court in full in Citizens Coalition Los Angeles v.
City of Los Angeles (2018) 26 Cal. App. 5th 561. Both challenger organizations filed Petitions for Review with the California Supreme Court. Our team prepared the City’s Answer opposing such petitions, and the Supreme Court declined to take review but depublished the Court of Appeal opinion. The Target store is now open. City of Los Angeles – Landmark Apartments. Our land use litigation team helped the City to defend an EIR for a large apartment project, with success on all but one small issue and defeating a motion for attorneys’ fees. In a case brought by Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance (“GSEJA”), we assisted with the full complement of briefing at the trial court concerning greenhouse gas emissions, health risk assessments, shading impacts, energy analysis, and the EIR certification process. Anna Shimko argued the case (and numerous motions) at the trial court level. The court upheld the EIR in all respects except the energy analysis due to an error in the calculations that mistakenly indicated that the project would result in a decrease in energy use. Following argument over the contents of the writ of mandate, the court ruled that, though a recirculated energy section was required, the project approvals and EIR could remain in place and construction could continue. Counsel for GSEJA filed a motion seeking more than $600,000 in attorneys’ fees. In response, we initiated much - contested discovery against the GSEJA lawyers and executive director, staved off efforts to depose the City’s and developer’s counsel, and took four depo sitions. Using data gleaned, we opposed the attorneys’ fee motion. In January 2019, the trial court denied the motion on the grounds that the result secured was not a substantial public benefit and that GSEJA has a financial interest in litigation it initiates. In the meantime, we assisted the City in preparing the Recirculated Energy Analysis, certifi ed in February 2019. We have successfully caused an untimely appeal to the Court of Appeal to be dismissed and opposed two Petitions for Writ of Supersedeas at the Court of Appeal
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 45
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 12 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
aimed at stopping project construction. We represented the City in defending the timely appeal on the merits, focused on the thresholds of significance and methodology for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions. Steve Velyvis, Gail Kavanagh, and Anna Shimko prepared the brief to the Court of Appeal. Ms. Shimko argued this case before the Court of Appeal and the City prevailed in the case. When the Petitioner appealed the trial court’s denial of attorneys’ fees, Burke lawyers Gail Kavanagh and Anna Shimko briefed and argued such case for the City at the Court of Appeal, and the City prevailed here as well. Ms. Kavanagh prepared an Answer to a request that the California Supreme Court accept the case for review, and the Court denied the Petition for Review. Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project. For two decades, our team has represented numerous environmental consulting firms undertaking CEQA and NEPA review work for projects before the CPUC, including transmission lines, nuclear power units, and the sales of all fossil-fueled power plants in the state. Under this construct, our client is the pertinent consulting firm but we work closely with and our work benefits the CPUC. The Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project is a proposed desalination plant along Monterey Bay, proposed by California American Water to supply water in lieu of illegal water removal from the Carmel River. Over the past decade, we helped prepare an EIR for the project in a form that was approved but later abandoned after CPUC approval.
More recently, our team assisted actively in preparing a comprehensive and detailed joint CEQA/NEPA EIR/EIS for the controversial current iteration and location of the desalination project. The EIR/EIS depended on groundwater characterization and modeling, and we researched and drafted all elements of the EIR/EIS addressing water rights as well as several master responses and many individual responses to comments.
We helped to scope and reviewed in detail all parts of the EIR/EIS, including multiple rounds of late comments. We drafted the CPUC’s CEQA findings, commented internally on the proposed CPUC decision, and recently completed work on the analysis to the CPUC on the requests for rehearing of its approval. Two entities filed Petitions for Writ of Review with the California Supreme Court, the only court with authority to consider the sufficiency of the EIR/EIS under CEQA if it elects to do so. We assisted the CPUC with its Answer aimed at convincing the Supreme Court not to grant review, and the Supreme Court denied review.
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan. The Burke team works with Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., on CEQA and land use issues in several jurisdictions, including in San Francisco and Oakland. We have helped to draft and process Kaiser’s Institutional Master Plan, required by the City and County of San Francisco. We have worked with Kaiser on entitlement issues at the Geary campus and the French campus, such as helping secure demolition permits for facilities no longer needed. We worked extensively on a proposed new medical office building in the Potrero Hill area of San Francisco, working closely with City staff and with a co-developer of the proposed site on entitlement applications and preparation of a “community plan exemption” streamlined CEQA document under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. In light of community opposition, we helped Kaiser successfully pivot to a site in the Mission Bay area of San Francisco, where the medical center was built.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 46
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 13 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
PROPOSED TEAM
We propose Anna C. Shimko to serve as lead attorney. We propose Anna, Eric S. Phillips, and Meghan E. Nihan for real estate, land use and CEQA matters, Susan E. Bloch for affordable housing matters, and Brenda Aguilar -Guerrero for eminent domain. Resumes detailing our team’s experience are attached. We would tailor a team to efficiently address the City’s needs for each particular matter, and if appropriate, we would draw upon the expertise of additional Burke attorneys with expertise in applicable issues. In addition, the fact that Greg Rubens, the City Attorney, practices at Burke would streamline effective communications and coordination.
Anna C. Shimko – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA
Anna Shimko joined Burke in 2014 as a Partner in Burke’s San Francisco office. Anna is chair of Burke’s Real Estate and Business Practice Group and focuses her practice on all areas of land use, real estate development and environmental law, representing both public agencies and private landowners and developers in administrative and court proceedings. Anna has particular expertise in compliance with CEQA and NEPA and has worked daily in those arenas for more than 25 years. She works closely with project proponents, public agencies, and environmental consultants on preparing and defending CEQA and NEPA documents such as categorical exemptions, negative declarations, environmental impact reports (EIRs), and environmental impact statements (EISs), including for complex projects such as water right s transfers, desalination plants, and alterations to nuclear plants. She enjoys rolling up her sleeves to help clients devise the optimum CEQA/NEPA path and tackling complex projects that raise challenging issues in the CEQA/NEPA puzzle (particularly in the realms of transportation, air quality and climate change, water supply and rights issues, growth- inducing effects, alternatives, and cumulative impacts). Anna helps private clients through all stages of the land use approval process, obtaining entitlements to build or expand large shopping centers, stand - alone retail stores, mixed- use projects, hospitals, hotels and resorts, golf courses, residential developments and quarries, among others. She also assists cities, counties, special districts, and state agencies in regulating land and development, negotiating real estate transactional documents and development agreements, and updating general plans, specific plans, and zoning codes.
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero – Eminent Domain
Brenda Aguilar -Guerrero recently joined Burke as a partner in Burke’s Oakland office. She formerly served as the chair for Meyers Nave’s statewide Eminent Domain and Inverse Condemnation Practice Group and has been representing public entities on complex eminent domain and inverse condemnation matters for more than 25 years. She has assisted clients with large, complex multi -billion infrastructure projects requiring hundreds of acquisitions, as well as smaller scale projects throughout the state for a variety of clients. Brenda likes to get involved at the initiation of a project to ensure that her clients are following all state and federal regulations and laws. She attends project meetings, obtains right of entry, drafts and/or reviews/revises acquisition documents, works with cons ultants/clients to execute acquisition strategies, reviews appraisals for legal compliance, and negotiates with property owners; assists in drafting staff reports, resolutions of necessity and notices to property owners; prepares
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 47
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 14 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
complaints and all documents required to file the condemnation action(s); obtains orders for prejudgment possession; and handles all litigation through the filing and recording of Final Orders of Condemnation. She has served as lead counsel on numerous right to take bench and jury trials for a number of clients. She has been recognized as a Northern California Super Lawyer and The Best Lawyers in America for Eminent Domain and Inverse Condemnation in 2020, 2021, and 2022. She received her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law in 1990 and was admitted to the State Bar of California that same year. She received her B.S. from U.C. Berkeley.
Susan E. Bloch – Affordable Housing
Susan Bloch has over 25 years of experience representing public agencies and private and nonprofit developers in connection with the disposition, development and financing of affordable housing and mixed- use projects, and the development and implementation of affordable housing policies and programs.
Susan has provided special counsel services on real estate and affordable housing transactions for Alameda County, Placer County, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, the City of Richmond Housing Authority, and the cities of Oakland, Union City, San Leandro, San Jose, Mountain Vi ew, Morgan Hill, San Carlos, Daly City, South San Francisco, Petaluma, Napa, Pleasanton, Dublin, and Livermore. Her nonprofit housing clients include Veterans Housing Development Corporation, the California Odd Fellows Foundation, the Hilarita- Tiburon Ecumenical Association , Christian Church Homes, YWCA Golden Gate - Silicon Valley , the Renewal Enterprise District and the RED Housing Fund.
Susan has extensive experience in negotiating and documenting ground leases, disposition and development agreements, loan documents, affordable housing regulatory agreements, and inclusionary housing and density bonus agreements. . She has represented numerous jurisdictions in connection with the disposition, development and financing of affordable housing and mixed-use projects that involve public agency financing and/or the sale or ground lease of City or County-owned land.
Meghan E. Nihan – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA
Meghan Nihan received her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law in 2013 and was admitted to the State Bar of California the same year. She received a B.A. in Political Science and a B.A. in History from the University of California, Los Angeles. Meghan practices in the areas of real estate and land use. She assists cit ies in preparing and negotiating disposition and development agreements . She also assists public agency clients and private landowners in negotiating and preparing purchase agreements, deeds, ground leases, leases, subleases, licenses, and easements. At a previous firm, Meghan also advised public agency staff regarding the property acquisition and eminent domain process during the planning phase of public transportation projects.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 48
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 15 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Eric S. Phillips – Real Estate, Land Use and CEQA
Eric Phillips received h is J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law in 2012 and was admitted to the State Bar of California the same year. He received his B.S. in Urban and Regional Studies from Cornell University. Eric practices in the areas of land use, r eal estate, and CEQA compliance. He represents clients in all phases of the development process, including property acquisition, entitlement and administrative approvals, CEQA compliance, compliance with state housing laws, and negotiating real estate dis putes. Eric has particular experience with State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, SB 35, and Housing Element Law. In addition to working on these issues as a lawyer since 2012, Eric started his career in 2002 as a planning consultant based in Berkeley, California.
Eric has served as special counsel to numerous public agencies and provides advice on writing ordinances and legislative findings related to zoning, subdivisions, inclusionary housing programs, rent control and tenant protection measures, and impact fees. Eric has experience preparing, reviewing, and applying land use plans and development standards; reviewing subdivision proposals and crafting conditions and implementation agreements to comply with the Map Act; negotiating and drafting development agreements; and overseeing the work of technical consultants to prepare draft and final EIRs and other CEQA -compliant documentation.
Eric also serves as the Vice President of Policy and Legislation for the California Chapter of the American Planning Association, and he frequently presents to state elected officials, legislative staff, local boards, and planners regarding compliance strategies in the ever -evolving fields of land use and housing law.
Eric has recently worked with the Ci ty of San Carlos on two projects. On behalf of the City, Eric drafted the term sheet, exclusive negotiating agreement, and predevelopment loan agreements with Eden Housing for the development of an affordable housing project on property acquired by eminent domain on Cherry Street, and he continues to work with City staff to create a Development and Disposition Agreement and permanent loan documents to facilitate development of the housing project. Eric has also advised City staff regrading CEQA compliance for a proposed housing development on Alameda de las Pulgas. In addition, as his prior firm, Eric worked with the City to draft an updated Inclusionary Housing Ordinance following the adoption of AB 1505, also known as the “Palmer fix” legislation.
Some other recent examples of Eric’s work include the preparation of a development agreement and related approvals for the “North Village” development in Healdsburg, approval of a 100% - affordable residential development project in unincorporated Alameda County and the successful defense of the County’s approval against a CEQA lawsuit, consultation on complex entitlement applications for mixed- use projects in Mountain View and Sunnyvale, and drafting updates to inclusionary housing, ADU, and density bonus or dinances in myriad jurisdictions throughout the state. Eric also recently assisted the City of Coronado and the City of Solana Beach in drafting ordinances to implement SB 9. Eric has overseen comprehensive General Plan and zoning code updates in Belmont, and he has contributed to Specific Plans in Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Cupertino, and other jurisdictions. He also worked on aspects of Housing Element Updates in Coronado, Solana Beach, Napa County, Menlo Park, Moraga, San Marino, and Alhambra.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 49
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 16 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
REFERENCES
We are proud of our service record with our clients. We encourage you to contact the existing client references listed below about the merits of Burke, its personnel, and its services.
Client Name and Address Contact | Tel | Email
City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Justin Murphy, City Manager
650.330.6610
[email protected]
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Elizabeth Klotz, Assistant City Attorney
408.615.2232
[email protected]
Ruth Shikada, Assistant City Manager
408.615.2219
[email protected]
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street, 3rd Floor
Mountain View, CA 94041
Sandra Lee, Assistant City Attorney
650.903.6480
[email protected]
RATES
We believe that the rates quoted below are reasonable and competitive.
Hourly Rates
Staffing Hourly Rate
Senior Partners $525
Junior Partners $460
Senior Associates $395
Junior Associates $345
Adjustments
The rates for legal services quoted in this proposal will remain in effect for the first year of the contract, until January, 2024. At that point and annually t hereafter, rates would be adjusted based upon the CPI for the San Francisco Bay Area.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 50
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 17 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Reimbursements
We routinely charge our clients for our direct out -of-pocket expenses and costs incurred in performing the services. These costs and expenses commonly include such items as reproduction of documents, facsimile, mileage reimbursement for travel at the IRS approved rate, and other costs reasonably and necessarily incurred in performing services for the City.
We do not charge a service fee or overhead for cost reimbursement items. We also do not charge for computer or word processing time. Reimbursement amounts may be adjusted annually.
Expense Rate
In-house reproduction charges
black and white 20¢ per page
Color $1 per page
Mileage 62.5¢ per mile (or current IRS rate)
Facsimile $1 per page
All other costs reasonably and
necessarily incurred in performing
services for the City
at cost
Billing Format and Procedure
Bills are sent out each month invoicing charges for the prior month. Fees for our services are charged in increments of 1/10th of an hour. The bills provide a specific description of the work performed by all attorneys, the time actually spent on the work item, and the billing rate of the attorney. These bills also contain itemized descriptions of any out -of-pocket expenses incurred during the prior month.
CONCLUSION
Burke has the experience, dedication, and resources to serve the City’s needs ethically, efficiently, and cost-effectively. We will be happy to provide you with any additional information you require about our firm and welcome the opportunity to meet face -to-face to discuss Burke’s capabilities and readiness to represent the City of San Carlos . We appreciate your consideration of our proposal.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 51
Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development
Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
ATTACHMENT A – RESUMES
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 52
PRACTICE GROUPS
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
Real Estate and Business
EDUCATION
J.D., Cornell Law School, 1986
B.A., Urban Studies, University of
California, Davis, 1983
ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
AFFILIATIONS
Secretary/Librarian, Land Use and
Environment Committee, American
College of Real Estate Lawyers
President, Harbor Equity Group, Waldo
Point Harbor, April 2015 – present
Marin Montessori School Campus
Planning Committee, 2015-present
Advisory Council and Board of Directors,
San Francisco Planning and Urban
Research Association, 2003-2014
California Building Industry
Association/California Business Properties
Association, CEQA Reform Task Force,
1992-present
Treasure Island/Yerba Buena Island
Citizens Advisory Board, 2001-2004
San Francisco Juvenile Probation
Commission, 1996-2000
Vice President, Associated Students of UC
Davis, 1981
City of Davis Ad Hoc Committee to Update
the Housing Element, 1982
Anna C. Shimko
Partner
Pronouns: she, her, hers
San Francisco [email protected]
1 California Street, Suite 3050 415.655.8115 D
San Francisco, California 94111 415.655.8100 T
Anna Shimko is Chair of Burke's Real Estate and Business Practice Group.
She focuses her practice on all areas of land use, real estate development, and environmental law, representing both public agencies and private landowners and developers in administrative and court proceedings to bring projects to fruition . Anna has part icular expertise in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). She works closely with project proponents, public agencies, and environmental consultants on preparing and defending CEQA and NEPA documents such as negative declarations, environmental impact reports (EIRs), and environmental impact statements (EISs), including for complex projects such as water rights transfers, multi-phased mixed -use projects and large campus master plans . Anna helps private clients through all stages of the land use approval process, obtaining entitlements to build or expand large shopping centers, stand -alone retail stores, mixed -use projects, hospitals, hotels and resorts, golf courses, residential dev elopments, and quarries, among others. She also assists cities, counties, special districts, and state agencies in regulating land and development, negotiating real estate transactional documents and development agreements, and updating general plans, spe cific plans, and zoning codes. Anna represents clients in matters involving the Subdivision Map Act, annexation, historic resources, public-private partnership transactions and financing mechanisms, the Coastal Act, air quality regulations, water supply, climate change regulations, transportation planning, eminent domain, and inverse condemnation. Anna litigates land use, CEQA, and NEPA matters for public and private clients at trial court and appellate court levels, and serves as an expert witness throughout California in cases involving land use development issues.
