Agenda packet, regular meeting — San Mateo City Council, October 17, 2022 (part 3 of 3)

B. Failure to Maintain
Parklet sponsors who fail to properly and sufficiently maintain the cleanliness, safety, and accessibility of their parklet may be subject to violations and fines. If maintenance issues are not resolved, the City may revoke the encroachment permit and parklet sponsors may be required by the City to remove the parklet at their own expense.

C. Utility Maintenance and Public Safety Emergencies
Because parklets may sit atop buried utilities, there may be instances where your parklet will need to be removed to access a utility beneath it. In the event of necessary utility maintenance or the unlikely event of a utility failure such as a gas leak or water main break that threatens public safety, the City or utility owner may remove parklets with little or no notice. Parklet sponsors are responsible for the cost of re-installing and restoring any damage to the parklet.

D. Parklet Removal
If for some reason the parklet sponsor decides no longer wants to maintain a parklet, the parklet sponsor is responsible for notifying the City and removing it at the parklet sponsors’ own expense.

Immediately upon removal the parklet area shall be cleaned and restored to its previous condition to the satisfaction of the City.

For More Information:

For questions or additional information regarding these Parklet Program Guidelines or the Parklet Encroachment Permit application, please contact:

Jennifer Chen, Economic Development Manager
[email protected]
(650) 522-7009

366 of 676

IDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN MALL

OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT PROGRAM
As revised October 2022
Outdoor dining is a great way to add liveliness to City streets and support local business operations. To that end, the City has created programs allowing businesses to expand their operations with additional restaurant seating in the public right-of-way, which includes City sidewalks and streets. The City has created two distinct programs to provide food service businesses the opportunity to expand a portion of their operations outside directly in front of their business frontage:
• Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit – This permit allows ground floor food service businesses to provide outdoor seating and related furnishings in the following areas if the applicant meets certain City standards and conditions of use:
o Commercial district areas on sidewalks (except when fronting El Camino Real). o The pedestrian mall on B Street between 1st and 3rd Avenue. • Parklet Encroachment Permit – This permit allows food service businesses to construct seating areas in on-street parking spaces directly in front of their business. Parklets are allowed in all commercial d
istricts except along El Camino Real. Parklet Encroachment permits are not allowed inside the p
edestrian mall (B Street between 1st and 3rd Avenue). If you are interested in expanding your business into the on-street parking area, please review the City’s Parklet Program Guidelines and Parklet Encroachment Permit Application.

Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permits are not available to food service businesses located in private shopping centers or businesses along El Camino Real because these locations are not under the City’s control. Terms and Conditions for such permits are listed below and may be updated by staff from time to time as appropriate.

Food service businesses interested in offering outdoor dining along a sidewalk or within the Pedestrian Mall must include all submittal requirements listed below, submit a Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Encroachment Permit Application and receive approval prior to placing any furnishings in the public right-of-way.

F
or More Information. Questions or additional information regarding the Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining and Parklet Programs, please contact Jennifer Chen, the City’s Economic Development Manager at (650) 522-7009.

EXHIBIT B

367 of 676

Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit Application Submittal Requirements

The following documents and fees are required in order to process a permit for use of the sidewalk or pedestrian mall for outdoor dining:

1. Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Encroachment Permit Application

2. Site Plan Drawings and Photos of Business Frontage.

Site plan drawings may be drawn by hand and must include the following information (see sample drawings provided as Attachment 1):
o Label the location of the business on diagram and storefront boundaries. o For sidewalk outdoor dining only: Show existing sidewalk obstructions (fire hydrants, trees, light poles, bike racks, utility boxes, manholes, newspaper racks, etc.) and dimensions between obstructions.
o For pedestrian mall outdoor dining only: show the location of the emergency access lane. o Show the layout of all proposed furnishings (planters, tables, chairs, umbrellas, heaters, fencing, etc.)
o Photographs of the business frontage
Photographs of the proposed sidewalk dining set-up may be submitted instead of a site plan drawing but the applicant should still specify the distances between obstructions .

3. Application Fee. The applicant is responsible to pay the annual permit fee prior to permit expiration. Fees are non-refundable. The current fee amount ($385.10 as of July 1, 2022) is set forth in the City’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule.

4. Certificate of Liability Insurance. Applicants shall provide proof of commercial general liability (or comprehensive) and property damage insurance and endorsements showing the City of San Mateo as additional insured on the policy and stating that the insurance is primary. See attached insurance standards requirements. Encroachment Permits issued shall be valid only during the term of liability insurance coverage. Applicants are responsible to submit updated insurance documents prior to the expiration date and annual fee. Failure to do so will result in revocation of the permit.

Please submit all documents electronically by sending an email to [email protected] or
in person at the Public Works counter at San Mateo City Hall at 330 West 20th Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94403 between 8am to 12pm and 1pm to 4:30pm.

368 of 676

Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit Terms and Conditions:

1. General Conditions of Use. Outdoor seating proposed on public sidewalks and within the pedestrian mall areas must meet the following terms and conditions:
• Comply with Chapter 17.08 and 27.87 of the San Mateo Municipal Code and other local, state and federal laws governing accessibility.
• Adjacency to Storefront. Outdoor seating must be located along the frontage of the storefront applying for the permit. Businesses will only be allowed to use a portion of the adjacent business owner’s frontage to expand their outdoor dining area if they obtain a letter from the current adjacent business owner stating that they have agreed to allow their frontage to be used.

Permission to use the space in front of an adjacent business can be revoked by that adjacent business at any time.
• Sidewalk Clearance. Outdoor seating areas must maintain a minimum sidewalk clearance and pedestrian through zone of 4-feet from any physical obstruction. This includes light poles, parking meters, fire hydrants, news racks, trees, entryways of adjacent businesses, or other barriers.

Tables or seating may be placed near the curb if a minimum of 2-foot clearance to the curb is maintained. Tables or seating shall not be placed within the gutter.

• ADA Accessibility. All seating areas must conform to the applicable provisi ons, rules, regulations and guidelines of the California Building Code (Title 24, Chapter 11b) and Americans with Disabilities Act.

• Outdoor Cooking Not Allowed. No outdoor cooking is allowed. Examples of types of foods that is considered outdoor cooking are hotpots, table-top barbeques, raclettes, fondues, and similar. In addition, outdoor restaurant busing stations are not allowed.

• Live Music. No amplified lived music is allowed without a Special Community Events permit from the City of San Mateo.

2. Furnishings. All outdoor furnishings (tables, chairs, umbrellas, planters, fencing, etc.) must be heavy enough to withstand high winds in order to protect guests and pedestrians. All furnishings may need to be stored inside the business from time to time to accommodate maintenance, cleaning, special events, or during periods of inclement or hazardous weather. Please ensure that weights used to anchor fixtures and furnishing do not create tripping hazards for pedestrians.

• Bolting Not Allowed. At no time shall any seating, tables, or umbrellas be bolted or affixed in any way to the public sidewalk, roadway, landscaping, or any structure (including but not limited to:
buildings, fire hydrants, street trees, streetlights, parking meters, or traffic poles, etc.).

• Fences/Railings/Stanchions. Businesses wanting to mark the boundary between the outdoor seating area and pedestrian path of travel are allowed only if the materials can easily be removed at the request of the City for special events and/or required maintenance. The height of these installations should not exceed 36 inches from the ground to the top of the railing, fencing or stanchions.

• Umbrellas. Umbrellas shall be fire-retardant, pressure-treated or manufactured of fire-resistant material. No portion of an umbrella shall be less than eighty (80) inches above the ground.

369 of 676

• Canopies Not Allowed. Tents, canvas, roofs, shade structures are not allowed on the sidewalk or in the pedestrian malls.

• Portable Heaters. Space heaters are permitted if they are an outdoor approved type, are located in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations, and are located at least 2 feet from the edge of any umbrella canvas, any tree foliage, and any other flammable object or material. Heaters are not allowed directly under umbrellas but can be placed near them if clearances are maintained.

• Electrical connections. All wiring and electrical cords must be exterior rated, GFCI protected, and UL listed. Cords must not create tripping hazards on the sidewalk and may not be extended above the City right-of-way. The use of generators are prohibited. Businesses are not allowed to tap into existing City electrical connections such as twinkle light outlets or streetlight poles. Utilization of existing City electrical connections shall be cause of termination of the permit.

3. Site Maintenance. Outdoor seating areas shall be maintained free of litter, refuse and debris. The area shall be scrubbed and mopped to remove any food or drink stains on a daily basis. Such cleaning shall be in accordance with the City’s Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Program, which prohibits any discharge other than storm water into the storm water drainage system. Failure to maintain the site or complaints received by the City related to lack of cleaning or upkeep shall be cause of termination of the permit.

4. Notice for Removal. The City and/or utility companies may need to access the sidewalk or pedestrian mall area for maintenance, repairs, events, and/or other purposes. While the City and/or utility companies will try to give a 72-hour advance notice, it may not be possible when dealing with emergency repairs. Additionally, the City will not cover business losses related to the loss of seating or business interruptions due to construction.