RESULTS
Private Developers
Represented a well -known Bay Area computer animation studio in securing development agreement and zoning for a four -phase headquarters project.
Defended in court the EIR and entitlements for a 20,000 -acre residential development and open space preserve in the Carmel Valley. Represented one of California’s largest grocery store chains and a large nationwide home improvement store in numerous projects throughout the state to build new stores or expand existing venues. Represented residential developer in obtaining local and coastal permits, including through several lawsuits and global settlement of Coastal Act, wetland, subdivision, traffic, and inverse condemnation issues.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 53
Anna C. Shimko
Assisted prominent football team in drafting ballot measure and seeking permits for new stadium and shopping mall.
Represent Native American tribe with environmental review under state compact for new casino, as well as with CEQA and NEPA documen ts for federal and state permits related to highway improvements, management contract and other permits, and with associated litigation. Secured major use permit amendments for renovation of Napa Valley resort on National Register of Historic Places.
Defended in court EIR and general plan consistency findings for shopping center in Monterey County involving water supply, traffic impact, and hazardous materials issues. Assisted private developer with transit-oriented development grant funding and entitlements from and agreements with public agencies for housing project near rapid transit station. Represented national developer in obtaining development agreement and all permits for phased shopping center, residential, and hotel project on redevelopment lands.
Defended CEQA review and height variance at trial court and Court of Appeal for demolition of unreinforced masonry building and construction of new research laboratory. Worked with a Bay Area developer on an EIR, development agreement and permits for a mi xed-use, phased redevelopment of commercial uses on port lands.
Represented a national hotel chain in its renovation of a high-end San Francisco hotel.
Public Agencies
Represent the City of Los Angeles defending land use and CEQA litigation concerning City approval of development projects at the trial and appellate court levels. Represented City of Albany in preparing an EIR for a waterfront development master plan, and later negotiated and defended in court a development agreement and gaming ordinance for a card room facility at a live horse racing venue on the waterfront.
Assisted the University of California at San Francisco with preparing EIRs (and defending associated litigation) for its acquisition of the Mount Zion Hospital and development of a biome dical research facility and administrative research space at the Laurel Heights campus.
Represent City of Santa Clara with ground leases, development agreements, EIRs and entitlements for private development of entertainment, office, retail, and residential uses on city land adjacent to Levi’s Stadium. For City of San Carlos, prepared development agreement with Palo Alto Medical Foundation for hospital and medical office project, and assisted with EIR, general plan amendments and all permits. Represented City of Orinda with a specific plan and EIR for mixed-use development of the Gateway Valley. Worked with consulting firms to advise the California Public Utilities Commission in environmental review for the sale of fossil-fueled and hydroelectric power plan ts and siting new transmission lines and substations throughout the state, for replacement facilities at nuclear power plants, and for desalination plant to supply water to Monterey Peninsula.
Assisted Zone 7 Water Agency with an EIR for a water supply, transfer, and storage program. Defended CEQA review of City of San Carlos decision to replace grass with turf on City play fields.
INSIGHTS
Presentations
“Avoiding Speed Bumps at the Intersection of Land Use and Real Estate Law,” 37th Annual Real Property La w Section
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 54
Anna C. Shimko
Retreat, Hyatt Regency Embarcadero, April 21, 2018
“CEQA: An Update,” California Water Law Conference, San Francisco, CA, November 13, 2017 “California Environmental Quality Act: Key Developments Affecting Water Projects,” Annual California Wate r Law Conference, San Francisco, November 2016
“Current Developments in CEQA Law and Practice,” The Administrative and Public Environmental Law Conference, June 2015
Speaker, “Current Issues in Land Use Regulation and Development,” California Environmental Quality Act Update Cases Late 2011 to Present, California Continuing Education of the Bar, September 2012 “Aetna Springs Resort,” California Building Industry Association Select Conference on Industry Litigation, April 2012 “Hydraulic Fracturing: Permitting and Environmental Reviews,” The Seminar Group, November 2011 “Americans with Disabilities Act Primer,” 2011 for insurance company “Cumulative Impacts,” Climate Change, Cumulative Impacts and Compliance: 6th Annual National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) CLE International Conference, January 2010 “Coming Soon to Your State or Federal Government: the Climate Change Regulation Experience in California,” ICSC U.S. Shopping Center Law Conference, October 2009
“The Benefits of Development Agreements,” League of California Cities Planners Institute, March 2009 “Land Use in Northern California,” Law Seminars International, March 2009 “AB 32 Session Climate Change: Science, Law & Policy,” California Business Properties Association, Fall 2008 “The Changing Climate of California Real Property Law,” California Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2008 “Green Building Conference,” CLE International, February 2008 “The Challenges of Urban Development: Trends and Legal Issues for Real Property Practitioners,” C alifornia Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2007
“Land Use Regulation and Development,” California Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2006 “Regulatory Takings Conference,” CLE International, 2003 “2002 Spring CEQA Workshop Series,” Association of Environmental Professionals, 2002 “Regulatory Takings Conference,” CLE International, 2002 “CEQA: What Is It and How Does It Impact Telecommunications Projects?,” Federal Communications Bar Association, Northern Chapter, 2002
RECOGNITIONS
American College of Real Estate Lawyers, Elected Member Lambda Alpha International (global land economics society), Elected Member California’s Top 50 Development Lawyers, Daily Journal, 2014 Selected to The Top 50 Women Attorneys in Northern California, Super Lawyers Magazi ne 2004-2005 Selected to Northern California Super Lawyers, 2004 – present Best Lawyers in America (Land Use and Zoning), 2012 – present
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 55
PRACTICE GROUPS
Public
Real Estate and Business
Litigation
EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Los Angeles,
1990
B.A., Social Welfare, University of
California, Berkeley, 1987
ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
Supreme Court of the United States
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the Eastern
District of California
United States District Court for the
Northern District of California
AFFILIATIONS
Board Member, Alameda County Bar
Association, 2022
Member, Women Lawyers of Alameda
County, Alameda County (past President)
Member, Chapter 2 (San Francisco/Santa
Rosa) and 42 (San Jose) of the
International Right of Way Association
UC Berkeley Alumni Delegate to the
California State Legislature
Member, East Bay La Raza Association,
2017
Program Co-Chair, Annual Northern
California Eminent Domain Conference,
CLE International, 2007- current
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero
Partner
Oakland [email protected]
1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900 510.903.8819 D
Oakland, California 94612 510.273.8780 T
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero has represented public entities on complex eminent domain and inverse condemnation matters for more than 25 years. She has assisted clients with large, complex multibillion -dollar infrastructure projects requiring hundreds of acquisitions, as well as smaller scale projects throughout the state for a variety of clients.
Brenda likes to get involved at the initiation of a project to ensure that her clients are following all state and federal regulations and laws. She attends project meetings, obtains rights of entry, drafts and/or reviews acquisition documents, works with consultants/clients to execute acquisition strategies, reviews appraisals for legal compliance, and negotiates with property owners; assists in drafting staff reports, resolutions of necessity and notices to property owners; prepares complaints and all documents required to file the condemnation action(s); obtains orders for prejudgme nt possession; and handles all litigation through the filing and recording of Final Orders of Condemnation.
Brenda has served as lead counsel on right -to-take and jury trials for a number of clients. She has also defended clients sued for inverse condemnation, dangerous condition of public property, and nuisance claims.
She has handled eminent domain and/or inverse condemnation actions for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Council of San Benito County Governments, Bay Area Rapid Transit Distr ict, San Mateo County Transit District, Transportation Agency of Monterey County, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commissi on, Central Contra Costa Sanitation District, County of Calaveras, County of El Dor ado, County of San Benito, County of Yolo, Town of Los Altos, City of Dublin, City of Inglewood, City of Sacramento, City of San Leandro, City of Morgan Hill, City of Palmdale, City of Rancho Cordova, City of South San Francisco, East Bay Regional Park Dis trict, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Glendale Housing Authority, Fremont Redevelopment Agency, City of Fremont, City of Elk Grove, County of Fresno, County of Napa, Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, City of Brentwood, Hayward Unified School District, City of Antioch, and City of Saratoga.
RESULTS
Inglewood v. Savine; Danfar/Affif; Quon; Michino & Bhalla , et al., LASC Court Case Nos. 21STCV06223, 21STCV06249, 21STCV06195, 21STCV06062, 21STCV06064, and 21STCV06065 (2021)
For purposes of conducting the right to take trial, The Honorable Elaine Lu consolidated six eminent domain actions filed to acquire properties needed for the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Project , the future home of the Clippers NBA team, after defendants in each of those cases asserted right to take challenges including a Public Use Challenge.
There were a total of twelve right to take challenges asserted. Brenda served as lead counsel for the City of Inglewood and after a five day bench trial, Inglewood prevailed on all the challenges.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 56
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero
RECOGNITIONS
Northern California Super Lawyers list:
Eminent Domain, Super Lawyers
Magazine, 2020-2021
The Best Lawyers in America, Eminent
Domain and Inverse Condemnation Law,
2020-2022
"Top Defense Result," Top Verdicts of
2015 Special Report, Daily Journal,
February 2016
Unity Award, Minority Bar Coalition, 2015
Wiley Manuel Pro Bono Award, The State
Bar of California
Sloan Fellowship, Carnegie Mellon
University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
School of Urban and Public Affairs
TAMC v. MWM Investments, LLC, et al., Monterey Superior Court Case No. 17CV001231 (2019)
Brenda served as lead trial counsel for TAMC on this case where TAMC needed to acquire a portion of a warehouse building on a 4.7 ‐acre industrial parcel. After a three ‐week jury trial, the jury found TAMC owed nearly $930,000 less than the landowner’s final demand. The jury verdict was $730,000 less than the deposit made by TAMC and ordered by the trial judge
Celebron v. City of Palmdale et a l.: Simmons v. Palmdale and Faulk v. Palmdale (2017)
More than 30 plaintiffs brought separate actions against the City of Palmdale involving inverse condemnation, nuisance, negligence, and trespass claims as a result of a massive 2015 rain storm that caused substantial flash flooding and debris flow. With a “return frequency” at 1000 years, the storm overwhelmed the City's public improvements.
Brenda served as lead counsel on the cases and obtained favorable results for Palmdale by: (1) negotiating the dismissal of Palmdale from the Simmons action within a fe w months of the filing of the action, (2) prevailing on a summary judgment motion in the Faulk action by establishing that the epic storm was a superseding, intervening cause of plaintiffs’ damages , and (3) negotiating a settlement of the remaining Dunagan/Celebron plaintiffs, which was paid by the pooling entity with a minimal contribution from the City of Palmdale. After Brenda successfully argued a summary judgment motion that resulted in the dismissal of numerous plaintiffs, the motion served as the catalyst to get the remaining cases settled at substantially less than it would have cost the City to prepare summary judgment motions in those cases.
Gonzalez v. Johnson (2015)
Brenda successfully represented the City of Sacramento in defeating the last legal challenge to the $477 million entertainment and sports arena in downtown Sacramento that serves as the home for the Sacramento Kings NBA team. After an 11-day trial with 18 witnesses, more than 150 exhibits and the presentation of an administrative reco rd, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Tim Frawley issued a proposed Statement of Decision finding that “plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden of proof on any of their causes of action” and awarded the recovery of defense costs.
Opponents settled their case for dismissal of all claims with prejudice in exchange for a waiver of costs. In an attempt to overturn the City’s approval of the arena, opponents had alleged that the public -private partnership supporting the arena engaged in a “secret subsidy,” col lusion, fraud, concealment, waste and illegal expenditure of public funds, along with alleged illegalities in the City’s $325 million in bond financing. The case also addressed unadjudicated law as plaintiffs’ reverse validation claim challenged the City’s finding that there were “significant public benefits” from issuing bonds under the Marks -Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985. Prior to Gonzalez v. Johnson , there was little judicial guidance for cities in their issuance of bonds under the Act. The Daily Journal selected the victory in Gonzalez v. Johnson as a “Top Defense Result” in its special report of the Top Verdicts for 2015. Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) v. PPF Industrial, et al. (2015) In a case raising complex questions on valuation of “improvements pertaining to the realty,” as well as unique relocation and goodwill issues,
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 57
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero
Brenda overcame the bloated appraisals from a business owner, saving the transit district over $4 million. A medical device sterilization business, represented by Norm Matteonni and Peggy O’Laughlin, sought $9.85 million in eminent domain just compensation from BART. As a result of motions in limine, that amount was reduced to $9.4 million. The jury awarded the business only $5.4 million, forcing it to return $400,0 00 to BART from the agency’s pretrial deposit—a rare occurrence in eminent domain disputes. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA): SVBX BART Project and CELR Project Brenda served as counsel on numerous eminent domain matters filed by VTA to acquire property for a 10 -mile extension of the BART system to the Silicon Valley. The acquisitions range d from full takes of multi -acre industrial parks containing numerous multitenant masonry buildings requiring complicated relocations of numerous business tenants, to complex acquisitions involving highest and best use and project influence issues.
Brenda drafted purchase and sale agreements including one for a property valued at $26 million, drafted license agreements, and obtained orders for possession. She also assisted with complicated relocation, valuation and improvements to the realty issues.
Brenda was also successful in having the Business Owner accept her final offer, after the jury w as empaneled, that was hundreds of thousands of dollars below the Business Owner’s trial testimony. ( VTA v. RK Logistics (2013)).
Brenda was part of the trial team that prevailed at a trial involving 10 separate right -to-take challenges. The challenges were raised in a condemnation action brought to acquire property owned by a shopping center for the construction of the Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project. In Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority v.
Eastridge Shopping Center, LLC (Case No. 1 -11-CV- 209524), judgment was entered in favor of VTA on all ten challenges including CEQA objections raised by Eastridge’s counsel (Gibson Dunn), Macy’s West Stores’ counsel (Matteonni O’Laughlin & Hechtman), J.C. Penney’s counsel (Turner & Turner Law) and Sears’ counsel (SNR Denton).
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority: The U.S. 101 Auxiliary Lanes Project After the complaints and motions for prejudgment possession had been filed by in -house counsel to respond to the numerous oppositions filed by several large developers, Google, a water district, and a City, Brenda was successful in getting stipulated orders for possession and reaching early settlements with all the property owners.
Five actions were filed to acquire various property interests needed for this project to relieve traffic congestion by constructing auxiliary lanes and extending high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on Highway 101 between State Route 85 in Mountain View and Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto. The settlements required coordination with the various property owners and Caltrans, as well as implementation of creative strategies. Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) – Salinas Rail Extension Project Brenda is presently assisting TAMC with Package 2 of a 16 -mile commuter rail exten sion project. She filed 10 eminent domain actions, settled nine and tried one of these actions to verdict for Package 1 and for Package 2, she filed three actions. She has settled all three actions and is assisting with the final aspects of Package 2 . She advised TAMC through the pre -condemnation phase, assisting with valuation, relocation, project coordination, and appraisal issues for both packages. She also assisted TAMC with numerous hardship acquisitions. Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) – Highway 25 Bypass Project Brenda assisted COG with all aspects of the right -of-way process, acquisitions and condemnations for the Highway 25 Bypass Project. A total of 44 property acqu isitions were required for the P roject. Two properties were acquired in their entirety as full fee takes; one business was relocated; one household was relocated; and one rental tenant was relocated. The remaining properties were acquired as partial fee takes, in addition to the acquisition of public utility easements and temporary construction easements. Brenda assisted COG staff and consultants in preparing initial offers, staff reports, resolutions of necessity, and an amendment to their joint powers agreement, as well as in negotiating settlements. Sixteen cases were f iled. Most involved complex legal and valuation issues relating to severance damages, highest and best use, development potential, dedication requirements, zones of value, and benefits.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 58
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero
Four cases are described below.
Council of San Benito County Governme nts v. Hollister Inn , (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 473. The property owner, Hollister Inn, who owned and operated a Best Western Hotel in the City of Hollister near the intersection of Highways 25 and 156, objected to the taking of its access easement across ano ther property owner’s property which provided the hotel direct access to Highway 25, which it alleged was its main entrance. At the right -to-take trial, the court found that COG committed a gross abuse of discretion by failing “to consider the possibility of taking the property of an adjoining landowner to provide Hollister Inn access to Highway 25” pursuant to section 1240.350. The trial court further found that COG “failed to exercise its discretion to determine whether the project was planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury.”
After COG complied with the conditional dismissal, Hollister Inn accepted COG’s final offer, and COG appealed.
The Court of Appeal reversed the trial co urt and vacated the award of attorney’s fees and costs. It found that the trial court erred in issuing an order of conditional dismissal against COG and in awarding reasonable litigation expenses to Hollister Inn. It also found that section 1240.350 does n ot authorize a public entity to condemn land to provide access to other private property when that property is cut off from access to a particular public access but is not landlocked.
Council of San Benito County Governments v. Roberts et al., San Benito Superior Court, Case No. CU -06-00050.
This case involved a full take of two adjacent parcels with a total area of 2.76 acres. One of the parcels was partially improved for use as a trailer sales and repair facility. Portions of both parcels were taken as un economic remnants. The case was bifurcated after the tenant disclaimed any and all rights to compensation for its leasehold interest in the property. The property owner made an initial demand of $3,606,780, supported by a summary statement of his trial appraiser. COG deposited $1,052,000 as just compensation. The case settled for $1,562,938 on the eve of trial. The court granted judgment for COG as to the tenant’s claim for loss of goodwill; the tenant was seeking a six-figure settlement.
Council of San Be nito County Governments v. K&S Market, et al., San Benito Superior Court, Case No. CU -06- 00047. This case involved a partial take of two adjacent parcels totaling 5.271 acres. The land was improved with a Safeway Food and Drug Store and a Safeway Service S tation. As a result of one of the fee takes, Safeway lost 28 parking spaces. It was undisputed that the Safeway parking was already at a minimum. After negotiations with Caltrans and the owners/tenants, Brenda negotiated a settlement in which Caltrans agre ed to allow COG to provide an excess parcel to the defendants for conversion into a parking lot for the store. This creative settlement resulted in great savings for all parties, especially COG.
Council of San Benito County Governments v. McNamee, et. al. , San Benito Superior Court, Case No. CU -06- 00048. This case involved a partial take of 1,494 square feet that eliminated 175.01 feet of the parcel’s frontage on San Felipe Road. The defendants sought substantial severance damages. Brenda argued at trial that defendants were not entitled to any severance damages because they could not show a “substantial impairment of access to their remainder parcel.” The trial court agreed and the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Appellate District affirmed. BART’s San Francisco Airport Extension Project
Brenda represented San Mateo County Transit (SamTrans) and BART on various cases related to BART’s extension to the San Francisco International Airport.
Two cases are described below.
San Mateo County Transit District v. Ci ty and County of San Francisco, et al., San Mateo County Superior Court, Case No. 405695. Brenda represented SamTrans in this action involving 50 separate parcels of property over approximately 8 miles of the former San Francisco Market Street Railway righ t-of-way. This case presented numerous challenging appraisal issues regarding full and partial takings, temporary construction and subterranean utility easements located on both residential and commercial property, as well as loss of goodwill. Favorable settlements were negotiated with 58 of the 59 named defendants. One defendant business tenant refused to settle and Brenda obtained summary judgment by establishing its lack of entitlement to loss of goodwill. On appeal, the summary judgment was affirmed.
San Mateo County Transit District v. Tanforan Park Shopping Center, et. al., San Mateo County Superior Court, Case No. 407836. Brenda represented SamTrans to acquire land for the construction of the San Bruno BART
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 59
Brenda Aguilar-Guerrero
Station. The subject fee acquisition consist ed of 5 acres of land that had been designated as parking for a shopping center. Permanent underground utility and temporary construction easements affecting approximately 8,800 square feet were also condemned. The case presented complex valuation issues r elated to severance damages, including entitlement, highest and best use, development potential, parking usage, and benefits.
Significant goodwill loss claims also were asserted. As part of the eight -week jury trial, Brenda tried the goodwill issues. The jury returned a verdict of $0 for national retailer Sears on its goodwill claim. North Concord BART Station
Brenda defended BART in an inverse condemnation action brought by over 100 plaintiffs living near the BART extension from Concord to the North Concord Station. The case consisted of three consolidated actions brought by homeowners and residents who claimed physical damage and personal injuries allegedly suffered during the period of construction and operation. Thirteen separate causes of action w ere alleged. Brenda negotiated a very favorable settlement for BART that included payment on only some of the construction related claims. Judgment was entered in favor of BART on all other claims.
INSIGHTS
Presentations
“Career Advancement Obstacles and Opportunities,” Bay Area Women Lawyers Retreat, February 2020 “Identifying and Minimizing Implicit Bias in the Land Use Context,” County Counsels’ Association of California, Fall Land Use Conference, 2019
Program Co -Chair and Presenter, “Prejudgment Possession: What You Need to Know,” 21 st Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference - Legal, Appraisal & Government Perspectives, CLE International, 2019 “Identifying and Minimizing Implicit Bias,” 21st Annual Northern California Eminent Domain C onference, CLE International, 2019
Program Co-Chair, “Eminent Domain: Legal, Appraisal & Right of Way Perspectives,” 20 th Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2018
“Women In Law Series Panel Discussion: Battling Bias,” A lameda County Bar Association and Women Lawyers of Alameda County seminar, 2018
“High Stakes & High Risks: Strategies for Handling High -Profile Litigation,” California Minority Counsel Program seminar, 2018
Program Co-Chair, “Eminent Domain: Law & Policy,” and “Relocation Law,” 19th Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2017
“Pathways to Partnership,” California Women Lawyers Annual Conference, 2016 “Eminent Domain Litigation and New Law Regarding Final Offers,” Right of W ay Annual Spring Conference, Chapter 42 of the International Right of Way Association, 2016
Program Co-Chair, “Case Law and Legislative Update,” 18th Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2016
“What’s New? The Latest Lega l Developments You Need to Know,” 18th Annual Southern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2016
Program Co -Chair, “Eminent Domain 101,” 17th Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2015
Program Co -Chair, “The Effects of the Casasola Decision on the After Condition Goodwill Analysis,” 16th Annual Northern California Eminent Domain Conference, CLE International, 2014
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 60
PRACTICE GROUPS
Public
Real Estate and Business
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Davis, 1995
Master of City Planning, University of
California, Berkeley, 1987
B.A., (with distinction), University of
Michigan, 1979
ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the Central
District of California
United States District Court for the
Northern District of California
AFFILIATIONS
State Bar of California, Real Property Law
Section
Los Angeles County Bar Association, Real
Estate Section
American Bar Association, State and Local
Government Law Section
American Bar Association, Affordable
Housing and Community Development
Forum
Susan E. Bloch
Partner
Oakland [email protected]
1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900 510.903.8809 D
Oakland, California 94612 510.273.8780 T
Susan Bloch specializes in affordable hous ing, economic development , and transactional real estate matters. Susan has over 25 years of experience representing private and non -profit developers and public agencies, including cities, counties, housing authorities, and redevelopment successor agencies in transactions involving the acquisition, development, financing, leasing and sale of residential, commercial and industrial properties; and the development and implementation of affordable housing policies and programs.
Susan has provided special counsel services on real estate and affordable housing transactions for Alameda County, Placer County, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, the cities of Oakland, San Jose, Union City, San Leandro, Mountain View, Morgan Hill, San Carlos, Daly City, South San Francisco, Petaluma, Napa, Pleasanton, Redwood City, Dublin, Cathedral City, Rialto, Hemet, and Livermore, and other public entities including Los Angeles World Airpor ts (LAWA), the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles, Renewal Enterprise District, Sacramento Regional Transit District, East Bay Regional Parks District, the Transportation Agency of Monterey County, and the Moraga -Orinda Fire District . Her nonprofit clients include Veterans Housing Development Corporation, Christian Church Homes, YWCA Golden Gate Silicon Valley, the California Odd Fellows Foundation, and the Hilarita-Tiburon Ecumenical Association.
Before beginning her practice as a n attorney, Susan served as Program Manager with the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency and as a consultant to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation and the National Economic Development and Law Center. She has been a speaker at conferences and seminars sponsored by the League of California Cities, the California Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB), the Real Property Section of the California State Bar, the California Redevelopment Association, Housing California, the Northern California Ass ociation for Non -Profit Housing, California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED), the California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal -ALHFA), the Bay Area City Attorneys Association (BACA) and the City Attorneys Association of Los Angeles County (CAALAC). She has served as a member of the Board of Directors of California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies since 2014.
RESULTS
City of Oakland /Oakland Redevelopment Successor Agency – representing the Successor Agency to the Oakland Redevelopment Agency in connection with redevelopment agency dissolution matters, including development of asset disposition and retention strategies, implementation of enforceable obligations, and representation before the State Department of Finance.
Represented the City of Oakland in connection with ground lease and financing transactions for the development of affordable and mixed -income housing as components of the Coliseum and Fruit vale Station transit-oriented developments.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 61
Susan E. Bloch
County of Placer/Placer County Successor Agency – representation on redevelopment and affordable housing matters, including matters related to dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency and implementation of enforc eable obligations. Recent projects include updating first -time homebuyer and residential rehabilitation loan documents; negotiation and drafting of financing and development documents for a scattered -site affordable housing project and a mixed-use/mixed-income housing development.
Santa Clara County Housing Authority – representation on real estate and finance matters including the acquisition, management and financing of the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park, the acquisition and disposition of property for development of affordable housing , and regulatory matters including compliance with affordability restrictions and state and federal relocation law.
City of Petaluma – representation on real estate, affordable housing and successor agency matters, including the disposition of City property for construction of affordable housing project s, and the documentation of City financing.
California Odd Fellows Foundation – representation as general counsel to the Board of Directors, representing the Foundation in connection with a joint venture for the redevelopment and refinancing of Fellowship Plaza, a 150-unit senior housing development in Saratoga, California. City of Pleasanton – representation in connection with a multi -phased affordable housing project under development on land leased by the City to a nonprofit developer, and a special needs project proposed for development on land to be ground leased from the City. Prepared and negotiated ground leases and City loan documents.
City of Livermore - affordable housing development and finance matters, including preparation of a purchase and sale agreement, affordable housing regulatory agreement, and City loan documents for a special needs project. City of Morgan Hill – representation on affordable housing policy, finance and transactional matters including disposition, development and loan transactions for multi -family acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction projects, and the administration of first-time homebuyer and inclusionary housing programs. Veterans Housing Development Corporation – representation in connection with the development of transitional housing and permanent supportive housing for formerly homeless veterans in several northern California jurisdictions, including a three-phase project on the former Mather Air Force Base in Rancho Cordova. City of Mountain View – representation in connection with affordable housing policy, development and finance matters, including projects developed using a combination of City housing trust funds, HOME funds, low -income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds and other sources. City of Union City – representation in connection with disposition, development and financing transaction s for market-rate and affordable housing component of the City ’s transit-oriented development at the Union City BART station.
RC Peninsula Park, LLC. Represented private developer in the negotiation and drafting of a long -term development agreement governing a phased residential condominium, retail and hotel projec t; an infrastructure financing agreement; and agreements governing developer contributions for affordable housing and childcare. Sacramento Regional Transit District – Transit-Oriented Mixed-Use Developments. Represented the District in the negotiation and preparation of disposition and development agreements for two proposed transit -oriented developments that will provide a mix of residential, retail and commercial uses. The documentation included option agreements and loan and security instruments for the District’s construction-to-permanent financing for the projects.
City of Reno. Represented the City of Reno and its Redevelopment Agency in connection with the private development of a minor league baseball stadium and related retail projects, includ ing the negotiation and drafting of complex disposition and development agreements, ground leases, property exchange and option agreements, retail leases, and financing documents.
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles – Alexandria Hotel. Represented the Agency in connection with financing the rehabilitation of a historic hotel into 463 studio apartments. Negotiated permanent loan documents with the private developer while concurrently negotiating a proposed settlement agreement in complex federal litigation related to the project.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 62
Susan E. Bloch
City of South San Francisco/Successor Agency. Represented the City of South San Francisco and its Redevelopment Agency in affordable housing and commercial transactions involving the purchase, sale and rehabilitation of residential and commercial properties and the negotiation and preparation of financing, acquisition and disposition agreements. Represented the Successor Agency in connection with redevelopment agency dissolution matters.
San Leandro Redevelop ment Agency – Senior Housing. Represented the Agency in connection with the financing of an affordable senior housing project. The project was financed with a combination of city, agency, and county loans; HUD 202 financing; tax-exempt bonds; and low-income housing tax credits. City of Dublin – Inclusionary Housing and First -Time Homebuyer Programs. Represented the City in connection with the implementation of its inclusionary zoning ordinance and its first -time homebuyer loan program. This included negotiation with the developers of single family and condominium developments that are subject to the inclusionary ordinance; drafting program guidelines and regulations; drafting amendments to the ordinance and regulations as changing circumstances have warr anted; and assisting staff in a myriad of implementation issues such as requests for refinancing, violation of resale restriction agreements and foreclosures. City of Dublin – Mixed-Income Housing. Represented the City in connection with development of a 660-unit, mixed-income housing development that includes senior and multi -family phases financed with 4 percent tax credits, tax -exempt bonds and a low -interest City loan. Negotiated and drafted development agreements detailing the developer’s obligations to construct public improvements, loan documents, and affordable housing regulatory agreements to ensure compliance with the City’s inclusionary zoning requirements. Represented the City in negotiations for the disposition and redevelopment of Dublin Hou sing Authority property for redevelopment as a mixed-income senior, multi-family, and homeownership development. City of Dublin – Low-Income Senior Housing. Negotiated and drafted ground lease, predevelopment and construction loan documents, regulatory agreements, and easement agreements for a low -income senior housing project financed with a City loan, tax credits and a conventional construction loan. This project required coordination with the City’s concurrent construction of a senior center on an adja cent parcel. The project included shared access, parking and reciprocal easements.
Milpitas Redevelopment Agency – Affordable Housing, County Health Center and Parking Facility. Negotiated and documented numerous owner participation agreements, dispositi on and development agreements and financing documents for these projects. Transactions included the Agency’s conveyance of adjacent parcels to a non-profit developer and to Santa Clara County for construction of an affordable senior housing development an d a County health clinic facility, and the ground lease of an additional Agency -owned parcel for County construction of a parking garage. Documentation included a ground lease with option to purchase, loan documents for the housing project, and a reciproc al access easement agreement governing construction and maintenance of a common driveway.
San Leandro Redevelopment Agency – Affordable Housing, Motel Conversion, Commercial Development and Rehabilitation. Represented the City of San Leandro and San Leand ro Redevelopment Agency on housing and economic development matters including residential and commercial rehabilitation programs, multi -family housing development, and the disposition and development of land for commercial and residential projects. Assist ed the Agency in the acquisition of a dilapidated motel, and the negotiation and preparation of ground lease and financing documents pursuant to which the Agency leased the property to a non -profit developer for conversion into affordable studio apartments, provided construction financing, and will provide an operating subsidy to ensure continued affordability.
INSIGHTS
Presentations
“The Future of Housing in California: Economic, Policy, and Development Perspectives,” 37th Annual Real Property Law Section Retreat, April 20, 2018
“State Housing Programs, California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal -ALHFA),” November 12, 2015
“Update on Post-Redevelopment Legislation and Litigation,” California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal-ALHFA) Regional Meeting, February 12, 2015
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 63
Susan E. Bloch
“How to Build a Winning Team for Affordable Housing Development,” California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal-ALHFA) Annual Conference, November 13, 2014 “Reinvention 2014 - New Approaches t o Housing, Redevelopment, and Economic Development,” California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal-ALHFA) Conference, April 3, 2014 “Development in the Post -Redevelopment Era: The Legal Aspect,” 86th State Bar of California Annual Meeting, October 2013
“Where Are We Going: Legislation & Litigation,” California Redevelopment Association Webinar, July 2013 “Housing Successor Agency Implementation Issues” California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal - ALHFA), conference workshop, October 2012
“What Does AB 1484 Really Mean in the Post -Redevelopment Era?” California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Webinar, July 2012
“Post-RDA Latest Developments,” City Attorney’s Association of Los Angeles County,” July 2012 “Implementing ABx1 26 - Successor Agency Training,” California Redevelopment Association, 2012 “Housing - Successor Agency Training,” California Redevelopment Association, 2012 “Nuts and Bolts for Successor Agencies,” Webinar, 2012
“Toolkit for Economic Development: Land Use and Housing,” Webinar, 2012 Publications
“Revised Department of Finance Budget Trailer Bill Addresses Redevelopment Dissolution,” Burke Public Law Alert , February 20, 2015
“Department of Finance Publishes Budget Trailer Bill Language Addre ssing Redevelopment Dissolution,” Burke Public Law Alert, February 11, 2015
“Governor Signs AB 1963 Extending Deadline for Approval of Long -Range Property Management Plans and Limiting Scope of State Controller Review of Property Transfers,” Burke Public Law Update, July 22, 2014
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 64
PRACTICE GROUPS
Real Estate and Business
EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Los Angeles
School of Law, 2013
B.A., University of California, Los Angeles,
2010
ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the Central
District of California
AFFILIATIONS
Orange County Bar Association
St. Thomas More Society of Orange
County
Orange County Women Lawyers
Association
Meghan E. Nihan
Senior Associate
Orange County [email protected]
1851 East First Street, Suite 1550 949.265.3404 D
Santa Ana, California 92705 949.863.3363 T
Meghan Nihan’s practice focus es on real estate transactional matters and public/private partnership development matters. She has experience with purchase, sale, easement, license, and lease transactions; government purchases of property in lieu of condemnation; ancillary matters such as title review and due diligence; and advising clients on property management landlord/tenant issues.