6. Transfer. Applicant may only use the dining area for their business. Applicant may not lease/rent or receive funds for the seating area to another operator.

7. Term. The permit is valid for a maximum of one year. Applicant must renew permits annually and pay for permit fees and update insurance information.

8. Certificate of Liability Insurance. Applicants must provide proof of commercial general liability (or comprehensive) and property damage insurance including endorsements showing the City of San Mateo as an additional insured on the policy and stating that the insurance is primary with regard to the City of San Mateo.

The detailed insurance standards are provided in Attachment 2 to these Terms and Conditions. It is the applicant’s responsibility to update insurance prior to permit expiration. Failure to do so will result in revocation of the encroachment permit.

9. Termination. The City reserves the right to terminate the permit without cause. In addition, the permit may be revoked due to failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit.

10. Additional Provisions for Outdoor Seating Located on the Pedestrian Mall:

Businesses located along the pedestrian mall on B Street between 1 st and 3rd Avenues will be required to meet
these additional conditions of use.

370 of 676

• No Permanent Structures Allowed. Businesses located in the pedestrian mall are not allowed to build any permanent structures. However, platforms will be allowed, provided that they can be designed to be easily removed upon 72 hours advance notice and stored off-street to allow for maintenance and City-sponsored events. Platforms must meet the following design criteria:

o Materials - Platforms must be constructed from durable materials that can withstand wear and tear of elements. Pouring concrete for parklet platforms is not allowed. You may use concrete pavers on a platform structure instead. Surface materials must be textured or treated with a non-skid coating to ensure a safe walking surface. Loose particles, such as sand or loose stone, are not permitted. o Platform Threshold - The platform threshold must not leave a gap greater than 1/2 inch, nor a vertical separation greater than 1/4 inch.
o Drainage - Platforms should allow for curbside drainage flow. A 6-inch height by 12-inch width minimum clear gutter space must be provided along the entire length of the proposed platform.

Openings at either end of the parklet may be covered with screens to prevent debris buildup beneath the platform and in the gutter. It is the responsibility of the parklet permittee to clean the cover or screen to prevent any backup of storm water. All parklets must provide access through the parklet platform or threshold to the gutter adjacent to the curb. o Bolting Not Allowed - At no time may platforms be bolted or affixed in any way to the roadway or any structure (including but not limited to: buildings, fire hydrants, street trees, streetlight, parking meters, or traffic poles, etc.).
o ADA Accessibility - All accessibility elements of the proposed platform shall be designed, constructed and/or conform to the applicable provisions, rules, regulations and guidelines of the California Building Code and Americans with Disabilities Act. Given the slope of the street, platforms may need to be raised above the height of the sidewalk in order to meet the ADA cross-slope requirement of no more than a ¼ inch rise per foot.

• Canopies Not Allowed. Tents, canvas, roofs, shade structures are not allowed in the pedestrian mall even if they are temporary/removable. Umbrellas are the only forms of shade protection allowed.

• ADA Considerations. Due to the slope of the street within the pedestrian mall, restaurants placing dining facilities in the pedestrian mall may also need to have tables available on the sidewalk in order to satisfy ADA accessibility requirements. It is the permittee’s responsibility to ensure ADA compliance.

• Maintenance and Special Events. When the City or other utilities need to perform street maintenance or when City-sponsored events are planned, the City will provide businesses with 72 hours advance notice to remove all furnishings from the pedestrian malls. If a business does not comply its encroachment permit will terminate and the City will remove the furnishings at the permit-holders expense and the furnishings will not be returned. Businesses wanting to host a special event will need to apply for a Special Community Events permit
from the City.

Emergency Access Lane. The center access lane must be kept clear at all times for emergency vehicles access and for short-term commercial vehicle loading, which is allowed from 1 am to 10 am daily.

Please note that the City intends to expand the center lane to a total width of 16 feet as part of the proposed pedestrian mall improvements that are currently being designed.

371 of 676

Attachment 1
Sample Site Plan (1 of 2)
Sidewalk Dining

372 of 676

Sample Site Plan (2 of 2)
Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining Plan

373 of 676

Attachment 2

CITY OF SAN MATEO

STANDARDS FOR INSURANCE

SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN MALL OUTDOOR DINING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT

Permittee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the permit insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with Permittee’s operation and use of the public right-of-way. The cost of such insurance shall be borne by Permittee.

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including liquor liability coverage, products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence . If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

Workers’ Compensation: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limits of no less than $2,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (for Applicants with employees).

Property Insurance: Property insurance against all risks of loss to any tenant improvements or betterments, at full replacement cost with no coinsurance penalty provision.

If Permittee maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of San Mateo requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of San Mateo.

OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS:

The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Additional Insured Status
The City, its elected and appointed officials, employees, and agents, are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the permittee including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Permittee’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10).

Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this permit, the Permittee’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance coverage at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, its e lected and appointed officials, employees, and agents. Any insurance or self -insurance maintained by City, its elected or appointed officials, employees, or agents shall be excess of the Permittee’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

Liquor Liability
If Permittee will be supplying alcoholic beverages, the general liability insurance shall include liquor liability coverage covering the sale of alcohol. Permittee must have a valid liquor sales license.

374 of 676

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with 30 days’ prior written notice to City.

Waiver of Subrogation
Permittee hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said permittee may acquire against City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Permittee agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M.

Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either:
the permittee shall obtain coverage to reduce or eliminate such self -insured retentions as respects the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees, and agents; or the permittee shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. The policy language s hall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may by satisfied by either the named insured or City.

Verification of Coverage
Permittee shall furnish the City with original Certificates of Insurance including all required amendat ory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause) and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsement Page of the CGL policy listing all policy endorsements to City before permitted activities begin. Howe ver, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the permittee’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorseme nts, required by these specifications, at any time.

Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements at any time, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

375 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN MALL OUTDOOR DINING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION (Page 1 of 2)

1. Property Owner Contact: _____________________________________________________

2. Property Owner Phone/email: ___________________________

3. Describe where the tables and chairs will be placed ______________________________

4. If you are located in the pedestrian mall, do you plan to include a platform as part of your installation?___________________________________________________________________

Please include the following attachments:

1. Site Plan- Drawn to scale, no smaller than 8.5’’ by 11”. Plans may be drawn by hand or dimensions may be provided over printed photographs. Sample site plans are attached for reference.

Please include the following information on the site plan:
o Label the location of the business on diagram and storefront boundaries. o For sidewalk outdoor dining only: Show any existing sidewalk obstructions (fire hydrants, trees, light poles, bike racks, utility boxes, manholes, newspaper racks, etc.) and dimensions between obstructions.
o For pedestrian mall outdoor dining only: show the location of the emergency access lane.
o Show the proposed layout of all proposed furnishings (planters, tables, chairs, umbrellas, heaters, fencing, etc.)
o Photographs of the business frontage

2. Evidence of Commercial General Liability (or Comprehensive) and property damage Insurance for one year endorsing the City of San Mateo as additional insured with the City’s address as the certificate holder. Insurance must be updated annually or the permit will be revoked. Insurance must meet the attached standards or a permit will not be issued.

3. Payment in the amount of $385.10 in the form of a check, money order or credit card. All credit card transactions will incur a 3% non-refundable service charge.

Business Name San Mateo Business License Number
Address Contact Phone
City Zip Alternate Phone
Email address Type of business
Contact Person

376 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN MALL OUTDOOR DINING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION (Page 2 of 2)

COMPLETE AND SUBMIT APPLICATION TO:[email protected] Public Works Department City of San Mateo
330 W. 20the Avenue San Mateo, CA 94403

QUESTIONS MAY BE ANSWERED BY EMAILING OR CALLING:
[email protected] or 650 522.7009.

Once the encroachment permit is issued, the permittee must notify the Public Works inspector 72 hours prior to the initial start of work. Contact [email protected] 650-522-7000 Ext. 6900 to schedule an inspection.

1. I [insert name] hereby affirm that I
have notified my landlord that I will be placing table and chairs in the pedestrian mall and have confirmed that I am not prohibited by any lease or rental agreement from placing furnishings in front of my place of business and I agree to abide by the conditions and restrictions of Municipal Code Chapter 17.08 and 27.87.

2. I agree to abide by and the terms and conditions attached to the encroachment permit and all other applicable laws and regulations.

3. I agree to hold harmless and indemnify the City of San Mateo (CITY), its elected and appointed officials, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, loss, liability, damage, and expense arising out of Applicant’s activity, except for those claims arising out of CITY’s sole negligence or willful misconduct. I agree to defend CITY, its elected and appointed officials, employees, and agents against any such claims.

Signature of Applicant I understand and agree to comply with all conditions of this application for a Sidewalk and Pedestrian Mall Outdoor Dining encroachment permit for outdoor restaurant seating in accordance with the City of San Mateo Municipal Code Chapters 17.08 and 27.87 and other local, state and federal laws governing accessibility as they apply to this permit.

Signature of Authorized Applicant Date

Reviewed and approved by Public Works staff Reviewed and approved by Public Works Inspector
Name Date Name Date

377 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 4

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 18 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 10-2021 File ID: 22-6736 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Finance Department
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:

Uncollectible Accounts Receivable Write Off – Approval
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution to authorize writing off $91,395.68 of uncollectible accounts receivable invoices as bad debt.

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to the City's Accounts Receivable Policy, City Council authority is required to write off accounts receivable invoices that have are deemed uncollectible, as both the City and its collections agency, Transworld Systems Inc. (TSI), have exhausted their comprehensive collection efforts.

As noted in Attachment 1, the unpaid invoices totaling $91,395.68 represent a broad array of service charges from nearly every department. Writing off the uncollectible accounts receivable as bad debt will position the City to have clean records in preparation for transitioning to the new Workday enterprise resource planning (ERP) system that will go live on November 1, 2022.

Finance staff will present subsequent uncollectible accounts receivable invoices for write off authorization by the City Council on an annual basis in June of each year.

BUDGET IMPACT:

Accounting standards require that bad debt be recognized as an expenditure in the year in which the bad debt is written off. As such, the General Fund will account for $91,395.68 in bad debt expenditure in the current fiscal year. It is expected that there should be adequate budget appropriations to absorb the impact of the bad debt expenditure.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This authorization to write off uncollectible accounts receivable invoices is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Proposed Resolution with Exhibit A

378 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 4

STAFF CONTACT
Rich Lee, Director, Finance
[email protected]
(650) 522-7102

379 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. ____ 2022
A
PPROVING WRITE OFF OF $91,395.68 OF UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE INVOICES AS BAD DEBT WH
EREAS, the City’s Accounts Receivable Policy requires City Council authority to write off accounts receivable invoices that are deemed uncollectible; and
WH
EREAS, as noted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, the City has $91,395.68 in uncollectible accounts receivable invoices from a wide variety of department and service charges; and WH
EREAS, writing off the uncollectible accounts receivable invoices as bad debt will ensure that the City’s accounts receivable records are ready to start the new Workday enterprise resource planning (ERP) system from inception.

NOW,

THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:

1. The uncollectible accounts receivable invoices listed in Exhibit A totaling $91,395.68 are authorized to be written off as bad debt.

380 of 676

Date Inv # Cust # Customer name Line Description Orig Amt Adjust Paid amt Amt owing 6/18/2015 87025 0013876 LONESTAR HOLDINGS LLC Heritage Tree Replacement 350.00 - - 350.00 6/18/2015 87057 0014208 CHILTON, MARCELLA Heritage Tree Replacement 350.00 - - 350.00 6/30/2015 87348 0014230 NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOC. Police Services Provided 1,807.38 - - 1,807.38 9/17/2015 88005 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC Code Enforcement CRC Fee 2,000.00 - - 2,000.00 11/9/2015 88618 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 1,600.00 - - 1,600.00 11/17/2015 88635 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 1,300.00 - - 1,300.00 11/30/2015 88730 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 1,400.00 - - 1,400.00 12/15/2015 88819 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 1,400.00 - - 1,400.00 1/6/2016 89020 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 2,100.00 - - 2,100.00 1/26/2016 89488 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 2,100.00 - - 2,100.00 2/8/2016 89805 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 1,400.00 - - 1,400.00 3/7/2016 90377 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 2,400.00 - - 2,400.00 3/21/2016 90818 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 2,100.00 - - 2,100.00 4/12/2016 91161 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 2,100.00 - - 2,100.00 5/17/2016 91733 0014326 PENINSULA COMMONS LLC CRC Imposed Admin. Penalties 3,000.00 - - 3 ,000.00
11/18/2016 93854 0015199 MACHISHECK, FE Planning Application Fees 3,500.00 (2,993.75) - 506.25 12/19/2016 94389 0015233 KUNKEL, JEFF Heritage Tree Replacement 350.00 - - 350.00 1/25/2017 94590 0015284 CALIFORNIA SUITES Heritage Tree Replacement 450.00 - - 450.00 2/2/2017 94957 0015310 STEVEN RESTIVO EVENT SERVICES Police Services Provided 5,944.40 - - 5,944.40 4/5/2018 500458 0016006 SAN MATEO COLLISION Reimbursement 393.68 - - 393.68 2/19/2020 509534 0003922 GRUBSTAKE PROPERTIES Reimbursement 9,450.71 - - 9,450.71 1/7/2021 510313 0020274 HAGERMAN, BRANDON SCOTT Driving Under the Influence 1,848.00 - - 1,848.00 10/3/2014 83613 0011196 CROWN CASTLE, NEXTG WEST Encroachment Permit Fee 328.00 - - 328.00 3/26/2015 85984 0014096 AGUILAR, DANA Class-A/R 55.50 - - 55.50 3/26/2015 86028 0014098 TURNER, MICHAEL CORTEZ Class-A/R 100.00 - - 100.00 3/26/2015 86029 0014099 ENNIS, HEIDI ANNE Class-A/R 100.00 - - 100.00 3/26/2015 86030 0014100 STEWART, LARRY Class-A/R 100.00 - - 100.00 10/5/2015 88165 0011196 CROWN CASTLE, NEXTG WEST Encroachment Permit Fee 340.00 - - 340.00 4/5/2016 91054 0014861 KHAN, MOYEED ASIF Class-A/R Park Citation 100.00 - - 100.00 10/4/2016 93250 0011196 CROWN CASTLE, NEXTG WEST Encroachment Permit Fee 350.00 - - 350.00
11/16/2016 93851 0015197 MORENO-SOTO, ANGEL Damage to San Mateo Property 95.36 - - 95.36 12/1/2016 93965 0015204 NEJAD, NERSI SEAN Class-A/R Park Citation 100.00 - - 100.00 12/20/2016 94398 0015239 CHUHYON, YI Miscellaneous Fees for Svcs 875.00 - - 875.00 10/3/2017 97409 0011196 CROWN CASTLE, NEXTG WEST Encroachment Permit Fee 362.00 - - 362.00 1/24/2018 99218 0015875 RAMIRES, RODRIGO RIOS Class-A/R Park Citation 1 00.00 - - 100.00 1/24/2018 99219 0015876 MARTINEZ, CARLOS Class-A/R Park Citation 100.00 - - 100.00 1/24/2018 99221 0015878 FONONGA JR., LESILI Class-A/R Park Citation 100.00 - - 100.00 6/30/2018 501363 0016130 RIOS, REYES SANCHEZ Class-A/R Park Citation 100.00 - - 100.00 5/14/2020 509942 0006475 COLD STONE CREAMERY #20755 Reimbursement 1,414.62 - - 1,414.62 7/18/2020 510041 0001961 TAQUERIA EL NAYARITA Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 8/31/2020 510094 0020240 CHICOS TAQUERIA Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 9/14/2020 510106 0004123 BENSON AND SON ELECTRIC Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 10/1/2020 510150 0020250 ZIZANG QI & TINGTING GAO Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 11/7/2020 510219 0015059 ESSEX PROPERTY TRUST Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 12/14/2020 510270 0020271 MASSAGE ENVY Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00
1/4/2021 510302 0015825 MESA RESIDENCE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 1/7/2021 510315 0020276 ARANA, JOANNA VANESSA Driving Under the Influence 924.00 - - 924.00 1/11/2021 510322 0015825 MESA RESIDENCE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 1/12/2021 510323 0020286 ESQUIVEL, HECTOR Reimbursement 129.00 - - 129.00 1/12/2021 510326 0006475 COLD STONE CREAMERY #20755 Reimbursement 1,015.85 - - 1,015.85 1/12/2021 510328 0004565 AT&T WIRELINE Reimbursement 3,529.87 - - 3,529.87 2/2/2021 510376 0001825 OFFICE DEPOT Shopping Cart Retrieval 23.00 - - 23.00 2/3/2021 510702 0000491 ABBASZADEH, SHIRIN Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510706 0000497 BUNCH, CURTIS & BERTRAM Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510717 0000523 ARNDT FRANK Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510808 0012917 LIANG, BU ZHAO Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510818 0014007 VAZQUEZ, DANIEL & MARIA Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510854 0020169 GUZMAN, GLORIA R & VICTORIA Dock Fee 1 28.00 - - 128.00 2/3/2021 510860 0020250 ZIZANG QI & TINGTING GAO Dock Fee 128.00 - - 128.00 2/19/2021 510887 0020299 THE BENZ DOCTOR Excess Police False Alarm 1

04.00 - - 104.00
3/9/2021 510899 0020305 ANNVILLE PLUMBING Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 3/19/2021 510992 0015074 PANDA EXPRESS Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/19/2021 511016 0015287 CHEF ZHAO BISTRO Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/19/2021 511020 0015290 CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL #2028 Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/19/2021 511032 0010736 FLETCH'S Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/22/2021 511081 0012630 STREET FOOD Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/22/2021 511093 0001961 TAQUERIA EL NAYARITA Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 3/22/2021 511095 0012961 THE SPOT ON 25TH Reimbursement 345.00 - - 345.00 4/4/2021 511126 0015059 ESSEX PROPERTY TRUST Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 4/11/2021 511136 0012906 WELLS FARGO MORTGAGE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 4/29/2021 511175 0020329 BUCIO RESIDENCE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 Exhibit A