Meghan was previously an associate in the Corporate and Real Estate practice groups of two Southern California law firms. She was also an associate in the Eminent Domain practice group of a law firm based in Orange County for five years, where she advised s taff during t he planning phase of a public transportation project, drafted and negotiated purchase and sale agreements , and handled all aspects of eminent domain litigation if a voluntary purchase transaction was not consummated.
During law school, Meghan completed environmental coursework. Early in her career, she worked as a Legal Fellow at Orange County Coastkeeper, whose mission i s to protect the region’s water resources. Meghan’s work there included bringing lawsuits to enforce the Clean Water Act and reviewing and drafting comments regarding local policies or Environmental Impact Reports.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 65
PRACTICE GROUPS
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
Public
Real Estate and Business
EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Berkeley
School of Law, 2012
B.S., Urban and Regional Studies, Cornell
University, 2002
ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the
Southern District of California
AFFILIATIONS
California Chapter of the American
Planning Association, Vice President of
Policy and Legislation
Eric S. Phillips
Partner
Pronouns: he, him, his
San Francisco [email protected]
1 California Street, Suite 3050 415.655.8114 D
San Francisco, California 94111 415.655.8100 T
Eric Phillips practices in the areas of land use, real estate, and CEQA compliance. Eric represents clients in all phases of the development process, including property acquisition, entitlement and administrative approvals, CEQA compliance, compliance with sta te housing laws, and negotiating real estate disputes. Eric has particular experience with State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, SB 35, and Housing Element Law.
Eric assists private clients to successfully obtain subdivision maps, densi ty bonuses, development agreements, and other land use approvals. He also has served as special counsel to numerous public agencies and provides advice on writing ordinances and legislative findings related to zoning, subdivisions, inclusionary housing pro grams, rent control and tenant protection measures, and impact fees. In both roles, Eric has worked with various clients to negotiate and close purchase and sale agreements, draft loan agreements, create below -market-rate rental and for -sale programs, perform property diligence, craft residential preference programs, and work with technical consultants to prepare Draft and Final EIRs.
INSIGHTS
Presentations
“Got Sites? Preparing for Sixth Cycle Housing Elements,” California Chapter of the American Planning Association, September 2019
“2019 California Legislative Update,” California Chapter of the American Planning Association, September 2019
“Housing Legislation Frenzy Continues,” Bay Area Planning Directors Association, May 2019
“Nuts and Bolts of Project Approvals,” Housing California, April 2019 “Legislative Update and RHNA Reform,” Sacramento Area Council of Governments, April 2019
“Resurgence of Rent Control and Tenant Protection Law in California,” San Diego Housing Federation, October 2018
“Getting to Yes – Leveraging State Law to Secure Project Approvals,” Southern California Association of Non Profit Housing, October 2018
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 66
w w w . b w s l a w . c o m
8 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 4 2 9 7
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 67
990051\06\3357903.2
PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
FOR ON-CALL LEGAL SERVICES RELATED TO ECONOMIC DEVLEOPMENT AND HOUSING
Goldfarb & Lipman LLP is a certified woman-owned enterprise.
Oakland
1300 Clay Street
11th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Los Angeles
550 South Hope Street
Suite 2685
Los Angeles, CA 90071
San Diego
2260 El Cajon Boulevard
No. 922
San Diego, CA 92104
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 68
i
990051\06\3357903.2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 2 REAL ESTATE.................................................................................................................................... 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ................................................................................................................... 3 EMINENT DOMAIN .......................................................................................................................... 5 PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE .......................................................................................................... 10 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 11 Exhibit A: Public Agency Clients
Exhibit B: Public Agency Real Estate Transactions
Exhibit C: Brief Biographies of Goldfarb & Lipman Attorneys Exhibit D: Excerpts of Relevant Sample Work
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 69
2 990051\06\3357903.2
INTRODUCTION
Goldfarb & Lipman LLP is one of California's leading law firms practicing in the fields of affordable housing, land use, community economic development, and municipal law, including trial and appellate litigation in each of these practice areas since 1971.
Our practice focuses on affordable housing and urban development, community economic development, real estate syndications, public finance, land use, fair housing, municipal law including the Brown Act and Public Records Act, relocation, environmental law, and litigation related to those matters, including eminent domain. Our practice includes all areas of legal experience required by our clients related to the development of projects, adoption and implementation of government programs, and trial and appellate litigation related to those matters.
Goldfarb & Lipman focuses on providing superior legal representation to both public and private entities, a diverse combination of clients that includes cities, counties, and public housing authorities, as well as private nonprofit and for-profit developers. Our broad client base provides our attorneys an unmatched ability to understand complex transactional and litigation matters from multiple perspectives. Goldfarb & Lipman has provided invaluable service and advice to our clients in thousands of real estate transactions from small urban infill and rural developments to large, high-profile projects throughout California.
A representative list of the firm's public agency clients is included in Exhibit A, and examples of projects on which we have represented public agencies are included in Exhibit B. Based on our extensive knowledge and experience, our clients turn to us as trusted advisors to assist them to reach their goals. We are committed to providing our clients excellent legal services in the most timely and cost-effective manner.
The resumes of the primary attorneys, who would perform the work requested by the City, as well as brief biographies of all other attorneys in the firm, are included in Exhibit C.
We propose to provide services in the following areas set forth in the City's Request for Qualifications:
Real Estate
Affordable Housing
Eminent Domain and Inverse Condemnation
Specific qualifications and experience related to each practice area are discussed below.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 70
3 990051\06\3357903.2
REAL ESTATE
Goldfarb & Lipman's real estate practice represents public agencies and private developers in the acquisition, development, financing, sale, and leasing of real estate. We have successfully represented public agencies on major development projects throughout California, ranging from the redevelopment of Whiskey Gulch in East Palo Alto, the Richmond City Center and Marin City, to the development of Staples Center and the Grand Avenue projects in Los Angeles and Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara. Our real estate experience covers a diversity of property types, including multifamily and single family residential, commercial, sports arenas, stadiums, entertainment complexes, offices, mixed-use developments, hotels, transit villages, cooperatives, mobile home parks, land trusts, condominiums, air rights parcels and other subdivisions. We represent our clients in acquisitions, dispositions, conveyances, sale/leasebacks, relocation, eminent domain, environmental issues, land use, general leasing, and ground leasing transactions. We also provide advice and guidance on compliance with the Surplus Lands Act and other laws governing the disposition of public property. Project activities include new development, rehabilitation, single site, and multi-parcel assembly, and, redevelopment to a new use. Our multidisciplinary experience working with public agencies and private developers on complex real estate transactions gives us detailed knowledge and a unique understanding of the issues that arise in every phase of major development projects.
Goldfarb & Lipman has far-reaching experience structuring and negotiating financing transactions for the feasible development of various types of development transactions. Our experience in this area includes providing assistance in structuring transactions, preparing development and financing documents, and advising clients with respect to ongoing operation and maintenance of developments.
Our multidisciplinary experience working with public agencies and private developers on complex real estate transactions gives us detailed knowledge and a unique understanding of the issues that arise in every phase of major development projects.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Goldfarb & Lipman is eminently qualified to provide affordable housing services to the City of San Carlos. Goldfarb & Lipman supports and shares our clients' commitment to affordable housing development. Since 1971, we have been a leader in affordable housing law representing hundreds of public agencies and non-profit and housing developers in creating affordable housing for low and moderate income households. We have helped our clients develop over fifty thousand affordable housing units throughout California, utilizing a wide variety of public and private financing sources.
Through our representation of cities, counties, and housing authorities, in their capacities as both lenders and developers of affordable rental housing, Goldfarb & Lipman has broad experience in structuring local assistance to affordable housing developers in complex real estate transactions and has devised methods to assist local public agencies in regulating and retaining affordable developments in their communities. Our attorneys have worked extensively with all federal, state, and local government housing programs, including the U.S.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 71
4 990051\06\3357903.2
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the California Housing Finance Agency, and local funding mechanisms such as multifamily housing revenue bonds and housing trust funds. We frequently advise our public agency clients on inclusionary housing and density bonus programs, and have drafted numerous ordinances and implementation documents for both types of programs. Goldfarb & Lipman has assisted in the creation and documentation of numerous first time homebuyer programs, funded with the former redevelopment housing funds, CDBG funds, HOME funds, and local housing trust funds. Our work with local public agencies includes drafting and negotiating land disposition, predevelopment, and construction loan and grant documents for public agency assistance, regulatory agreements for multifamily developments, resale restrictions and shared appreciation loan documents for low and moderate income homebuyers. Our attorneys have the skill and experience to ensure that our clients meet the requirements of applicable funding programs as well as the requirements of first mortgage lenders, investors, mortgage insurers, and secondary mortgage market entities, including CalHFA, FHA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. We are also well-versed on utilizing federal and state low-income housing tax credits to develop affordable housing.
We have extensive experience advising public agencies and their private development partners in transactions using many economic development tools, such as:
Private Equity
- State tax credits
- Federal tax credits (New Market, Historic, Renewable Energy
Tax and Assessment Financing
- Infrastructure financing districts
- Mello-Roos special tax districts
- Business improvement districts
- Other assessment districts
- Certificates of participation
State and Federal Economic Development Tools
- Section 108
- Brownfields
- Enterprise zones
- Infrastructure bank financing
State and Local Regulatory Incentives
- CEQA streamlining and exemptions
- Density bonuses and other zoning concessions
- Development agreements
- Transferrable development rights
We develop and lead training workshops on these tools and continue to work with legislators, local governments, and citizen groups on community economic development legislation. We are a recognized leader in the economic development community and provide
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 72
5 990051\06\3357903.2
technical support to groups advocating for new programs that will provide local governments with the financing, land assembly, and environmental remediation tools needed to form public- private partnerships and effectively invest in infrastructure, transportation, transit-oriented development, and other improvements that will enhance sustainability efforts as well as strengthen local economies. With such intimate knowledge and experience with affordable housing and community economic development programs, we are well equipped to offer the Economic and Community Development Department staff general assistance and related services as requested by the City.
EMINENT DOMAIN
Goldfarb & Lipman has guided our clients in the acquisition of all types of properties and property interests through voluntary negotiations and condemnation. We have handled acquisition projects ranging from the acquisition of one parcel to the acquisition of multiple parcels for large scale developments as well as road construction, right-of-way and street widening projects. We are well-versed in the technical and procedural aspects of public agency acquisition, including clearing clouds on title, relocation of residents and business facilities, complex goodwill issues, valuation issues including severance damages, easement rights, temporary interference with business operations, acquisition of outdoor advertising, and hazardous materials remediation.
Our attorneys are highly knowledgeable and experienced in the areas of real estate and public law relevant to public agency acquisition of land. We also are recognized as leading experts in the complexities of relocation law under both federal and state law, regularly providing trainings and seminars on both the legal and practical aspects of implementing relocation programs. We have extensive experience in eminent domain and inverse condemnation litigation, including advising public agencies on minimizing the risks of inverse condemnation liability as well as advising clients whose property is being condemned about the eminent domain rules and valuation concepts.
Goldfarb & Lipman has also assisted clients in undertaking various activities that precede or accompany the filing of eminent domain actions, including appraisals, negotiations, resolutions of necessity, staff reports, legal notices, CEQA/NEPA compliance, and relocation plans. We also have extensive experience in the litigation of issues affecting condemnation, valuation of property, and the right to take, including CEQA challenges, conflict of interest laws, the Meyers- Milias-Brown Act and similar laws, federal bankruptcy proceedings, challenges to statutory or constitutional authority to condemn, and unique issues relating to the type of property to be condemned. With our vast litigation experience, Goldfarb & Lipman provides our clients with an accurate assessment so they have a realistic understanding of the time, cost and issues involved in condemnation.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 73
6 990051\06\3357903.2
ATTORNEYS INTENDED TO BE ASSIGNED TO ASSIST SAN CARLOS
Partner Karen Tiedemann will serve as lead attorney for all matters involving the City, and will direct services related to real estate and affordable housing. Ms. Tiedemann's resume and representative list of public agency real estate work are attached as Exhibit B.
Partner Celia Lee will serve as lead attorney on eminent domain matters. Ms. Lee’s resume and a list of recent eminent domain cases led by Ms. Lee are attached as Exhibit B.
Partner Barbara Kautz will continue to advise the City on housing-related land use matters, including assistance with the City’s inclusionary ordinance. An inclusionary ordinance recently adopted by the City of Richmond is attached as Exhibit D.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 74
7 990051\06\3357903.2
PRIMARY ATTORNEY RESUMES
KAREN M. TIEDEMANN
[email protected]
1300 Clay Street, 11t h Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Oakland
510 836-6336
Los Angeles
213 627-6336
San Diego
619 239-6336
goldfarblipman.com
Ms. Tiedemann is a partner in the firm with an emphasis of practice in community economic development, real
estate transactions, affordable housing, nonprofit
organization, and environmental law.
Ms. Tiedemann has negotiated and drafted disposition
and development agreements for complex developments
involving multiple uses, including transactions that
involved the acquisition of numerous properties and the relocation of business and residential tenants. She also advises clients on compliance with environmental laws
including shepherding developments through CEQA. Ms.
Tiedemann has extensive experience in financial analysis for projects utilizing multiple funding sources. Ms.
Tiedemann is a frequent speaker on relocation and fair
housing issues. Additionally, as general or special
counsel to several public agencies, Ms. Tiedemann
provides advice on compliance with the Brown Act, the
Fair Political Practices Act and Public Records Act, as well as general law questions.
Ms. Tiedemann is a co-author of A Legal Guide to
California Redevelopment (Third Edition), and Between
the Lines, a Question and Answer Guide on Fair Housing
in Supportive Housing.
Professional Experience Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Oakland, California, 1988-present.
Director, Renters Assistance Project for Students (RAPS), Associated Students of the University of California.
Education J.D., Berkeley Law School, University of California at Berkeley, with Order of the Coif honors. Associate Editor, Ecology Law Quarterly.
M.C.P., University of California at Berkeley.
B.A., Rhetoric, University of California at Berkeley.
Professional & Volunteer
Affiliations
Member, State Bar of California, Board Member, California Center for Cooperative Development, Board Member, Merritt Community Capital.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 75
8 990051\06\3357903.2
CELIA W. LEE
[email protected]
1300 Clay Street, 11th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Oakland
510 836-6336
Los Angeles
213 627-6336
San Diego
619 239-6336
goldfarblipman.com
Celia Lee is a partner in the firm. Her practice
encompasses a broad range of civil litigation and
investigations on behalf of public agencies, nonprofit, and private entities in real estate, housing, land use, and municipal law disputes.
Ms. Lee served as a Deputy City Attorney in the Office of the City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco for almost a decade. From 2010 to 2013, she was a
member of the Neighborhood and Resident Safety/Code
Enforcement Team, representing the City and County and
its departments and employees in its civil enforcement of state and local public safety and public nuisance laws.
From 2004-2010, she served on the Trial Team of the City Attorney's Office, where she litigated a wide variety of matters for several City departments. From 1994 to 2004, she practiced commercial litigation and insurance
litigation at two San Francisco law firms.
Professional Experience Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Oakland, California, 2014 – present.
Office of the City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco.
Education J.D., University of Michigan Law School, 1994.
B.A., University of California at Berkeley, 1991; magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa.
Professional & Volunteer
Affiliations
President, Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area (AABA), 2008-2009.