381 of 676

Date Inv # Cust # Customer name Line Description Orig Amt Adjust Paid amt Amt owing 5/10/2021 511186 0015006 TSANG, SAM Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 5/14/2021 511195 0020329 BUCIO RESIDENCE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 6/23/2021 511264 0001825 OFFICE DEPOT Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 6/24/2021 511267 0020344 AGUIRRE, MAURICIO ORLANDO Driving Under the Influence 1,680.00 - - 1,680.00 6/24/2021 511270 0020347 OLIVIERA, MARY DENISE Driving Under the Influence 630.00 - - 630.00 6/24/2021 511271 0020348 AGUILAR LOPEZ, MILHEN Driving Under the Influence 924.00 - - 924.00 6/24/2021 511272 0020349 VASQUEZ YOC, NERY ELIEZAR Driving Under the Influence 516.00 - - 516.00 6/24/2021 511273 0020350 RAMOS FUEGO, FAUSTO AMILCAR Driving Under the Influence 645.00 - - 645.00 6/24/2021 511275 0020352 CABRERA, ELFIDO Driving Under the Influence 774.00 - - 774.00 6/24/2021 511276 0020354 SANDINO BALLADARES, MARIA Driving Under the Influence 602.00 - - 602.00 6/24/2021 511277 0020355 CHU, YUEN CHI GORDON Driving Under the Influence 421.40 - - 421.40 7/13/2021 511308 0020359 CATALAN, RONALDO E Driving Under the Influence 800.00 - - 800.00 7/13/2021 511310 0020361 BARRIOS, MABLE LAZARO Driving Under the Influence 328.00 - - 328.00 7/14/2021 511313 0020353 BARRERA, BRIAN GIOVANNI Driving Under the Influence 537.50 - - 537.50 9/21/2021 511424 0020372 HAUGEN, BRANDEN RICHARD Driving Under the Influence 774.00 - - 774.00 9/21/2021 511426 0020374 TURNBULL, TAMARA Driving Under the Influence 430.00 - - 430.00 10/8/2021 511445 0014092 MARINER ADVANCED PHARMACY Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 11/4/2021 511493 0020384 BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 11/6/2021 511497 0020384 BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 12/1/2021 511555 0020397 SICAJAU CHAMALE, CESAR ENRIQUE Driving Under the Influence 588.00 - - 588.00 12/1/2021 511560 0020404 COIBOY, MARVIN Driving Under the Influence 645.00 - - 645.00 1/26/2022 511665 0003859 LEWELLEN, DARREN Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 104.00 3/26/2015 85983 0014095 HINGANO FILIMOEHALA-MANUMA Class-A/R 175.60 - - 175.60 3/26/2015 85985 0014097 FERGUSON, LATOYA Class-A/R 816.00 - - 816.00 10/15/2015 88283 0014350 MCALLISTER, CHRISTOPHER City Reimbursement 625.00 - - 625.00 2/17/2016 89877 0014791 ELIZABETH L MARTIN, LAW OFFICES OF Civil Subpoena 403.45 - - 403.45 4/5/2016 91060 0011573 WRIGHT, APRIL Class-A/R 283.00 - - 283.00 4/24/2018 500607 0011696 CONTINENTAL EVENT & SPORTS MGT Police Services Provided 4,569.42 - - 4,569.42 8/23/2019 508504 0019999 BIRYANI, DOSA N Reimbursement 628.00 - - 628.00 8/17/2020 510065 0020222 SOLZER, FELICITAS Reimbursement for City Service 1,200.00 - - 1,200.00 9/16/2020 510117 0020247 ANDREINI, STEPHEN PETER Driving Under the Influence 756.00 - - 756.00 9/17/2020 510118 0020210 CHAVIXPIRIR, LUIS ARTURO Driving Under the Influence 378.00 - (250.00) 128.00 10/6/2020 510162 0020253 DETERT, EMILY Heritage Tree Permit 500.00 - - 500.00 10/22/2020 510201 0020261 CHOYXAR, MIGUEL Driving Under the Influence 860.00 - - 860.00 1/7/2022 511571 CALIBER COLLISION Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 129.00 12/31/2021 511562 CHAVAC JEREZ, BRANDON ESTUARDO Driving Under the Influence 924.50 - - 949.50 12/30/2021 511550 CHITIQUEZ ABAJ, HERMES ORLANDO Driving Under the Influence 1,118.00 - - 1,143.00 1/8/2022 511577 DENG, XIANGJU Driving Under the Influence 494.50 - - 519.50 12/31/2021 511557 FERNANDEZ, JACQUELINE KRISTINE Driving Under the Influence 756.00 - - 781.00 12/31/2021 511561 GATTON, JEFFREY JAMES Driving Under the Influence 1,204.00 - - 1,229.00 11/19/2021 511470 GUTIERREZ, RODRIGO Reimbursement 2,710.69 - - 2,735.69 2/12/2022 511629 MICHAEL'S STORE Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 129.00 2/12/2022 511581 MURO RAMIREZ, ELENA Driving Under the Influence 172.00 - - 197.00 1/8/2022 511574 NUNEZ, EDUARDO SOLORIO Driving Under the Influence 588.00 - - 613.00 12/31/2021 511558 SANCHEZ VELASQUEZ, JESUS Driving Under the Influence 301.00 - - 326.00 1/8/2022 511576 SANTINI, RALPH HENRY Driving Under the Influence 430.00 - - 455.00 1/15/2022 511599 SLATE AT 190 Excess Police False Alarm 104.00 - - 129.00 1/8/2022 511575 SOLORIO MOLINA, CIRILO Driving Under the Influence 688.00 - - 713.00 91,395.68$

382 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 19 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 10-1511 File ID: 22-6742 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Clerk's Office
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:

November 8, 2022 Statewide Propositions – Recommendations RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the Legislative Committee’s recommendations to take the following positions on the propositions on the ballot for the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election: Proposition 28 (Funding Arts and Music Education) – Support; and Proposition 31 (Prohibiting Retail Sale of Certain Flavored Tobacco Products) – Support.

BACKGROUND:

On September 29, 2022, the Legislative Committee comprised of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor met to consider recommending positions on the November 8, 2022 General Election. There are seven propositions on the ballot. City Council passed a Resolution in Support of Proposition 1 on September 19, 2022. As such, the Legislative Committee discussed the remaining six propositions.

After discussion, the Legislative Committee recommended the City Council take a support position on Proposition 28 and Proposition 31. City Council may wish to note that the Legislative Committee reached a split vote on Proposition 29 (one neutral and one support), which relates to kidney dialysis clinics requirements.

Attachment 1 provides Council with a summary of each proposition.

BUDGET IMPACT:

There is no budget impact associated with this administrative action.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This item is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Easy Voter Guide

STAFF CONTACT
Martin McTaggart, Deputy City Clerk
[email protected]
(650) 522-7044

383 of 676

Visit easyvoterguide.org to download this guide in
English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, and Korean.

This guide is a collaboration of the League of Women Voters ® of California Education Fund and the California State Library.

November 8, 2022 n California General Election
YOUR VOTE. YOUR VOICE.
easyvoterguide.org
October 24, 2022 Last day to register to vote in this election.

November 8, 2022 ELECTION DAY Your polling place is open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

ARE YOU SIGNED
UP TO VOTE?
Esta guía también está disponible en español n 本指南也有中文版 Hướng dẫn này cũng có sẵn bằng tiếng Việt n 이 안내서는 한국어로도 제공됩니다 n Register to vote
by October 24 at
registertovote.ca.gov.
n Check your registration to make sure it’s
up to date. If your signature has changed
over time, then re-register to update your
signature at voterstatus.sos.ca.gov.
n If you want to get voting
materials in a language other
than English, make that choice
at voterstatus.sos.ca.gov.

GET READY:

384 of 676

2 ©2022 Easy Voter Guide California General Election · November 8, 2022 You do not have
to vote on
everything.

Your vote still
counts even if you
choose to skip
some things on
your ballot.

About the November 8, 2022 General Election
n U.S. Senator
(6-Year term)
n Representative in
U.S. Congress
(2-Year term)
Offices that represent you
in national government
n Governor – The highest elected official in California:

Oversees most state departments and agencies Prepares
annual state budget. Approves or rejects new state laws. n Lieutenant Governor – Next in line: Becomes Governor if the elected Governor leaves office. Has a tie-breaking vote in the State Senate. Serves on boards and
commissions.
n Secretary of State – Head of elections and record
keeping: Coordinates statewide elections and oversees
election laws. Also keeps records about new corporations and businesses and other state databases.
n Controller – The state’s bookkeeper: Keeps track of how the state’s money is spent. Issues most checks from the state and manages collection of money due to the state.