Chair, Board of Trustees for Chinese for Affirmative
Action/Asian Americans for Civil Rights and Equality
(CAA/AACRE), a civil rights organization based in San
Francisco's Chinatown that advocates for the Asian Pacific American community, 2009-present.
Member, Board of Directors, San Francisco Conservation
Corps, a nonprofit organization that offers education, job training, and employment in recycling and conservation
work around San Francisco to at-risk individuals aged 18- 26, 2009-present.
Member, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights for the San Francisco Bay Area, 2011-present.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 76
9 990051\06\3357903.2
BARBARA KAUTZ
[email protected]
1300 Clay Street, 11t h Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Oakland
510 836-6336
Los Angeles
213 627-6336
San Diego
619 239-6336
goldfarblipman.com
Ms. Kautz is a partner in the firm, with an emphasis of practice in the areas of land use (especially housing-related land use), CEQA compliance, real estate, economic
development, fair housing, and affordable housing. She is the author of In Defense of Inclusionary Zoning: Successfully Creating Affordable Housing, 36 U.S.F. Law Review 971
(2002); No More Kids: How Overcrowded Schools May Lead
to Violations of Fair Housing Laws, California Real Property Journal (2015).
Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Kautz was Community
Development Director and Assistant City Manager for the City of San Mateo, California, where she was responsible for managing the planning, redevelopment, code enforcement, and building operations of the city. She also served as Planning Director for the Town of Corte Madera, California.
Ms. Kautz has been active in the League of California Cities, serving on the Board of Directors, Planning Department
President, as editor of the Land Use chapter in the Municipal Law Handbook, and in the California Chapter of the
American Planning Association, where she served as Vice President for Policy and Legislation.
Ms. Kautz is a frequent lecturer on California housing laws, inclusionary housing, housing approvals, housing elements, affordable housing programs, and density bonus law.
Professional Experience Goldfarb & Lipman, Oakland, California, 2004-present.
Community Development Director and Assistant City
Manager, City of San Mateo, California.
Education J.D., University of San Francisco Law School, summa cum laude. Articles Editor, USF Law Review.
M.C.P., University of California, Berkeley.
A.B., Stanford University, Phi Beta Kappa, cum laude.
Professional & Volunteer
Affiliations
State Bar of California. Fellow, American Institute of Certified Planners. Member, American Bar Association,
Section on State and Local Government. Member, Urban
Land Institute. Member, Association of Environmental
Professionals
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 77
10 990051\06\3357903.2
PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE
Goldfarb & Lipman proposes to offer legal services to the City at the following discounted hourly rate:
Goldfarb & Lipman does not charge for word processing services. Reimbursable expenses that will be billed at cost by Goldfarb & Lipman include, but are not limited to: application, filing and similar fees required by third parties; and delivery charges other than by first class United States mail. Please note our hourly rates are adjusted from time to time and may change during the course of our engagement upon 60 days prior written notice to you. If you choose not to consent to the increased rates, you may terminate our services by written notice effective when received by us. We will have the right to withdraw as your attorney if permitted under the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California and applicable law.
Partner $350 - 365
Senior Counsel $345 - 365
Associate $210 - 345
Senior Law Clerk $195
Law Clerk $180
Litigation Project Coordinator $210
Project Coordinator $180
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 78
11 990051\06\3357903.2
REFERENCES
John Nagel
City Attorney
City of Sunnyvale
Office of the City Attorney
456 W Olive
Sunnyvale, CA 94088
(408) 730-7464
Tom Williams
City Manager
City of Millbrae
621 Magnolia Avenue
Millbrae, CA 94030
(650) 259-2334
Silva Darbinian
Deputy County Counsel
County of Napa
1195 Third Street
Napa, CA 94559
(707) 259-8250
[email protected]
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 79
A-1
990051\06\3357903.2
EXHIBIT A
PUBLIC AGENCY CLIENTS
City of Arcata
City of Arvin
City of Avenal
City of Barstow
City of Berkeley
City of Brea
City of Brentwood
City of Brisbane
City of Campbell
City of Clayton
City of Clovis
City of Concord
City of Cupertino
City of Del Rey Oaks
City of East Palo Alto
City of El Cerrito
City of Elk Grove
City of Eureka
City of Fremont
City of Fresno
City of Hayward
City of Hollister
City of Irvine
City of La Mirada
City of Livermore
City of Long Beach
City of Los Angeles
City of Marina
City of Martinez
City of Menlo Park
City of Millbrae
City of Modesto
City of Monrovia
City of Montebello
City of Monterey
City of Moreno Valley
City of Morgan Hill
City of Mountain View
City of Newark
City of Oakland
City of Orange
City of Pacifica
City of Palo Alto
City of Pittsburg
City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Reno
City of Richmond
City of Rosemead
City of Sacramento
City of Salinas
City of San Bruno
City of San Carlos
City of San Diego
City of San Rafael
City of Santa Clara
City of Seaside
City of Shafter
City of Solana Beach
City of South Lake Tahoe
City of South San Francisco
City of Stockton
City of Sunnyvale
City of Tracy
City of Tustin
City of Union City
Town of Fairfax
Town of Tiburon
County of Alameda
County of Butte
County of Contra Costa
County of Fresno
County of Humboldt
County of Mendocino
County of Napa
County of Orange
County of Nevada
County of Sacramento
County of San Mateo
County of Santa Clara
County of Santa Cruz
County of Sonoma
County of Yolo
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 80
A-2
990051\06\3357903.2
HOUSING AUTHORITY CLIENTS
Alameda County Housing Authority Regional Housing Authorities of Sutter & Nevada Counties
Berkeley Housing Authority Richmond Housing Authority
City of Alameda Housing Authority San Bernardino County Housing Authority Eureka Housing Authority City of San Buenaventura Housing Authority Hawaii Public Housing Authority San Francisco Housing Authority Kern County Housing Authority Wasco Housing Authority
Marin Housing Authority Yolo County Housing Authority
Oakland Housing Authority
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 81
B-1
990051\06\3357903.2
EXHIBIT B
PUBLIC AGENCY REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS
Alameda County. The firm has represented Alameda County and its Surplus Property Authority to secure entitlements for and realize maximum disposition value from several hundred acres of undeveloped or unneeded property eligible for annexation by nearby cities. We have written disposition rules designed to make the disposition process as streamlined and flexible as possible, within statutory constraints; negotiated residential and industrial purchase and sale agreements; participated in negotiations with neighboring landowners and the U.S. Army, the former owner of much of the property in question; and represented and assisted County staff in securing subdivision approval and development agreements and other entitlements from cities.
Berkeley Mixed–Use Project. Goldfarb & Lipman represented the City of Berkeley in negotiation of a disposition and development agreement of mixed-use development consisting of a publicly owned parking garage, retail space, affordable housing, and environmentally- friendly office space that used New Markets Tax Credit, a Section 108 loan and a Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) Grant as part of the financing.
East Palo Alto - Gateway Center. Representation of the redevelopment agency on all aspects of 250,000 square foot "big box" retail center including disposition agreements with five retailers, residential and business relocation and property acquisition, representation of the agency and the City in eminent domain and inverse condemnation cases relating to property acquisition, compliance with hazardous waste laws, and assistance with obtaining land use approvals and subdivision map approvals.
East Palo Alto - University Circle. Representation of redevelopment agency in negotiating and drafting the disposition and development agreement for a 12-acre hotel and office complex.
We assisted with the preparation and review of environmental documents, relocation plan, and replacement housing plan. The firm has assisted the agency in acquisition of approximately 40 separate parcels of land and provided oversight of the relocation of 100 residential tenants and 37 businesses.
Fresno Bee Building. Goldfarb & Lipman provided representation for the City of Fresno in connection with the rehabilitation of the Fresno Bee Building, a federally recognized historic building located in the Cultural Arts District of Downtown Fresno, with the use of New Markets Tax Credits. The firm assisted the City in the drafting of the transfer documents which provided for the disposition of the Fresno Bee Building to a City controlled California nonprofit public benefit corporation. The firm also prepared documents in connection with the financing of the rehabilitation expenses for the Fresno Bee Building.
Hollywood and Vine. The Hollywood and Vine project involves the construction of a multi- family rental housing development consisting of approximately two hundred sixty-two (262) units, approximately forty-five thousand (45,000) square feet of retail space along with
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 82
B-2
990051\06\3357903.2
approximately six hundred eighty-three (683) parking spaces, a four-star hotel consisting of approximately three hundred (300) rooms, lounge, restaurant, retail space, approximately two hundred eighty-five (285) parking spaces, a condominium development consisting of approximately ninety-six (96) units of for-sale housing with approximately one hundred ninety- two (192) parking spaces (the "Project"). The Project is located on approximately 4.6 acres of real property bounded by Hollywood Boulevard to the north, Argyle Avenue on the east, Selma Avenue on the south, and Vine Street in Los Angeles.
Monterey Hotel/Housing Project. Goldfarb & Lipman represented the City of Monterey and the Redevelopment Agency in the development of an 18 unit affordable housing project, constructed concurrently with the renovation of an adjacent Hotel. Goldfarb & Lipman prepared loan documents and development agreements, assisted in City in negotiating the work-out documents when the first developer experienced financial difficulty and defaulted on the project; and prepared the documents for the new developer which completed the construction of the project.
Oakland Fox Theater Project. Goldfarb & Lipman provided representation for the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Oakland in connection with the rehabilitation of the Oakland Fox Theater, a federally recognized historic building located in the Uptown area of Oakland, with the use of a combination of New Markets Tax Credits and Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits. The firm assisted the agency in the drafting of the disposition and development agreement which provided for the disposition of the Fox Theater to an agency-controlled California nonprofit public benefit corporation, as well as structuring the financing to assist with the costs of rehabilitating the Fox Theater. We also prepared the subleases with the live theater operator and charter school that utilize the rehabilitated building.
Pinole Vista Shopping Center. Goldfarb & Lipman negotiated and drafted on behalf of the redevelopment agency, purchase of the land, sale of the land to two major retailers (Target and Mervyns), and the ground lease of the remaining land to a developer for build-out of the rest of the site.
Rafael Theater. Goldfarb & Lipman drafted and negotiated the agreement for acquisition of a historic art deco theater in downtown San Rafael and the disposition agreement providing for a non-profit film organization to preserve and rehabilitate the theater (including seismic rehabilitation) for film festival use. The unique disposition agreement includes a covenant that the building remains in movie theater use and for periodic city use of the theater for city fund raising purposes.
Richmond – Transit Village. Representation of the Richmond Community Redevelopment Agency in negotiating and drafting the cooperation, design and funding, and construction agreements with the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District relating to the construction of a parking garage at the Richmond BART station.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 83
B-3
990051\06\3357903.2
Santa Clara Stadium Project. Goldfarb & Lipman represents the Santa Clara Stadium Authority in the development of a new stadium to serve as the home of the San Francisco 49ers. Our work on this project includes negotiation of the lease between the Stadium Authority and the 49ers, advice on myriad complex financing, land use and real estate issues including triggers for environmental review, public bidding process, sale of seat licenses and naming rights, concession agreements, use of off-site parking, and protections under long term ground leases.
South Lake Tahoe Park Avenue. Goldfarb & Lipman represented the South Lake Tahoe Redevelopment Agency in negotiation of agreements that led to development of a large mixed- use resort development in South Lake Tahoe near the Nevada border. The project includes a gondola serving the Heavenly ski area, two large time share developments, a transit center and restaurant, retail and entertainment uses.
Staples Center/L.A. LIVE. We provided representation to the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (the "CRA") in connection with the development of the Staples Center arena. The firm drafted and negotiated the disposition and development agreement ("DDA") on behalf of the CRA which provided for the acquisition of an approximately eight-block area and the disposition of the land to the developer of the arena. Following the execution of the DDA, the firm worked with the City Attorney's Office and CRA staff to oversee the acquisition and condemnation process for the arena land.
Sunnyvale Town Center Project. Goldfarb & Lipman represented the City of Sunnyvale Redevelopment Agency in negotiating and drafting the documents for the redevelopment of an unsuccessful 1970's shopping center into a modern mixed use residential, and retail complex scheduled to include approximately 1 million square feet of retail uses, 300 residential units and 300,000 square feet of office uses.
PUBLIC AGENCY EMINENT DOMAIN CASES
City of Hayward v. Ghulam Rabani, et al., Alameda County Superior Court Case No.
HG13692337: Representation of the City of Hayward in an eminent domain valuation action.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. The Community Development Commission of the County of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No.
BC644125: Representation of the County of Los Angeles as the property owner where the property was being condemned by the LA Metropolitan Transpiration Authority.
City of Millbrae v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, et al., County of San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 22-CIV-02713: Representation of the City of Millbrae in a condemnation action.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 84
D-7
990051\06\3357903.2
EXHIBIT C
BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES OF GOLDFARB & LIPMAN ATTORNEYS
M DAVID KROOT
Education: B.A., University of Michigan, Honors Program in Economics. J.D., University of Chicago Law School. Previous Employment: Chief Housing Attorney, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Area Counsel, San Francisco, California.
Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California. American Bar Association.
Member, Forum on Affordable Housing & Community Development Law of the American Bar Association. Chief Legal Officer, Board of Directors, Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation.
LYNN HUTCHINS
Education: B.A., Stanford University. J.D., University of California, Davis, Order of the Coif honors. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California. American Bar Association. Member, Real Property Law Section, Member, Forum on Affordable Housing and Community Development Law. Secretary, California Housing Consortium.
THOMAS H. WEBBER
Education: B.A., University of Massachusetts, Amherst. J.D., Golden Gate University School of Law. Previous Employment: Assistant to the City Attorney, Office of City Attorney, City of Oakland. Planner, Office of Economic Development and Employment, City of Oakland.
Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
DIANNE JACKSON MCLEAN
Education: A.B., University of California, Berkeley. Masters in City Planning, University of California, Berkeley. J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law. Previous Employment: Associate Planner, City of Daly City. Associate Planner, City of Sacramento. City Planner, City of Emeryville Redevelopment Agency. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations:
Member, State Bar of California. Member, California Lawyers Association, Ethics Committee.
Advisor, California Lawyers Association, Real Property Law Section Executive Committee.
Member, Charles Houston Bar Association. Member, National Bar Association. Fellow, American Bar Foundation. Member, American Bar Association. Member, California Association of Black Lawyers. Member, Bar Association of San Francisco, Ethics Committee.
ROBERT C. MILLS
Education: B.A., California State University, Northridge, cum laude. J.D., Hastings College of the Law. Associate Articles Editor, Communications and Entertainment Law Journal. Previous Employment: Staff Attorney, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, Office of Counsel, Pacific/Hawaii Area. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
Member, National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 85
D-8
990051\06\3357903.2
ISABEL L. BROWN
Education: B.S.E. in Civil Engineering and Certificate in Architecture, Princeton University, cum laude. Masters degree in Architecture, University of California, Berkeley. J.D., UC Berkeley School of Law. Articles Editor, Ecology Law Quarterly. Sadie & Alvin Landis Prize in Local Government Law. Previous Employment: Legislative Assistant, U.S. House of Representatives.
Assistant Architect, City of New York, Department of Housing, Preservation & Development.
Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
JAMES T. DIAMOND
Education: B.A., University of San Francisco, cum laude. J.D., Hastings College of the Law.
Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California. State Bar of California. American Bar Association, Employment Law Section. Alameda County Bar Association Labor & Employment Law Section, Executive Committee Member. Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce.
MARGARET F. JUNG
Education: B.A., University of California, Los Angeles, magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa. J.D., UC Berkeley School of Law. Previous Employment: Public Accountant, Ernst & Young, LLP.
Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, Business Law and Taxation Sections. Certified Public Accountant (inactive), California Board of Accountancy. Board of Directors, Chinatown Community Development Center. Member, National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development.
HEATHER J. GOULD
Education: B.A., Carleton College, magna cum laude, Northfield, Minnesota. J.D., UC Berkeley School of Law. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
WILLIAM F. DICAMILLO
Education: B.A., State University of New York, Buffalo, magna cum laude. Phi Beta Kappa. J.D., University of California, Los Angeles. Previous Employment: Travelers Aid Society of Alameda County, Case Manager. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California. State Bar of New York.
AMY DeVAUDREUIL
Education: B.A., University of Rhode Island, Highest Honors, Phi Beta Kappa. J.D., UC Berkeley School of Law. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, Real Property and Taxation Sections. American Bar Association, Forum on Affordable Housing and Community Development. Board Member, San Diego Housing Federation.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 86
D-9
990051\06\3357903.2
RAFAEL YAQUIAN
Education: B.S., Community and Regional Development, University of California, Davis. M.A., Urban Planning, University of California, Los Angeles. Jesse Marvin Unruh Assembly Fellow, California State University of Sacramento Center for California Studies. J.D., University of California, Los Angeles, Epstein Program in Public Interest and Law Policy. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, Real Property and Taxation Sections. American Bar Association. Member, Forum on Affordable Housing and Community Development Law.
DOLORES BASTIAN DALTON
Education: B.A., Philosophy, University of California at Berkeley. J.D., University of San Francisco School of Law. Comments Editor of the Law Review. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California. Member, The Mediation Society. Member, State Bar of California Litigation Section. Member, Appellate Mediation Panels, CA Court of Appeal, Third and Sixth Districts. Ms. Dalton has been certified by the State Bar of California as specialist in appellate law. Ms. Bastian Dalton is an adjunct professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law.
JOSHUA J. MASON
Education: B.A., cum laude, University of California, Los Angeles. UCLA Community Service Commission Project Director of the Year. Distinguished Bruin Award. Chancellor’s Service Award. Charles E. Young Humanitarian Award. Masters in City Planning, University of California, Berkeley. J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law. PILP Pro Bono Publico Award. PIC Public Interest Law Certificate. Imelda Rosenthal Bar Scholarship. Equal Justice Works Summer Corps. Previous Employment: Staff Attorney, US Department of Housing and Community Development. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
ELIZABETH R. KLUECK
Education: B.A., cum laude, University of California, Berkeley. J.D., University of California, Davis. The Order of Barristers; CEB/UC Award for Excellence in Legal Writing; Competitions Chair, UC Davis Moot Court Board; Executive Board of Directors, King Hall Legal Foundation; American Inns of Court Scholarship Recipient; Finalist, Martin Luther King, Jr. Public Service Award. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
JEFFREY A. STREIFFER
Education: B.A., Earlham College, phi beta kappa. J.D., Hamline University School of Law.
Previous Employment: Senior Counsel, US Department of Agriculture; Board Member, SPIRE Credit Union. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California; State Bar of Minnesota; American Bar Association; Legal Consultant, LegalCORPS; Bankruptcy Attorney, Volunteer Lawyers Network.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 87
D-10
990051\06\3357903.2
JHAILA R. BROWN
Education: B.A., University of California, Berkeley. J.D., University of San Francisco School of Law. Previous Employment: Deputy County Counsel IV, County of Riverside; Deputy City Attorney, Calabasas, California. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California; Housing and Development Law Institute, County Counsels' Association of California.
GABRIELLE B. JANSSENS
Education: B.A., University of California, Berkeley. J.D., UC Davis School of Law. Previous Employment: Deputy City Attorney for the City of Livermore; Associate County Counsel for Alameda County; Deputy County Counsel for Santa Barbara County. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, League of Cities, Municipal Handbook Chapter Chair; Mediator Training, 28 Hours; Ventura Center for Dispute Settlement WSET Level II Certificate.
RYE P. MURPHY
Education: B.A., University of Oregon. Center for Arab and Middle Eastern Studies, American University of Beirut. J.D., University of California, Hastings College of Law. Hastings International & Comparative Law Review, Articles Editor; CALI Award, Constitutional Law.
Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
BENJAMIN FUNK
Education: B.M., Vanderbilt University. J.D., American University, Washing College of Law.
Certificate of Completion, Volunteers of America Executive Development Programs, University of Notre Dame. Previous Employment: Assistant General Counsel for Housing, Volunteers of America, Inc. Professional & Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, State Bar of Maryland, State Bar of the District of Columbia, California Bar Association, American Bar Association, Maryland Bar Association.
AILEEN NGUYEN
Education: B.A., phi eta sigma, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. J.D., Georgetown University Law Center. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
KATIE DAHLINGHAUS
Education: A.B., Harvard University. J.D., University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.
Previous Employment: Law Clerk, United States Department of Agriculture; Program Manager, LifeMoves. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 88
D-11
990051\06\3357903.2
MATTHEW S. HEATON
Education: B.A., University of Pennsylvania. J.D., St. John's University School of Law.
Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California, State Bar of New York, California Lawyer's Association - Real Property Section.
NAZANIN SALEHI
Education: B.A., University of California, Berkeley. J.D., The George Washington University Law School. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
ERIN LAPEYROLERIE
Education: B.A., New College of Florida – The Honors College of Florida. M.C.P., University of California, Berkeley. J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
MINDA BAUTISTA HICKEY
Education: B.A., University of California, Berkeley. Teresa Hak-Kyung Cha Undergraduate Fellowship Award, BAMPFA, HAAS Scholar Fellow. J.D., University of Davis California. Chair, Filipino Law Students Association; Board Member, Asian Pacific American Law Students Association; Student Board Member, Aoki Center; John Paul Stevens Public Interest Fellowship Recipient. Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
CONNOR T. KRATZ
Education: B.A., magna cum laude, Boston College. J.D., Georgetown University Law Center.
Professional and Volunteer Affiliations: State Bar of California.
7.d
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 89
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 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 through 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 meet 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.
Pursuant to AB 361, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-093 on September 27, 2021, declaring the need for the City Council and Commissions 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.
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 90
Since May 9, 2022, the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission meetings have been conducted in-person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission and Youth Advisory Council have since decided to transition to in-person meetings as well. The Residential Design Review Committee continues to conduct its meetings remotely.
With hospitalizations and deaths dramatically reduced due to the state’s vaccination and public health efforts, the Governor announced on October 17, 2022, that the COVID-19 State of Emergency will end on February 28, 2023. Until then, the City may continue making findings and adopting a Resolution every thirty days authorizing remote teleconference meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. After the State of Emergency is lifted, remote access to meetings will only be allowed under the original teleconferencing rules or Assembly Bill 2449 (“AB2449”) procedures.
AB2449 was signed into law on September 12, 2022 amending the Brown Act restrictions for legislative bodies to participate in meetings remotely. Attached as Attachment 3 is a memo from our City Attorney’s firm detailing this new remote meeting law. The City Clerk and City Attorney are working together to determine implementation and will provide updates to the City Council and Commissions when ready.
ANALYSIS:
Adopting the proposed Resolution will provide commissions with the option to continue holding remote meetings through December 12, 2022. In addition, members of the City Council and Planning and Transportation 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 active 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 through the end February 2023 (when the State of Emergency ends).
If the Council does not adopt a Resolution this evening to authorize remote meetings pursuant to AB 361, beginning November 15, 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 City 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 November 15, 2022; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction
Respectfully submitted by:
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 91
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution
2. AB 361
3. Memo on AB 2449 Remote Meeting Law
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 92
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 conducting meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361; and
WHEREAS, since May 9, 2022, the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission meetings have been conducted in-person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission and Youth Advisory Council have also transitioned to in-person meetings; and
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 93
WHEREAS, the Residential Design Review Committee has opted to continue conducing its meetings remotely; and
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 remotely 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, 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 14th day of November 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.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 94
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 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUTHENTICATED
ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 95
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 96
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 97
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 98
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 99
(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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 100
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 101
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 102
(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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 103
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 104
(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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 105
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 106
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 107
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 108
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 109
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 110
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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 111
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
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 112
(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 —
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 113
RIV #4884-6284-2933 v2
AB 2449
AB 2449 amends the Brown Act to provide an additional procedure for members of legislative bodies to attend public meetings remotely. It will become effective on January 1, 2023.
Under this new law, members of a legislative body may attend public meetings remotely without identifying their teleconference site on the agency’s agenda or ensuring it is accessible to the public if the procedures below are followed.
As long as a quorum of the legislative body participates in person from a physical location open to the public, the remaining agency members can participate remotely in two situations:
1. Just cause
Just cause is defined as any one of the following:
(a) childcare or caregiving of a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner that requires a member to participate remotely; (b) a contagious illness that prevents a member from attending in person; (c) a need related to a physical or mental disability; or (d) travel while on business of the legislative body or another state or local agency.
In order to participate remotely under the just cause provisions, the member must notify the legislative body at the earliest possible opportunity, including at the start of a meeting, of their need to participate remotely and provide a general description of the circumstances related to one of the four items above.
A member may only participate remotely under the just cause provisions up to two meetings per calendar year.
2. Emergency Circumstances
Emergency circumstances means a physical or family medical emergency that prevents a member from attending in person.
In order to participate remotely under the emergency circumstances provisions, the member must request that the legislative body allow them to participate in the meeting remotely because of emergency circumstances and the legislative body must take action to approve the request.
A member must make a request to participate remotely under the emergency circumstances provisions as soon as possible. The legislative body may take action on this request at the earliest opportunity. If the request does not allow sufficient time to place it on the agenda for the meeting for which the request is made, the legislative body may take action on the request at the beginning of the meeting by majority vote.
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 114
RIV #4884-6284-2933 v2
The legislative body must request a general description of the circumstances relating to the member’s need to appear remotely. This description does not have to be more than 20 words and the member does not have to disclose any personal medical information.
Additional Rules if Members Participate Remotely
If agency members participate remotely under this new law for either the just cause or emergency circumstances situations described above then the following rules apply:
The legislative body must provide a way for the public to remotely hear, visually observe, and remotely address the legislative body, either by a two-way audiovisual platform or a two-way telephonic service and a live webcasting of the meeting. The legislative body must provide notice of how the public can access the meeting and offer comments.
The agenda must identify and include an opportunity for the public to attend and directly address the legislative body through a call-in option, an internet-based service option, and in-person at the location of the meeting.
The body cannot require comments to be submitted before the start of the meeting. The public must be allowed to make “real time” public comment.
If there is a disruption to the meeting broadcast or in the ability to take call-in or internet- based public comment, no further action can be taken on agenda items until the issue is resolved.
The legislative body must implement a procedure for receiving and resolving requests for reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities, and must give notice of these procedures.
Members participating remotely must participate through both audio and visual technology.
Members participating remotely must publicly disclose at the meeting before any action is taken whether any other individuals 18 years of age or older are present in the room at the remote location with the member and the general nature of the member’s relationship with the individual.
A member may not participate in meetings solely by teleconference under this law for more than three consecutive months or 20% of the regular meetings for the public agency within a calendar year. If the legislative body regularly meets less than 10 times a year, a member may not participate remotely for more than two meetings.
Legislative bodies may still meet via teleconference by following the traditional Brown Act rules of identifying the teleconference site on the agency’s agenda and ensuring it is accessible for the public to attend. Further, legislative bodies may meet by teleconference under AB 361 until January 1, 2024 during the Governor’s proclaimed State of Emergency and as long as other requirements are met.
7.e
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 115
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the claim of Marisa Huber 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 Marisa Huber. Staff is recommending Council’s denial of the claim based on Sedgwick 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 Liability 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 known as the Association of Bay Area Government Pooled Liability Assurance Network or “ABAG PLAN”) on November 27, 2017 and designated the Administrative Services Director and Senior Management Analyst as primary and alternate PLAN JPA Board members.
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 116
ANALYSIS:
Marisa Huber, claimant, filed a claim against the City for a trip and fall incident. The claimant alleged that on July 9, 2022, she was walking on Cherry Street towards El Camino Real and tripped over uneven pavement. Claimant is requesting compensation for her medical bills.
The claim was received on September 6, 2022; however, the claimant did not provide the amount claimed or state how the City is responsible for occurrence. Staff contacted claimant and a notice of insufficiency was sent on September 9, 2022 informing her of the insufficient claim. Staff has not received an amended claim since. For this reason, staff recommends formal rejection of Marisa Huber’s claim. Council’s rejection of this claim does not preclude City staff nor 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 Marisa Huber; or
2. Do not deny claim of Marisa Huber; 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. Claim
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 117
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 118
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 119
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 120
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 121
7.f
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 122
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive an update on the status of objectives and tasks in the City’s 2022 Strategic Plan and approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with this update.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council adopted the 2022 Strategic Plan at its March 14, 2022 meeting after a series of three strategic planning meetings. The three meetings included a public Council Mini Retreat on September 9, 2021, a public Strategic Planning Retreat on January 21, 2022, and an Executive and Management Team Meeting on February 17, 2022.
ANALYSIS:
A Strategic Plan ensures that the City Council and staff continue to advance the City’s mission, vision, and values, while also addressing the day-to-day tasks, projects, functions, and issues necessary to maintain successful City operations. It identifies priorities and needs that are of importance to the community now and into the future. Development of the Strategic Plan is iterative and continuous. It is updated annually after a series of focused meetings and reviews.
The City’s Strategic Plan is comprised of three parts: mission, vision and core values statements (Attachment 1); strategic goals (Attachment 2); and a work plan (Attachment 3). The work plan includes a comprehensive and detailed list of objectives, tasks, dues dates, status, and owners for each of the seven strategic goals the City Council prioritized in 2022. All of these documents were adopted by the City Council on March 14, 2022, and are posted on the City’s website at www.cityofsancarlos.org/strategicplan.
Staff provides progress reports or updates to the City Council for its review and approval a couple of times a year. The “June 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update” was submitted for the Council’s review and approval at its June 27, 2022 meeting (Attachment 4). Included for the Council’s review and approval with this staff report is the “November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update” (Attachment 5).
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 123
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update; or
2. Do not approve the updates to the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update; 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. Mission, Vision, and Core Values
2. 2022 Strategic Goals
3. 2022 Work Plan
4. June 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update
5. November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 124
City of San Carlos
2022 Strategic Goals
MISSION
The City of San Carlos provides high-quality services and facilities to its residents in an equitable, sustainable, transparent, responsive, and friendly manner to foster an inclusive, safe, and healthy community now and in the future.
VISION
The City of San Carlos will continue to lead with confidence into the future as a desirable, vibrant, equitable, inclusive, and business friendly community, admired by all as a great place to live, learn, work, and play.
CORE VALUES
Not in priority order
•Fostering a safe, diverse, welcoming, and engaged community that recognizes the importance of social equity.
•Ensuring fiscal responsibility and the sustainability of San Carlos’ resources, infrastructure, and social/cultural environment
•Proactively protecting our physical environment from the threats of climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
•Recognizing the needs and challenges of the community and promoting its well-being. •Demonstrating high ethical and professional standards, including high quality customer service
•Leading and managing effectively by engaging the community, thinking strategically, remaining proactive, and planning for the future
•Supporting the well-being of employees, investing in their development, and aligning staffing and resources with the demand for City services
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 125
City of San Carlos
2022 Strategic Plan Goals*
Child Care and Youth Programming
The City of San Carlos will encourage and support the creation of child care facilities and promote access to youth programming.
Climate Change
The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Downtown
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.
Housing
The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, diverse and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels.
Mobility, Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure
The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe and effective movement throughout the city.
Northeast Area Specific Plan
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as part of this new development.
Senior Services and Programming
Make San Carlos a great place to mature and retire by fostering full participation of seniors in community life and promoting healthy and active aging.
*Goals are listed in alphabetical order.
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 126
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 127
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 128
City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Table of Contents
2022 Strategic Goal Pages
Child Care and Youth Programming 2-3
Climate Change 4-8
Downtown 9-13
Housing 14-18
Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure 19-23 Northeast Area Specific Plan 24-27
Senior Services and Programming 28-29
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 129
2 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Child Care and Youth Programming
The City of San Carlos will encourage and support the creation of child care facilities and promote access to youth programming.
Objective #1: Increase access to child care by reducing barriers to creation and expansion of facilities and creating community resources.
Highlights: Reviewing regulatory framework to find opportunities where child care spaces may be created.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will
each action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Adopt a child care
development impact
fee and establish a
child care facility trust
fund
City Council Study Session CD Director (L)
Housing Mgr. (S)
Sr.MA-CD (S)
3/14/22 Nexus study and proposed
fee levels and uses have
been prepared for Council
review.
Staff met with
Council
Subcommittee on
two occasions to
refine impact fee
and trust fund
goals
Reduce or waive City-
controlled fees for
child care projects
City Council study session CD Director (L)
Principal Plan. (S)
8/1/22 Pending direction from
subcommittee.
On target
Revise use standards
and permitted zoning
districts for child care
centers
1. Bring preliminary findings to child
care subcommittee (Residential
Districts in religious/community
facilities)
2. Planning Commission
Consideration
3. City Council Consideration
CD Director (L)
Senior Planner (S)
Housing Mgr. (S)
1. 8/1/22
2. 9/30/22
3. 10/30/22
Use Standards were
adopted by Council.
GCI study brought to
Subcommittee: Permitting
in GCI District not a high
priority as most new
developments will be PDs
and have Development
Agreements.