Reports on finances of state and local governments.
n Treasurer – The state’s banker:

Manages the state’s investments
and assets. Coordinates the sale of
state bonds.
n Attorney General – The state’s top
lawyer: Makes sure laws are enforced the same way
across the state. Manages the state Department of
Justice. Oversees sheriffs and district attorneys.
n Insurance Commissioner – Insurance overseer:

Manages the state Department of Insurance. Enforces
laws that insurance companies must follow.
n Superintendent of Public Instruction – Head of public schools: Manages the state Department of Education.

Provides leadership and assistance to all public schools in California. Enforces education regulations.

Offices that represent everyone in California (elected for a four-year term) n State Senator (4-Year term; even-numbered
districts will be voted on in this election)
n State Assembly Member (2-Year term)
n State Board of Equalization (state tax
commission; 4-Year term)
Offices that represent you
in state government
How the Statewide General Election Works in California
In this “general” election, voters will:
n Choose a Governor and other representatives for national, state, and local government. n Decide if judges on the state’s Supreme Court should keep their positions. n Vote “YES” or “NO” on 7 proposed state laws.

You will also be asked to decide on local candidates and possibly local ballot measures.

What’s on your ballot depends on where you live. Every registered voter will get a Voter Information Guide in the mail that lists everything they can vote on.

For the following offices, only the two candidates who got the most votes in the June 2022 primary election will appear on your ballot. These two candidates could be from the same political party.

The state of California wants to make it easier to vote. Now, every registered voter in California will receive a ballot in the mail about a month before Election Day. You can choose to return the ballot by mail, drop it off, or instead vote in person. Read pages 7-8 for more details.

No Longer in Prison? Once you have been released from prison in California your right to vote is automatically restored – you just need to register to vote. You may vote while you are on parole, but cannot vote if you are currently serving a sentence in state or federal prison.

WHAT’S
FOR
VOTERS

385 of 676

California General Election · November 8, 2022
©2022 Easy Voter Guide 3
State Propositions
Propositions are proposed laws presented to the public to vote on. Propositions can make new laws, change existing laws, and sometimes they change California’s Constitution. They can be placed on the ballot by people who collect enough voter signatures or by state lawmakers (the California Legislature). A proposition passes and becomes law if it receives more than 50 percent YES votes.

Propositions 1, and 26 through 30 are “initiatives.” For an initiative:
n A YES vote means that you support the way the proposition would change things. n A NO vote means that you want to leave things the way they are now.

Proposition 31 is a “referendum,” which asks voters to decide on a law that was already passed. For a referendum:
n A YES vote means that you support the law and want to keep it. n A NO vote means you do not want the law to go into effect.

There are 7 state propositions in this election. You do not have to vote on everything.

Learn about propositions that are important to you and make your choice, YES or NO.

The way it is now: In California, the law says that you have the right to choose to have an abortion and you have the right to privacy about your personal reproductive decisions. But these rights are not specifically named in the California Constitution. The California Constitution is the state’s highest law. Only a new amendment can change it. A new amendment requires a two-thirds vote of the legislature and also a vote of the people.

Reproductive Freedom
What Prop 1 would do if it passes:
• Name reproductive freedom as a right in the
California Constitution.
• A right to reproductive freedom means that the state cannot deny or interfere with someone’s right to choose an abortion, use or refuse birth control (contraceptives), and get other reproductive healthcare.

Effect on the state budget: Prop 1 would have no impact on the state budget other than the costs needed to place the measure on the ballot.
• The California
Constitution
should protect
reproductive rights
so that they will
not be at risk in
the future.
• Proposition 1 is an
extreme, expensive,
and pointless waste
of tax money that
will allow abortion
at any time.
1 People for
Prop 1 say:

People against
Prop 1 say:

Official Voter Information Guide from
the California Secretary of State
Find your County Elections Office online at sos.ca.gov/county-elections-offices.County Elections Offices Voter’s Edge makes it easy to see your voting location and all the candidates and propositions that will be on your ballot. Just type in your home address at votersedge.org.

Voter’s Edge, an online election guide
from the League of Women Voters of
California Education Fund and MapLight
The Secretary of State’s guide includes voting resources, detailed information about the state propositions, and statements from candidates. Find the Official Voter Information Guide online at voterguide.sos.ca.gov.

HELP FOR VOTERS
Legislative Constitutional Amendment

386 of 676

4 ©2022 Easy Voter Guide
California General Election · November 8, 2022
State Propositions
The way it is now: Tribal casinos in California can offer poker, bingo, and other games. But sports betting, roulette, and dice games are illegal in tribal casinos and everywhere else in California.

In-Person Sports Betting in Tribal Casinos
What Prop 26 would do if it passes:
• Legalize in-person sports betting, roulette,
and dice games in tribal casinos.
• Legalize in-person sports betting at four horse
racetracks.
• Allow private lawsuits against illegal gambling
in some situations.

Effect on the state budget: Prop 26 could raise
up to tens of millions of dollars each year in
revenue from casinos, horse racetracks, and fines
from lawsuits. Regulating in-person sports betting
could reach the low tens of millions each year.
• Prop 26 would allow
California’s tribes to
provide vital services
like health care,
housing, infrastructure,
and education to
tribal members.
• Taxing sports betting
would increase the
state’s revenue.
• This measure would
create a big increase in
gambling that benefits
only a few tribes.
• Gambling is addictive.

Legalizing more types
of gambling is bad for
public health and safety.
26 People for
Prop 26 say:

People against
Prop 26 say:

The way it is now: The United States Supreme Court has ruled that each state can decide whether to legalize sports betting. Sports betting is illegal everywhere in California, including on tribal lands.

Online Sports Betting
What Prop 27 would do if it passes:
• Legalize online sports betting in California (not on tribal lands) for people 21 and over.
• Bets could only be placed through a gaming tribe
or qualifying businesses.
• Most of the revenue from betting fees and taxes
would address homelessness and the mental health
needs of people who are homeless. The rest of the
money would support Native American tribes.

Effect on the state budget: Legalizing online sports
betting could raise up to the mid-hundreds of millions
of dollars each year. Regulating online sports betting
could cost up to the mid-tens of millions of dollars
each year.
• Regulating online
sports betting would
protect gamblers and
end illegal online
gambling operations.
• The measure would
guarantee extra
funding to address
homelessness and
mental health in
California.
• Large out-of-state
gambling companies
would proﬁt off of
Californians and block
smaller operations
from the market.
• Online sports betting
makes gambling
more accessible
than ever, and more
people would become
addicted to gambling.
27 People for
Prop 27 say:

People against
Prop 27 say:

Initiative Constitutional
Amendment and Statute
Initiative Constitutional
Amendment and Statute

387 of 676

California General Election · November 8, 2022
©2022 Easy Voter Guide 5
The way it is now: If a person’s kidneys stop working, they may need a treatment called dialysis. In California, licensed dialysis clinics usually provide dialysis. When a person is receiving dialysis, their personal doctor must visit them at least once a month. Most patients have dialysis treatment paid for by Medicare and Medi-Cal.

Sometimes private insurance is used. Private insurance pays higher rates for treatment than Medicare and Medi-Cal. Infections that might be caused by dialysis must be reported to the federal government.

What Prop 29 would do if it passes:
• Clinics must have at least one doctor, nurse
practitioner, or physician assistant present during
all treatment hours.
• Clinics must report any dialysis-related infections
to the state every three months.
• Clinics must disclose who owns the clinic to patients. • Clinics need permission from the state before closing or reducing services.
• Clinics can’t refuse to treat patients based on
how they are paying for their treatment.

Effect on the state budget: Increased kidney dialysis clinic requirements would cost the government in the low tens of millions of dollars each year.
• Dialysis is a
dangerous procedure.

Clinics should always
have a healthcare
provider available
to help.
• Prop 29 would
prevent discrimination
and protect patients
in rural communities.
• Prop 29 would
take healthcare
providers away
from hospitals and
emergency rooms.
• Some dialysis
clinics in the state
may close due to
increased costs.

People for
Prop 29 say:

People against
Prop 29 say:

State Propositions
The way it is now: Every year the state must set aside about 40 percent of its income (revenue) to fund public schools. But the state doesn’t have another annual source of funding for arts and music education in public schools.

Funding Arts and Music Education
What Prop 28 would do if it passes:
• The state must set aside some of its revenue to fund arts and music education in K-12 public schools.
• All schools would receive some funding for each
student. Schools serving many low-income students
would receive a bit more money. Funding would
allow schools to hire new staff and pay for training
and supplies.

Effect on the state budget: Arts and music education
would cost approximately $1 billion each year.
• Arts and music
education can
improve a student’s
personal and
academic life.
• Only one in ﬁve
schools have a
dedicated teacher
for arts programs.
• Prop 28 would
limit the state
funds available for
other spending.
28 People for
Prop 28 say:

People against
Prop 28 say:

Kidney Dialysis Clinics Requirements29 Initiative Statute Initiative Statute

388 of 676

6 ©2022 Easy Voter Guide
California General Election · November 8, 2022
State Propositions
The way it is now: The state collects taxes on income made in California. In 2021, the state collected over $130 billion in income taxes. Most of this money goes into California’s main budget, which is called the General Fund. The money in the General Fund supports state services like public schools and healthcare.

Income Tax on Millionaires for Electric Cars
What Prop 30 would do if it passes:
• For every dollar a person makes over $2 million an
additional 1.75% tax will be charged.
• The money from this tax would be put into a special
fund that is separate from the General Fund.
• Most of this money would be used to increase the use of “zero-emissions” electric vehicles, and to keep the
air cleaner. The rest of this money would be used to
manage wildﬁres.

Effect on the state budget: Prop 30 would raise between $3.5 and $5 billion each year.
• Greenhouse gas
emissions from cars
and other transportation
are the largest
contributors to climate
change and we need
to take action now.
• Wildﬁres are getting
worse, and we need
more money to
manage them.
• High earners may
leave the state if
California increases
its income taxes.
• If these new
projects are really
important, they
should be paid
for with the
General Fund,
not new taxes.
30 People for
Prop 30 say:

People against
Prop 30 say:

Background: The state passed a new law in 2020 banning the sale of ﬂavored tobacco products when they are bought in-person at stores and vending machines. Examples of ﬂavored tobacco products include candy-ﬂavored e-cigarettes or menthol cigarettes. This new law has not gone into effect.

Yes or No to Banning Flavored Tobacco Products
What Prop 31 would do if it passes:
• Ban the sale of ﬂavored tobacco products and allow
the state’s new law to go into effect.
• Flavored tobacco products would no longer be sold
at gas stations, grocery stores, vending machines,
and other places.

Effect on the state budget: This ban on ﬂavored
tobacco would cost tens of millions to around
$100 million in lost tax revenue every year.

Government health care savings from reduced
tobacco usage is unknown, with possible increased
costs over the long term as healthier people live longer. 31 • Kids are drawn
to sweet-ﬂavored
tobacco products.
• Nicotine is very
addictive and
ﬂavored tobacco
could cause life-
long addiction.
• Adults who choose
to use ﬂavored
tobacco products
will no longer have
a choice as to what
products they buy.
• People will buy
ﬂavored tobacco
products illegally,
taking money away
from local businesses.

People for
Prop 31 say:

People against
Prop 31 say:

Referendum
Initiative Statute

389 of 676

California General Election · November 8, 2022
©2022 Easy Voter Guide 7
Ways to Vote
This year you have more options to vote safely and easily. The biggest change is that every registered voter in California will receive a ballot in the mail a month before the election.

There are 3 ways to vote. You can choose to mail back your ballot, or drop it off, or you can vote in person at a Voting Location.
1 VOTE-BY-MAIL
MAIL YOUR BALLOT BACK EARLY! You can fill it in and mail it back as soon as you receive it.

No stamp? No problem. You do not need a stamp to mail back your ballot.

Mark your ballot and seal it inside the envelope provided Follow the directions on the ballot to mark your choices.

Check that you are using the return envelope with your name on it.

Put your ballot into the envelope & seal. Only 1 ballot in each envelope.

Sign and date the envelope
Date and sign your name carefully on the back of the envelope using ink.

Return your ballot on time
Mail your ballot back early because it must be postmarked by Election Day, November 8.

OR DROP OFF YOUR BALLOT
If you decide to hand in your ballot instead of mailing it, you must drop it off no later than 8PM on Election Day, November 8 .

Drop off your ballot at any Voting Location or secure Ballot Dropbox in your county.

For details and locations check caearlyvoting.sos.ca.gov. 2 MADE A MISTAKE? YOU CAN GET A REPLACEMENT BALLOT.

To get a new ballot contact your County Elections Office before Election Day or go to your Voting Location when it opens and ask for a replacement.

Visit votersedge.org to see what will be on your ballot.

It’s easy. Just enter your home address.

390 of 676

3 8 ©2022 Easy Voter Guide
California General Election · November 8, 2022
Ways to Vote
MISSED THE OCTOBER 24 VOTER REGISTRATION DEADLINE?
NO PROBLEM! YOU CAN STILL VOTE IN THIS ELECTION!
If you missed the deadline, go to any Voting Location. You can register and vote on the same day – all the way up through Election Day. n If possible, find your assigned location at findmypollingplace.sos.ca.gov. Go to that Voting Location to make sure you get a ballot with all your local contests. n Same-day register and vote from home . If you need to register after October 24 and want to vote from home, contact your County Elections Office to find out how to register and get a vote by mail ballot through Election Day. Check sos.ca.gov/county-elections-offices.

DO YOU LIVE IN A “VOTER’S CHOICE ACT” COUNTY?
Check here: bit.ly/VotersChoiceCounties.

If so, then you may vote at any voting location in the county. Many will open starting Saturday, October 29 but some will open earlier. Or drop off your ballot at any secure Ballot Dropbox starting Tuesday, October 11.

Check locations and hours at caearlyvoting.sos.ca.gov.

VOTE IN PERSON
At in-person Voting Locations you can:
n Vote in-person.
n Drop off your completed ballot.
n Vote with an accessible voting machine.
n Get help and voting materials in multiple languages.

Early voting, starting before Election Day, will be available in some locations.

Find Early Voting and Ballot Dropbox locations at caearlyvoting.sos.ca.gov.

Find your Voting Location at findmypollingplace.sos.ca.gov.

ABOUT THE EASY VOTER GUIDE
The Easy Voter Guide is made possible in part by the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act, administered in California by the State Librarian. The League of Women Voters ® of California Education Fund is a 501(c)(3) nonpartisan organization that encourages informed and active participation in government and works to increase understanding of major public policy issues. Please send questions or suggestions about this guide to [email protected].

After returning your ballot, check WheresMyBallot.sos.ca.gov to find out where your ballot is in the process and when it has been accepted.

TRACK MY
BALLOT
Give your opinion about this guide at
easyvoterguide.org

391 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
3 7

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 20 Section Name: CONSENT CALENDAR Account Number: 10-1111 File ID: 22-6755 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Clerk's Office
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:

Fixin' San Mateo County – Resolution of Support
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution to affirm the City of San Mateo City Council’s support for Fixin' San Mateo County's (FxSMC) efforts to establish civilian oversight of the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office.

BACKGROUND:

On September 19, 2022, City Council received a presentation from Fixin’ San Mateo County (FxSMC). Within this presentation, representatives from FxSMC stated their goal to establish independent civilian oversight of San Mateo County’s Sheriff’s Office, with subpoena power, to address complaints, investigate, and make recommendations.

During its September 13, 2022 meeting, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors expressed their support for establishing a civilian oversight board charged with monitoring the Sheriff’s Office and formed an ad hoc committee to explore the issue.

By adopting this resolution, City Council will affirm its support of the efforts of a nonpartisan local grassroots group to establish effective civilian oversight of the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office.

BUDGET IMPACT:

There is no budget impact associated with this administrative action.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This proposed resolution is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Proposed Resolution

STAFF CONTACT
Martin McTaggart, Deputy City Clerk
[email protected]
(650) 522-7044

392 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. __ (2022)
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF FIXIN’ SAN MATEO COUNTY (FXSMC) WHEREAS, the death of George Floyd in 2020 prompted civil unrest and community concern into policing practices and heightened calls for reform around the country, including in the five-county Bay Area where Black people constitute less than 7% of the population yet accounted for 27% of the people killed by law enforcement officers from 2015 through 2020; and
WHEREAS, two-hundred and twenty (220) jurisdictions around the country, twenty-five (25) of them in California, have established civilian oversight over their local police or sheriff, including the counties of Santa Clara, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, and Sonoma; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 1185 codifies the right of citizens to establish a civilian oversight board to assist the Board of Supervisors with overseeing the conduct of all county officers and ensure that they faithfully perform their duties; and
WHEREAS, On September 13, 2022 the County of San Mateo Board of Supervisors voted to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to research and report on potential civilian oversight for the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office and to work with staff to design and help implement a community engagement process; and WHEREAS, this resolution is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it can be seen with certainty that it will not cause a physical change in the environment; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:

1. The City Council of the City of San Mateo supports Fixin’ San Mateo County (FxSMC) in their efforts to establish effective civilian oversight of the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office.

393 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 3

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 21 Section Name: NEW BUSINESS Account Number: 14-1311 File ID: 22-6731 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Manager's Office
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:

Downtown Business Improvement Area – Resolution of Intent RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution of Intent to modify the basis and method of levy for the Downtown Business Improvement Area and set a public hearing for November 7, 2022, to consider proposed modification of assessments.

BACKGROUND:

The Downtown San Mateo Association (DSMA) has served as the Downtown Business Improvement Area (DBIA) administrator since its formation in 1986. The mission of the DSMA is to create a welcoming and economically vibrant commercial core. The assessments collected are used to provide for enhanced cleaning services and complementary programs for Downtown businesses. Over the years, the DSMA has promoted local businesses, organized special community events, and engaged in cleaning and beautification projects.