New Direction to study
residential districts.
1.On target
2.On target
3.On target
Create resources for
stakeholders
1. Produce application process
infographic
2. Create informational literature
(brochures/handouts) that provide
child care information
3. Establish webpage for child care
program information on City
website
CD Director (L)
Sr. MA-CD (S)
1. 3/31/21
2. 3/31/22
3. 3/1/22
1. In progress
2. In progress
3. Recently
completed.
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 130
3 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Child Care and Youth Programming
The City of San Carlos will encourage and support the creation of child care facilities and promote access to youth programming.
Objective #2: Address the community’s needs for youth programming.
Highlights: Evaluate community needs and align services and programming accordingly.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be completed?
Target Date
Comments and Considerations Status
Assess current after-
school enrichment
classes for youth offered
by Parks and Recreation
Evaluate classes
offered during this
time
PR Director (L)
Rec. Supervisor (S)
Rec. Coordinator (S)
Ongoing Due to the ongoing
pandemic, enrollment has
been low. Contract
instructors are reluctant to
offer in person
programming and parents
are reluctant to sign kids
up for weekly
programming.
Evaluation will
continue and adjusts
will be made on an as-
needed basis
Survey community to
better understand after-
school needs and
program interests
Get feedback through
Shape San Carlos
PR Director (L)
Rec. Supervisor (S)
Rec. Coordinator (S)
Ongoing
Provide opportunities for
Youth Center members to
recommend new program
ideas to offer during
SCYC Drop-In program
1. Create a SCYC
member focus group
2. Use social media tools
to engage with
members
PR Director (L)
Rec. Supervisor (S)
Rec. Coordinator (S)
1. Ongoing
2. Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 131
4 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation
The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Objective #1: Plan and implement measures approved by the Council in the Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan (CMAP).
Highlights: Use the 2021 CMAP to plan for and implement measures. The CMAP includes 33 greenhouse gas reduction strategies and 12 adaptation strategies to reduce emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The 45 strategies vary in size, complexity, cost, implementation time, and scope.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Prioritize and fund
strategies
1. Identify funding needs
2. Request funds from Council
3. Apply for grant opportunities
ACM (L)
Sustainability MA-CM
(S)
Ongoing Ongoing
Implement mitigation and
adaptation strategies
Identify measureable actions the
City can take to mitigate
greenhouse gas emissions to
reach reduction targets while
offering co-benefits to climate
change adaptation
ACM (L)
Sustainability MA-CM
(S)
Ongoing Ongoing
Strategy 39: Sea Level
Rise
1. Establish multidisciplinary team
2. Adopt resolution in support of
One Shoreline
2. Develop team project plan with
recommendations on subprojects.
3. Adopt Safety Element
Sustainability MA-CM
(L)
ACM (S)
City Engineer (S)
Planning Manager (S)
1. 4/30/22
2. 6/30/22
3. 8/1/22
4. 11/1/22
Develop regionally
coordinated sea level rise
adaptation measures and
programs. Team should
include One Shoreline,
MIG.
Strategies 4 and 18:
Electric Vehicle charging
and building
electrification incentives
1. Obtain funding
2. Establish and promote
incentive programs
1. 7/1/22
2. 12/21/22
Requested $100k as part
of FY 2021-23 mid-cycle
budget request.
1. In progress
2. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 132
5 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation
The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Objective #2: Update the Disposable Food Service Ware Ordinance Highlights: Evaluate the County Ordinance for use in San Carlos, outreach to those who will be impacted, and encourage the community to reduce waste while the Ordinance is in process.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Update Disposable Food
Service Ware Ordinance
Present Disposable Food
Service Ware Ordinance
to City Council for
consideration and
adoption
ACM (L)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
3/14/22 Introduced 10/11/21
Adoption 10/25/21
Update Adoption 3/14/22
Pending
Perform outreach and
education to food service
provider community
1. Conduct outreach and
education
2. Begin enforcement
ACM (L)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
3/31/22 Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 133
6 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation
The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Objective # 3: Community Engagement and Outreach
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Community Education Develop 3-part pamphlet ACM (L)
Sr. MA-CM (S)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
March 2022 SB1383, EV Charging,
Energy Efficiency
Pending
Earth Day Events ACM (L)
Sr. MA-CM (S)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
April 2022 Pending
Farmers Market Booth ACM (L)
Sr. MA-CM (S)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
5/1/22 Electrification and Reach
Code “education”
Pending
Update the Council and
Community
1. Presentation at
Council Meeting
2. Report in Council
Newsletter
ACM (L)
Sr. MA-CM (S)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
October/November Pending
Add Sustainability
Module to Citizen’s
Academy
ACM (L)
Sr. MA-CM (S)
Sustainability MA-
CM (S)
Fall 2022 Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 134
7 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation
The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Objective #4: Update emergency plans and policies.
Highlights: Ensure the city’s emergency plans and policies meet state and federal requirements and industry best practices.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Review and update the
Safety Element of the
General Plan by 2023
1. Draft the Safety
Element
2. Take the Safety
Element to Council for
approval
CD Director (L)
Ad. Plan. Mgr. (S)
Dep. Fire Chief (S)
1. 3/31/22
2. 11/14/22
1. 1
This effort is led by CDD
with support from key staff
from Fire, Public Works,
and Police, and is part of
the Focused General Plan
Update to address Land
Use, Housing, and Safety
Elements of the General
Plan.
1. In progress
2. While the Safety Element
will be drafted by 3/31/22,
and sent to the State for
review, it will be taken
together with the Housing
Element, Land Use
Element, Zoning Update,
and an EIR that needs to
address these elements
altogether for
consideration starting in
October 2022 with the
Planning Commission
and November 2022 with
Council
Update the EOP
(Emergency Operations
Plan)
Rewrite the EOP and
submit to Council for
approval.
ACM (L)
SO Captain (S)
Dep. Fire Chief (S)
6/30/22
Exercise new EOP 1. Train the training staff
2. Conduct exercises
Dep. Fire Chief (L)
SO Captain (S)
ACM (S)
1. 6/31/23
2. 6/30/23
Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 135
8 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
Objective #5: Reduce the risk and threat of wildfire and prepare the community for such an event.
Highlights: Implementing improvements in evacuation planning, fuel reduction measures and early public notification systems.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Obtain fuel reduction
funding and plan projects
Plan project(s) to use
funding
Dep. Fire Chief (L)
PW Director (S)
P&R Director (S)
Ongoing Ongoing
Fuel reduction work Dep. Fire Chief (L)
PW Director (S)
P&R Director (S)
Ongoing Ongoing
Update Council Regularly update Council Dep. Fire Chief (L) Ongoing Will provide periodic updates to the Council and
in the Council Newsletter.
Ongoing
Work in partnership with
other agencies
surrounding San Carlos
1. Hold meetings
2. Develop plans to
mitigate risks
Dep. Fire Chief (L) 1. Ongoing
2. Ongoing
Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 136
9 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Downtown
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.
Objective #1: Implement the community engagement strategy for the Downtown Specific Plan.
Highlights: Create an inclusive process with a holistic approach to ensure maximum participation so that everyone can benefit from decisions that will shape the downtown.
What will
be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and Considerations Status
Continue to
inform and
educate the
community
1. Develop a Community
Engagement Strategy
2. Develop and maintain
a virtual educational
library on the project
website
3. Form a Downtown
Advisory Committee
(DTAC)
4. Meet with Focus
Groups/Stakeholders
5. Community
Workshops and online
surveys
6. Meet with: Youth
Advisory Council;
Parks, Recreation, and
Culture Commission;
Economic
Development Advisory
Commission;
Transportation &
Circulation
Commission
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
1. 4/2022
2. 5/2022
3. 5/2022
4. 11/2022
5. 01/2023
Project will kick off in March 2022.
Task 4 begins in April 2022 and includes up to 24
touchpoints with stakeholders and focus groups
during the plan process.
Task 5 includes 4 workshops and open houses with
the community, and also 3 online surveys during
the plan process.
Task 6 will include two touchpoints with each of
these commissions to review the preferred concept
plan and the public review draft specific plan.
1. Ongoing
2. Ongoing
3. Pending
Continued on next page
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 137
10 What will
be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and Considerations Status
7. Issue a Spotlight
Newsletter to share
the Preferred Concept
Plan(s)
8. Create an email
distribution list from
sign-ups obtained
from project webpage
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 138
11 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Downtown
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.
Objective #2: Create the Downtown Specific Plan and corresponding implementation strategies.
Highlights: Key considerations in developing the Specific Plan will include: Parking; Land Use; Urban Design and the Public Realm; Infrastructure; Street Closure; Formula Business Ordinance; Building Height; Building Façades, Shopfronts and overall Architecture; Community Events; Maintenance; Emergency Access (i.e. maintain emergency vehicle access, access to each business and access to fire department connections); Traffic and Circulation; Walking, Biking, and all-inclusive Accessibility; Outdoor Dining; Parklets and Plazas; Housing Over Retail; Funding, Phasing and Implementation; Businesses; Chamber of Commerce; Private Development; Downtown BID.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Project
Commencement
1. Kickoff meeting and site tour
2. Information gathering
3. Stakeholder interviews
4. Community engagement strategy
5. Project logo, website, online
questionnaire
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 04/05/2022
2. 05/30/2022
3. 05/30/2022
4. 05/30/2022
5. 05/30/2022
Entire project kicks
off in March 2022.
1. Pending
2. Pending
3. Pending
4. Pending
5. Pending
Existing Conditions
and Outreach
1. Infrastructure existing conditions
analysis
2. Transportation and mobility
3. Develop planning principles
4. DTAC meeting #1
5. Community workshop #1
6. Online survey
7. Focus Group meetings (4 mtgs)
8. Historic resources inventory
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 06/2022
2. 06/2022
3. 06/2022
4. 06/2022
5. 06/2022
6. 06/2022
7. 06/2022
8. 08/2022
1. Pending
2. Pending
3. Pending
4. Pending
5. Pending
6. Pending
7. Pending
8. Pending
Concept Plan
Alternatives
1. DTAC meeting #2
2. Community workshop #2
3. Online survey
4. Focus Group Meetings (4 mtgs)
5. Planning Commission and City
Council Study Sessions
6. Economic studies
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 08/2022
2. 08/2022
3. 08/2022
4. 08/2022
5. 09/2022
6. 11/2022
1. Pending
2. Pending
3. Pending
4. Pending
5. Pending
6. Pending
Specific Plan
Preparation
1. DTAC Meeting #3
2. Community Workshop #3
3. Online Survey
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 02/2023
2. 02/2023
3. 02/2023
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 139
12 4. Meetings with YAC, EDAC, PRC,
and T& C
5. Planning Commission and City
Council Study Sessions
6. Prepare Infrastructure and Services
Plan
7. Administrative Draft Specific Plan
8. Public Review Draft Specific Plan
9. DTAC Meeting #3
10. Community Open House
11. Meetings with YAC, EDAC, PRC,
and T& C
12. Planning Commission Study
Session
13. City Council Study Sessions
14. Prepare Hearing Draft Specific Plan
4. 04/2023
5. 04/2023
6. 06/2023
7. 08/2023
8. 10/2023
9. 11/2023
10. 11/2023
11. 01/2024
12. 02/2024
13. 02/2024
14. 03/2024
Specific Plan
Adoption
1. Prepare Draft CEQA document
2. Planning Commission public
hearing
3. City Council adoption hearing
4. Final Specific Plan document
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 10/2023
2. 03/2024
3. 03/2024
Implementation and
maintenance
1. Identify and prioritize key
opportunity sites
2. Timing of public improvements
3. Identification of municipal
incentives
4. Designate lead departments,
agencies for implementation
5. Identify potential funding sources
and financing mechanisms
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Senior Planner (S)
1. 10/2023
2. 10/2023
3. 10/2023
4. 10/2023
5. 10/2023
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 140
13 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Downtown
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.
Objective #3: Ensure that the vision and goals of the Downtown Specific Plan come to fruition.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Develop a funding
strategy.
Identify potential funding sources and
financing mechanisms (recommendations
will be specifically tied to the Downtown
Specific Plan Infrastructure Development
and Services Plan)
CDD Director (L)
Planning Manager (S)
Economic
Development and
Housing Manager (S)
10/2023 Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 141
14 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Housing
The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels.
Objective #1: Increase the number of Below Market Rate (BMR) housing units to meet local and regional housing requirements (e.g.: regional collaboration, grant programs, acquisition and new development).
Highlights: The City will continue to take a diverse and equitable approach to increase the number of BMR units locally.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Update the BMR
Ordinance to increase
number of affordable
units
1. Council Study Session
2. Planning Commission
hearing
3. Council Hearing
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
Planning Mgr. (S)
1. 2/28/22
2. 4/18/22
3. 4/25/22
Staff met with the
Council
Subcommittee twice.
The meeting in
October ‘21 provided
additional rental
scenarios based on
feedback received
during the July
meeting. A Study
Session was held
with the Planning
Commission in
November ’21.
Explore the acquisition
of Market Rate units to
convert to BMR and
complimentary
strategies for leveraging
BMR Housing Funds to
increase BMR housing
supply
1. Policy review before
Council Subcommittee
2. City Council Study
Session to adopt guiding
policies
3. Implement policies as
opportunities arise
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
ED Coordinator (S)
1.5/31/22
2.6/30/22
3.Ongoing
Staff is reviewing two
programs, one from the
California Community
Housing Agency (CalCHA)
and the other from the
California Statewide
Communities Development
Authority (CSCDA), to
determine whether to
recommend the City join
Staff and program
representatives are
currently analyzing
the City’s real estate
market to determine
whether these
programs will be
feasible in San
Carlos.
Research opportunities
for partnerships,
including nonprofits, the
School District and
regional partners
1. Engage local nonprofits
for shared opportunities
2. Partner with County
Housing Department
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
ED Coordinator (S)
Ongoing Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 142
15 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Housing
The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels
Objective #2: Continue to develop and prepare a focused general plan update that includes the Housing Element, the Safety Element, and the Land Use Element to meet Council direction and State mandates.
Highlights: The City is working with the community to evaluate General Plan and Zoning to find out where changes in density can occur to meet diverse housing needs.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Evaluate existing
development standards
to incentivize housing
in areas already
allowed
1. Explore existing conditions
and preliminary options
2. Develop preferred options
and analysis
3. Prepare administrative and
draft Housing, Land Use,
Safety Elements and Zoning
Amendments
4. Engage the community
5. Prepare Environmental
Analysis
6. Prepare Drafts of the Land
Use, Safety, and Housing
Elements
7. Planning Commission hearing
8. Council hearing
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
MA-CD (S)
Asst. Planner (S)
1. 3/31/22
2. 8/31/22
3. 4/30/22
4. 4/30/22
5. 6/30/22
6. 9/30/22
7. 10/17/22
8. 11/14/22
1. Completed
2. Underway
3. Admin. draft 3/22; Public
release draft 4/22
4. Pending
5. Underway
6. Pending
7. Pending
8. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 143
16 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Housing
The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, diverse and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels.
Objective #3: Facilitate completion of projects currently underway.
Highlights: The City is facilitating the construction of over 50 net new Below Market Rate (BMR) units and collecting affordable housing fees from large commercial developers.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Complete regulatory
agreement of existing,
smaller multi-family
projects building BMR
units
1525 San Carlos Avenue
806 Alameda de las Pulgas
Vista Del Grande
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
ED Coordinator (S)
Ongoing BMR plans and sales
agreements will be
executed as projects
come before the Planning
Commission and prior to
tenancy.
Ongoing
817 Walnut Street
Development Project
1. Construction
2. Lease-up with BMR waitlist
households
3. Ribbon Cutting
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
ED Coordinator (S)
1. 2/28/22
2. 4/30/22
3. 5/31/22
Lease up is currently in
progress as construction
continues. Ribbon cutting
will occur after building is
occupied in order to
include residents in
celebration.
Construction nearing
completion and
residents expected to
move in over the
coming months.
Cherry Street
Affordable Housing
Development Project
1. Request Council approval
to execute Development
Agreement for the project
2. Support project development
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
1. 4/30/22
2. Ongoing
Staff currently
working with attorney
on draft of
Development
Agreement.
Large Office
Development projects
Work with developers to collect
Commercial Linkage Fees as
needed
CD Director (L)
Housing Manager (S)
Ongoing Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 144
17 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Housing
The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, diverse and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels.
Objective #4: Increase Housing Production.
Highlights: Implementation of Housing Element Goals as well as expediting ADU approvals and the creation of objective design standards for housing units.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Expedite ADU
approvals
1. Meet with 3-4 ADU builders
2. Review cities for best practices for
“pre-approved” ADUs and
expedited review
3. Update ADU code – Planning
Commission Recommendation
4. Update ADU code- City Council
5. Create Submittal Materials with
documentation to facilitate
expedited review.
6. Update website and include links
to “pre-approved” units.
7. Conduct Outreach with community
CD Director (L)
Principal Planner (S)
1. 3/31/22
2. 3/31/22
3. 4/4/22
4. 4/25/22
5. 4/30/22
6. 4/30/22
7. 5/31/22
Staff has met with 2 ADU
companies and is in the
process of researching
best practices for
neighboring cities.
Revise Zoning
Ordinance to
implement Housing
Element goals
1. Develop case studies that present
a range of development intensities
for public review and comment.
2. Determine sufficient development
capacity through proposed
changes to the Zoning Ordinance
to meet San Carlos’ RHNA.
3. Review Zoning Ordinance for
consistency with proposed Zoning
Amendments
4. Present Draft Housing Element
Goals and corresponding Zoning
Amendments to the community for
review and comment.
5. Prepare final draft Zoning
Amendments for review by HCD
CD Director (L)
Planning Manager
(S)
1. 8/2021
2. 10/2021
3. 3/2022
4. 5/2022
5. 6/2022
6. 10/2022
7. 11/2022
Revising the
Zoning
Ordinance is
being completed
in conjunction
with the
Focused
General Plan
Update Project
(Land Use,
Housing, and
Safety Elements
+ Zoning
Ordinance
Amendments
and an EIR).
1. Completed
2. Completed
3. Underway
4. Pending
5. Pending
6. Pending
7. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 145
18 What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
6. Present proposed Zoning
Amendments to the Planning
Commission for recommendation
7. Present proposed Zoning
Amendments to the City Council
for adoption
Objective design
standards (Multi-
family/Mixed
Use/Single-Family
1. Contract approval and
appropriation of funds by Council
2. Explore existing conditions and
data gathering
3. Community Workshop #1
4. Complete Objective Standards
specific to SB-9 projects
5. Community Workshop #2
6. Prepare Administrative Draft
Objective Standards (with Planning
Commission and City Council
Study Sessions)
7. Planning Commission Hearing
8. City Council Hearing
CD Director (L)
Principal Planner (S)
1. 2/28/22
2. 4/30/22
3. 5/31/22
4. 8/30/22
5. 9/30/22
6. 1/31/23
7. 6/30/23
8. 7/31/23
SB-9 Permanent
Ordinance
1. Community Workshop
2. Planning Commission Study
Session
3. Meet with the Housing
Subcommittee
4. PC Recommendation to CC to
adopt the Ordinance
5. City Council Hearing
CD Director (L)
Principal Planner (S)
S. MA (S)
1. 4/30/22
2. 6/27/22
3. 8/15/22
4. 8/29/22
5. 9/26/22
1. On target
2. In progress
3. In progress
4. In progress
5. In progress
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 146
19 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe, and effective movement throughout the city.
Objective #1: Identify and implement alternative modes of transportation (non-vehicular) to improve traffic flow and parking.
Highlights: Alternative modes of transportation are those other than single passenger vehicles. They could include bicycles, scooters, ride-share, shuttles, public transit, walking, and emerging technologies.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Implement Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan
1. San Carlos Quick-
Build Project – design,
outreach, and
construction
2. Pedestrian
improvements at
Alameda/Howard
3. Pedestrian
improvements at
Olive/Elm
4. Pedestrian
improvements at
Arroyo/Woodland
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1. FY 22-23
2. FY 23-24
3. FY 24-25
4. FY 25-26
The identified projects will
be incorporated in the CIP
plan and budget.
Planning an
outreach strategy
with the consultant
Develop a shared micro-
mobility (bike share or
scooter share)
policy/program
1. Research and develop
policy
2. T&C Commission
input and discussion
3. Council consideration
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1.12/31/22
2. TBD
3. TBD
Working with C/CAG on a
county-wide shared micro-
mobility study
In progress
Identify funding
mechanisms and
public/private
partnership
opportunities to support
and enhance
transportation, traffic,
and mobility
1. Negotiate with
developers
2. Pursue grant funding
as available
CD Director (L)
PW Director (S)
Ongoing Negotiate with developers
for community benefits to
enhance mobility as
opportunities arise.
Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 147
20 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe, and effective movement throughout the city.
Objective #2: Identify and implement citywide street and intersection projects and initiatives to improve traffic flow and parking.
Highlights: Improve traffic flow and parking in the city by planning and implementing initiatives and projects.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Initiate and complete
parking study of the
South Laurel area
1. T&C Commission
2. Request funding
3. Complete parking
study
4. Council consideration
PW Director (L) 1. TBD
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
Due to COVID-19, this
project is pending until
normal traffic and parking
patterns resume.
1. TBD
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
Finalize a citywide policy
for the residential
parking permit program
1. T&C discussion
2. Council consideration
PW Director (L)
MA-PW (S)
1. TBD
2. TBD
Need results from the
parking study above to
complete and refine the
residential parking program
policy.
1. TBD
2. TBD
Perform traffic signal
study
1. Engage consultant
2. Data gathering and
analysis
3. T&C Commission
4. Council consideration
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1. 12/31/21
2. 6/30/22
3. 8/31/22
4. 10/31/22
1. Completed
Implement
Neighborhood Traffic
Management Program
1. Analyze traffic mgmt.
improvements at
Rosewood and
Morse, along
Cordilleras, and
along Alameda de
las Pulgas
2. Identify and
Implement
neighborhood traffic
management
improvements
PW Director (L)
Senior Engineer (S)
City Engineer (S)
1. 12/31/22
2. Ongoing
Some projects are in
process.
Ongoing
Increase PCI through
Annual Pavement
Rehabilitation program
1. Funding
2. Design
3. Construct
PW Director (L)
Senior Engineer (S)
City Engineer (S)
Ongoing Funding approved for FY
2021-22 project.
Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 148
21 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe, and effective movement throughout the city.
Objective #3: Develop community education, reporting, outreach, and information tools using change management principles and practices.
Highlights: Ensure the community is better informed about transportation related projects, planned improvements, available services, and programs.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Develop citywide
construction activities
webpage
1. Identify requirements
2. Create webpage
3. Maintain webpage
PW Director (L)
ACM (S)
Comm-CM (S)
2. 3/31/22
3. 6/30/22
4. Ongoing
Working with CMO to
identify and obtain the
resources needed to
customize and maintain
our project webpage.
1. Pending
2. Pending
3. Ongoing
Develop additional ways to
outreach to the community
to ensure understanding
changes that will impact
them
Develop strategic
communications plan to
improve project
communications
PW Director (L)
ACM (S)
Comms Team (S)
Ongoing Implementing more
project site
communications methods
and simulations, such as
signage at the location of
the work in advance of the
work.
Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 149
22 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe, and effective movement throughout the city.
Objective #4: Identify and implement enhanced traffic and pedestrian safety opportunities.
Highlights: Improve driver and pedestrian safety through public education, focused enforcement, and infrastructure improvements.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Develop Safe Routes to
School maps &
improvements
1. Develop Routes to
School Map
2. Develop
improvement plans
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1. 6/30/22
2. 6/30/22
In progress
Enhance traffic and
pedestrian safety through
education and enforcement
1. Analyze traffic data
for focused
enforcement
2. School Zone Safety
3. Enhanced DUI
enforcement
4. Safety education
through NTSB
campaigns/advertising
5. Replace Guided
Parking Enforcement
Program
Police Chief (L) 1. Ongoing
2. Ongoing
3. Ongoing
4. Ongoing
5. 3/31/22
Actions 1-4 will continue
as long as funding
continues.
Action 5 – CIP approved
and awaiting contract
approval for purchase by
City.
Items 1-4 are ongoing
and Item 5 is in
process
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 150
23 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Mobility, Traffic, and Transportation Infrastructure The City of San Carlos will actively pursue plans and strategies for improving mobility, traffic, parking, transportation infrastructure, and street maintenance while encouraging alternative modes of transportation to provide efficient, safe, and effective movement throughout the city.
Objective #5: Facilitate completion of projects currently underway.
Highlights: The City currently has numerous projects underway that will improve transportation, traffic and mobility in the community.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step
happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Four Corners traffic safety
near Carlmont High
School and Tierra Linda
Middle School
1. Re-engage Committee
2. Design
3. Funding request/grant
funding
4. Construct
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1. In process
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
The City of Belmont is
leading this effort and
managing the design.
1. In process
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
Traffic striping and
marking
1. Annually identify streets
needing striping/markings
on a fiscal year basis
2. Design
3. Construct
PW Director (L)
Senior Engineer (S)
Ongoing Ongoing
Brittan Avenue widening
at Industrial
1. Right-of-way acquisition
2. TIF Funding
3. Design
4. Construct
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
1. Pending
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
Property acquisition is
pending opportunity.
1. Pending
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
Brittan and Alameda de
las Pulgas widening
1. Right-of-way acquisition
2. TIF Funding
3. Design
4. Construct
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
Senior Engineer (S)
1.Pending
2.TBD
3.TBD
4.TBD
Activities pending
opportunity for right-of-
way acquisition.
1. Pending
2. TBD
3. TBD
4. TBD
San Carlos Avenue
pedestrian safety
improvements
1.Phase 3 Design
2.Construction
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
Senior Engineer (S)
1. 6/30/22
2. 12/31/22
Project extended to
allow for extensive
outreach.
1. In process
2. TBD
Design sidewalk
improvements along
Brittan Ave.
1. Design & outreach
2. Construction
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
Senior Engineer (S)
1. 12/31/22
2. 6/30/23
In progress
Analyze crosswalk
improvements at SCA
and Kenton, SCA and
Prospect, and intersection
of School Street,
Woodland Ave. and
Chestnut Street
1. Analyze
2. Design & outreach
3. Construction
PW Director (L)
City Engineer (S)
Senior Engineer (S)
1. 3/31/22
2. 6/30/22
3. 12/31/22
In progress
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 151
24 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Northeast Area Specific Plan
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as part of this new development.
Objective: #1 – Create a framework and inform the community.
Highlights: Create an inclusive process with a holistic approach to ensure maximum participation so that everyone can benefit from decisions that will shape the Northeast area of San Carlos.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will
each action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Develop a process that
outlines preparation of
the plan
1. Present draft process to the
Economic Development for
review and input
2. Present draft process to the
City Council for review and
input
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
1. 04/29/22
2. 05/31/22
1. Pending
2. Pending
Inform the community 1. Issue a Spotlight Newsletter
2. Perform outreach as
appropriate
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
ED/Housing Mgr. (S)
MA-CD (S)
1. 07/29/22
2. Ongoing
Spotlight in
development. Using
full social media
toolkit, e-notify, project
webpage under CDD
via official City
website.
1. Pending
2. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 152
25 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Northeast Area Specific Plan
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as part of this new development.
Objective #2: Obtain Funding
Highlights: Request necessary appropriations to hire professional, qualified consultants to assist the City in preparing the Northeast Area Specific Plan.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Obtain funding through
the mid-year budget
cycle for FY2022/2023
Determine estimated budget
needed to prepare plan.
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
3/28/2022 Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 153
26 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Northeast Area Specific Plan
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as part of this new development.
Objective: #3 – Determine staff resources and budget needed to develop the plan.
Highlights: Request necessary resource allocations to ensure the plan can be successfully managed and carried to fruition through adequate staffing and funding for professional consultants.
What will be
done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports?
(S)
When will
each action
be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and Considerations Status
Determine staffing
resources and
funding required to
create the plan
1. Request approval of a new
Associate Planner for the Advance
Planning Division
2. Determine consultant services
required and request funding as
part of the budget
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
1. 04/2022
2. 04/2022
1. Will fill position by July 2022.
2. Anticipate bringing a
professional services
agreement to the Council in July
2022 should funds be
appropriated.
1. Pending
2. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 154
27 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Northeast Area Specific Plan
The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as part of this new development.
Objective #4: Develop a scope of work to create a Northeast Area Specific Plan Highlights: Significant change is expected in the Northeast Area of San Carlos due to continued development interest in the biotechnology and life sciences sectors. Utilizing extensive community outreach, this plan will maximize the City’s ability to shape infrastructure, urban design, transportation circulation management and mobility, service provision, open space, community facilities, present and future land uses including housing, complete neighborhoods, economic development, community benefits, zoning changes, as new office development is added to the area.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Develop detailed work
scope
1. Present scope to the Economic
Development subcommittee for
review and input
2. Present draft process to the City
Council for review and approval
CD Director (L)
Planning Mgr. (S)
ED/Housing Mgr. (S)
1.06/30/22
2.06/30/22
1. Pending
2. Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 155
28 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Senior services and programming
Make San Carlos a great place to mature and retire by fostering full participation of seniors in community life and promoting healthy and active aging.
Objective #1: Continue to work with the Age-Friendly Community Task Force on Action Plan items identified in the AARP Age-Friendly application.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Continue to review
senior-friendly
improvements in the
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan
1. Meet with Public Works
staff on upcoming projects
identified in Bike/Ped Plan
PR Director (L)
Supervisor (S)
1. 6/30/22 In progress
Provide support for
the Medical
Equipment Lending
Library program
1. Assist with as needed in
the program.
2. Assist with advertising of
program
PR Director (L)
Supervisor (S)
1. 6/30/22
2. 6/30/22
In progress
Improve and increase
communication of
senior resources and
services offered city
and countywide
1. Compile information on
senior resources
2. Update City website with
updated information and
easier access to information
3. Create City Spotlight on
Senior resources and
programs
PR Director (L)
Supervisor (S)
1. 4/30/22
2. 5/31/22
3. 9/30/22
In progress
Continue to meet with
the Age-Friendly
Task Force
1. Meet quarterly on progress
of Action Plan items
PR Director (L)
Supervisor (S)
1. 4/30/22 Meet with Age-Friendly
Task Force to ensure the
Action Plan projects are
on target.
Ongoing
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 156
29 City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Work Plans Strategic Goal: Senior services and programming
Make San Carlos a great place to mature and retire by fostering full participation of seniors in community life and promoting healthy and active aging.
Objective #2: Continue to engage seniors on preferred programming and events.
What will be done?
Step/Task
How will this step happen?
Action(s) Needed
Who leads? (L)
Who supports? (S)
When will each
action be
completed?
Target Date
Comments and
Considerations
Status
Survey San Carlos
community to find
ways to engage
non-participants
1. Create survey to send to
community.
2. Send out survey to
community.
PR Director (L)
Supervisor (S)
1. 5/31/22
2. 9/30/22
Target dates coincide
with Senior focused City
spotlight.
Pending
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 157
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
JUNE 202 2 STRATEGIC WORK PLAN UPDATE
Child Care and Youth Programming: The City of San Carlos will encourage and support the creation of child care facilities and promote access to youth programming.
Objective #1: Increase access to child care by reducing barriers to creation and expansion of childcare facilities and creating community resources.
Actions Completed:
• Shared findings from the draft Nexus Study (updated in 2021) at a City Council Study Session on March 14, 2022.
• Drafted an ordinance adding Chapter 8.52 to the San Carlos Municipal Code establishing a child care development impact fee for new nonresidential developments in the city, which is scheduled for the City Council’s consideration on June 27, 2022. • Developed a robust child care City webpage with resources and information for the community, parents, and operators. W ebpage includes an application proc ess infographic and informational literature (brochures/handouts) that provide child care information.
Actions in Progress:
• Adoption a child care development impact fee and establish a c hild care facility trust fund.
• Continue to analyze the possibility of allowing commercial child care centers in the GCI Zoning District.
• Researching the ability of commercial daycare centers to locate in residential zoning districts.
Objective #2: Address the community’s needs for youth programming.
Actions Completed:
• Seasonal participant surveys were sent out following the spring class session. • Youth Center hosted a special event at the end of the year and incorporated participant feedback into the special activities.
Actions in Progress:
• Work on fall programming based on community and participant feedback. Evaluation will continue and adjusts will be made on seasonal basis. • Shape San Carlos Survey to better understand after -school needs and program interested. It will be posted in July.
• Monthly special events are being planned for the Drop-In Program.
Climate Change: The City of San Carlos will support sustainability initiatives and address climate change. As part of its focus on climate change, the City of San Carlos will continue to prepare for public safety emergencies, such as wildfire, earthquake, flood, power outage, school safety and other potential community emergencies by developing and implementing risk mitigation and reduction strategies.
7.g
November 14, 2022
Packet Pg. 158
June 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update