The DSMA has not increased the DBIA assessments, even to adjust for the cost of living, since 2009. In addition, during the pandemic, the DSMA reduced the assessments by 50% for a two-year period in order to assist the Downtown businesses that were struggling during that time. The DSMA had previously proposed a modification of its assessment structure in August 2017. The proposal was not approved by City Council due to protests from the business community. A few short months later in March 2018, the Executive Director departed the organization. Since the departure of the former Executive Director, the DSMA has been able to continue its work through a dedicated, all-volunteer board with Lew Cohen, President of DSMA, at the helm, and administrative support from City staff. The City has also provided shared office space for the DSMA at the Downtown Coordinator’s office on 1st Avenue at no cost to the DSMA.

The DSMA elected to postpone the hiring of an executive director position in order to reserve funds to hire consultants to conduct an assessment modification study, financial audit, and to do outreach businesses for the proposed assessment modification. In the meantime, the volunteer board continued the basic functions such as managing a cleaning contract, marketing, hosting regular meetings, advocating on behalf of Downtown businesses.

In 2019 DSMA hired NBS, a special financing district consultant to study its current assessment structure, understand best practices for Downtown Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), and propose a new BID assessment schedule to distribute the cost of fees more equitably across all businesses in the Downtown. The initial study was completed in February 2020 and the DSMA was prepared to engage in public outreach when the work was halted due to the State’s emergency public health mandate for everyone to shelter-in place in March 2020. Thus, instead of requesting for a fee increase, the DSMA requested the City Council reduce the DBIA fees by 50% in June 2020. The request was continued for a second year at the June 21, 2021 meeting because of the on-going spread of the COVID-19 virus and its economic damage on small businesses.

394 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 3
At the June 20, 2022, City Council meeting, the City Council approved the full restoration of the DBIA fees to existing levels and indicated support for the DSMA’s request to bring forth a proposal to modify the basis and method of the DBIA fees in the fall. Thus, the DSMA re-engaged with NBS to update the study and engage in businesses outreach and is now ready to return to the City Council with a proposed rate schedule that would distribute the fees more equitably among the businesses in the Downtown.

Proposed Assessment Changes
For the last twelve years, the DSMA has not increased the DBIA assessments despite rapidly rising costs in San Mateo and the surrounding region. For fiscal year 2022-23, DSMA estimated the DBIA assessments to be approximately $150,000, anticipating a revenue reduction due to an economic slowdown. In order to maintain existing services and provide long- term sustainability of the BID, an adjustment is necessary. The new proposed rate was created based on DSMA’s goal of a reaching an annual budget of $400,000. The new rate chart proposed by the DSMA is included as attachment 2 of this report.

The proposed new rate is based on business type, location, size and employee count. •Business Type: Businesses have been categorized into Retail, Professional, Service and Financial based on their North American Industry Classification (NAIC) codes. The hotel and miscellaneous categories have been removed. •Location: The zone of the business is determined by proximity to the Downtown core. Businesses located in Zone 1 pay higher assessments as they tend to see greater benefits from cleanliness, beautification projects, and promotional activities than businesses further from the Downtown. Businesses located in Zone 2 are assessed at 50% of Zone 1. The existing zones and boundaries of the DBIA will remain the same. •Size: For retail businesses, the proposed rate is based on the gross receipts of a business and the existing five tiers have remained the same at $0-$150,000, $150,001-$400-000, $400,001-600,000, $600-001-$1,000,000 and over $1,000,000. For professional and service businesses, the proposed rate is based on the number of employees working for the business. Professional and Service businesses are categorized into five tiers from 0 to 5 employees, 6-15 employees, 16-35 employees, 36-75 employees, and over 75 employees.

Rate Change by Business Type
Retailers are businesses that offer goods and products for sale and include restaurants, bars, grocery stores, furniture stores, clothing and apparel, jewelry, frames and similar. Retail business rates will increase from $166.35 to $200 for businesses with gross revenues of less than $150,000 for zone 1 and from $66.35 to $100 for zone 2. The rate increases for each tier based on gross revenue and caps at $1,500 for retailers with over a $1,000,000 in revenues for zone 1 and $750 for zone 2.

Professional businesses are primarily second floor users that offer highly specialized services such as software development, software integration, cloud storage, gaming, medical, legal, accounting, architectural, engineering services and similar. These businesses will see the most significant fee increase. Professional businesses located in Zone 1 will change from a flat rate of $99.82 to a starting rate of $550 for up to 5 employees and rising to $3,050 for up to 75 employees. For businesses with over 75 employees, the business will be charged an additional $14 per employee on top of the $3,050 annual assessment. Professional businesses located in Zone 2 will change from a flat rate of $66.55 to $275 for up to 5 employees and rising to $1,525 for up to 75 employees. For businesses with over 75 employees, the business will be charged an additional $7 per employee on top of the $1,525 annual assessment.

Service businesses provide personal services like hair salons, nail salons, massage services, dry cleaners, auto bodies, gyms vacuum repair shops and similar. Service businesses located in zone 1 will change from a flat rate of $133.08 to a starting rate of $400 for up to 5 employees and rising to $2,300 for up to 75 employees. For service businesses with over 75 employees, the business will be charged an additional $10 per employee on top of the $2,300 annual assessment. Service businesses located in zone 2 businesses will change from a flat rate of $66.55 to $200 for up to 5 employees and rising to $1,150 for up to 75 employees. For businesses with over 75 employees, businesses will be charged an additional $5 per

395 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 3
employee on top of the $1,150 annual assessment.

Financial businesses providers include money management firms, payment systems, digital banking and brick and mortar banks. Financial businesses will continue to be assessed at a flat rate. Financial businesses located in zone 1 will change from a $998.15 to $1,500 and from $665.44 to $775 for zone 2.

Mills Health Center is a non-profit hospital located in the Downtown. The hospital does not have to contribute to the assessment but is voluntarily proposing an annual $6,050 contribution to the DSMA to support the fee adjustment effort because the hospital understands the value of a vibrant Downtown and the need for increased sanitation and having a vibrant and clean Downtown for its employees, patients, and visitors to the hospital.

The changes in the proposed assessment structure and fees are intended to share costs more equitably among businesses in the DBIA and provide a sustainable revenue stream to maintain and improve services in the Downtown. While the all volunteer DSMA Board has done an incredible job carrying out the work of the DSMA, the organization cannot continue indefinitely without an executive director. With the revenues provided by the current annual assessment, the organization cannot hire a skilled executive director while maintaining its current level of services and programs. Thus, the DSMA is requesting the Council to support the modification of the DBIA fee and the proposed fee schedule.

Business Outreach
The DSMA contracted with CivicMic for outreach and engagement on the fee proposal. The outreach portion focused on connecting with business owners in the Downtown Business Improvement Area and informing them about DSMA‘s desire for input on the services currently provided and the proposed fee change. CivicMic mailed postcards with information about the DSMA in Spanish and Chinese, and held an online meeting on March 30, 2022. A survey launch followed these outreach efforts to provide another mechanism for business owners to provide feedback. The DSMA also conducted an in - person meeting on September 22, 2022, where representatives from 10 businesses in the Downtown attended. The results from the outreach indicate that the business stakeholders are generally aware of the services being provided by DSMA and recognized these services as important to the success of their businesses. Maintaining the cleanliness of the area is the most important service identified by business owners, while beautification and the promotion of public events are also valued. Additionally, there was a range of support for the fee change. While many business owners supported restructuring of the fee to make it more equitable to all businesses, there were also businesses who felt indifferent to the fee change. Staff have not received protest as of this report.

Projected Annual Revenue
Under the existing assessment schedule, DBIA revenues averaged approximately $180,000 for the last 10 years before the pandemic. To support small businesses through the pandemic, the DSMA reduced its fees by 50% in fiscal year 2020-21 and again in fiscal year 2021-22. Thus, for the last two years the assessment was approximately $92,000. Under the proposed new structure, annual assessment is projected to range between $360,000 to $400,000.

In year one, the additional funds would support:
•Hiring of a full-time executive director
•Enhanced and additional cleaning services across the district •Expanded marketing to promote downtown and businesses
•New event programming to attract new and returning patrons and enhance the Downtown experience If approved, the new assessment is anticipated to start on July 1, 2023. This will allow businesses time to plan for the new rates and provide a longer recovery time for businesses who are still struggling financially. Additionally, it allows time for the City to implement the new rates internally through our Business License Tax system.

Approval Process
Before the City Council may act on DSMA’s request to modify the DBIA assessment schedule, the request must be considered at two Council meetings. At the first meeting on October 17, 2022, the City Council is asked to adopt the Resolution of Intent to modify the basis and method of the assessments for the DBIA, included as attachment 1 to this

396 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
2 3
report. If the Council decides to move forward, a public hearing will be held on November 7, 2022 on the proposed modification to the DBIA assessment structure and to amend the existing ordinance to change the basis of the fee structure and to accommodate the proposed fees.

Should the Council adopt the Resolution of Intent and set the public hearing, each business in the DBIA will receive a second letter regarding the hearing at least 10 days prior to the meeting. Additionally, a newspaper notice will be published once at least 7 days before the public hearing. Protests received from businesses paying 50% or more of the total proposed assessment will result in the termination of these proceedings and no further proceedings to modify the basis or method of the levy will be taken.

BUDGET IMPACT:

Modification to the basis and method of levy of the annual DBIA assessment does not have an impact on the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This resolution is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met. The DSMA sent a notice to all businesses in the DBIA informing them about the public hearing with a copy of the proposed assessment rates.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Proposed Resolution of Intent
Att 2 - NBS Fee Modification Study
Att 3 - Public Comments

STAFF CONTACT
Jennifer Chen, Economic Development Manager
[email protected]
(650) 522-7009

397 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. ____ (2022)

RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO MODIFY THE BASIS AND METHOD OF LEVY FOR

THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA (DBIA)
WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1979 (California Street and Highway Code Section 36500 et seq.) authorizes cities to establish new parking business improvement districts for the purpose of imposing assessments on businesses for certain purposes and to modify the boundaries, assessments and activities in the district; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1986-12 (Ordinance) establishing the Downtown Business Improvement Area (DBIA); and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1996-13 amending the DBIA to change the number of benefit zones from three to two; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 2008-7 expanding the DBIA boundary and amending the ordinance Nos. 1986-12 and 1996-13
WHEREAS, the City Council supports a strong, economically sustainable and vibrant Downtown with enhanced cleaning services, public space programming for special events, and beautification programs; and WHEREAS, the Downtown businesses value enhanced cleaning services, special community events to promote Downtown businesses and enhance Downtown’s image; and WHEREAS, the DBIA fees have not been increased in twelve years despite rising costs in San Mateo and the surrounding region; and
WHEREAS, the new assessment schedule fees were created to more equitably distribute costs among the businesses in the DBIA to assist with creating and maintaining a vibrant Downtown core.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:

1. The City Council is considering whether to amend the Ordinance to modify the basis and method of the DBIA assessment for Fiscal Year 23-24 as set forth in Exhibit A attached to this resolution.

2. A public hearing is hereby scheduled for Monday, November 7, 2022 to discuss the modification of the Ordinance and DBIA assessment schedule. The hearing will be held at City Hall, 330 West 20th Avenue, San Mateo at 7pm. The City Clerk is directed to publish this Resolution and the attached Exhibit A and B in a newspaper of general circulation in the City once before the public hearing. Oral and written protests in compliance with Sections 36524 and 36525 of the Streets and Highways Code may be made at the public hearing.

398 of 676

7 3
6 9
Exhibit A: Proposed Annual Downtown Business Improvement Area (DBIA) Schedule Professional (based on number of employees)
Zone 1 Zone 2
PROPOSED Existing PROPOSED Existing
Up to 5 Employees $550.00 $275.00
6-15 Employees $1,200.00 $600.00
16-35 Employees $2,300.00 $1,150.00
36-75 Employees $3,050.00 $1,525.00
76+ Employees 1, 2 $3,050.00
$98.82
$1,525.00
$66.55
1 - $3,050 + $14.00 per employee over 75 employees for Zone 1 2 - $1,525 + $10.00 per employee over 75 employees for Zone 2 Service (based on number of employees)
Zone 1 Zone 2
PROPOSED Existing PROPOSED Existing
Up to 5 Employees $400.00 $200.00
6-15 Employees $1,150.00 $575.00
16-35 Employees $1,700.00 $850.00
36-75 Employees $2,300.00 $1,150.00
76+ Employees 3, 4 $2,300.00
$133.08
$1,150.00
$66.55
3 - $2,300 + $10.00 per employee over 75 employees for Zone 1 4 - $1,150 + $7.00 per employee over 75 employees for Zone 2 Financial (flat rate)
Zone 1 Zone 2
PROPOSED Existing PROPOSED Existing
Financial (flat rate) $1,500.00 $998.15 $775.00 $665.44 Miscellaneous : Removed Hotels: Removed
Retail: includes but not limited businesses that have goods and food for sale including automotive vehicles and parts dealers, home furnishing stores, jewelers, electronics and appliance stores, building material and garden equipment and supplies dealers, food and beverage stores, full-service restaurants, limited service restaurant, fast food restaurants, cafeterias, dessert and snack establishments, bars, gasoline stations, clothing and clothing accessories, sporting goods, hobby stores, music instruments, book stores, general merchandise store, wireless phone stores and similar Professional: includes but not limited to businesses that offer services that are highly specialized and typically require licensing and regulations. Professional service providers and information-based businesses such as software publishers, data processing, network hosting and related services, internet publishing and broadcasting and web search portals, venture capital, insurance agencies and brokerage, real estate agents and brokers, offices of lawyers, accounting, architectural, engineering advertising, translation and interpretation services, veterinary services, offices of physicians, offices of dentists, and other health practitioners Service: includes but is not limited to providers of personal and business services such as hair salons, nail salons, lock smiths, dry cleaners, auto service and maintenance shops, gyms, vacuum repair shops, educational, childcare, electronic equipment repair, personal care services, and similar Financial: includes but not limited to businesses in the financial industry such as money management, payments, digital banking, banks, savings and loan companies, credit unions, and finance companies
Retail (based on annual gross receipts)
Zone 1 Zone 2
PROPOSED Existing PROPOSED Existing
0- $150,000 $200.00 $166.36 $100.00 $66.55
$150,001- $400,000 $400.00 $332.72 $200.00 $99.82
$400,001- $600,000 $800.00 $665.43 $400.00 $133.10
$600,001- $1,000,000 $1,150.00 $998.15 $575.00 $199.62
$1,000,000+ $1,500.00 $1,330.88 $750.00 $332.72

399 of 676

7 3
6 9
Exhibit B: Map of Downtown San Mateo Business Improvement Area Zone 1 - Shaded parcels
Zone 2 – Parcels outlined in black

400 of 676

32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
Fax: 951.296.1998

nbsgov.com

MEMO
To: Downtown San Mateo Association Board Members
From: Sara Mares/NBS
Date: October 5, 2022
Re: Update to Business Improvement District Research and Analysis from February 2020 Executive Summary
Downtown San Mateo has gone through many changes over the past years, with more changes to come. Community leaders realized it was time to review the level of services provided, budget and method of funding within the Downtown Business Improvement Area (the “DBIA”). In particular, there has been a desire to update the fee structure so that it is more equitable, based on the benefits offered by the services that are provided.

As with many downtowns, there is a shift occurring in retail from goods to experiences, such as shopping to din ing. In the City of San Mateo (the “City”) , there has also been a pronounced increase in office space and foot traffic from those workers and office users. At the same time, there has been a natural increase in the cost of operations (Downtown San Mateo As sociation [the “DSMA”] staff, cleaning, event production) while revenues have remained flat.

Background – Downtown Business Improvement Area
The City established the DBIA in 1986, pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1979 , to levy an annual assessment on businesses within the DBIA in order to provide decorations, promote public events, furnish music, and generally promote business activities within the DBIA . The DSMA is the advisory board appointed by the City Council of the City (the “Council”) to make recommendations to the Council on the expenditure of revenues derived from the levy of assessments, on the classification of businesses, and on the method and basis of levying the assessments.

The Parking and Business Impro vement Area Law of 1979 was repealed and replaced with the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (the “PBIA Law”), and, as such, the DBIA is currently subject to Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the PBIA Law, covering (1) Assessments, (2) Modifications to Boundaries, Assessments, Improvements, or Activities, and (3) Disestablishment, respectively. Pursuant to the PBIA Law, the City must renew the DBIA each year More recently, the DSMA has focused on beautification and cleanliness , public outreach, promotion of the DBIA, and events. The City collects the annual assessment —on behalf of the DSMA—from each business within the DBIA as part of the annual business license tax, which provides the majority of the revenue needed to pay for these services and activities. Efforts to

401 of 676

⚫ Page 2

review the funding have been ongoing. Please refer to Appendix C for a copy of the initial memorandum prepared in analyzing the funding options.

Rate Analysis
In order for the DSMA to generate desired revenue of $ 400,000, NBS recommends the following rates for each of the following categories in Zone 1 and Zone 2, based on the discussions with the DSMA and our understanding of the area:

Based on information provided by the City, the following table shows the number of businesses within each basic category:

The business type categories are described in more detail below:

Business Type Total
Financial 11
Mills Health Center 1
Professional 176
Retail 166
Service 128
Total 482

402 of 676

⚫ Page 3

Financial: includes but not limited to businesses in the financial industry such as money management, payments, digital banking, banks, savings and loan companies, credit unions, and finance companies
Mills Health Center: Voluntarily contribution – specifically the business identified Professional: includes but not limited to businesses that offer services that are highly specialized and typically require licensing and regulations. Professional service providers and information-based businesses such as software publishers, data processing, network hosting and related services, internet publishing and broadcasting and web search portals, venture capital, insurance agencies and brokerage, real estate agents and brokers, offices of lawyers, accounting, architectural, engineering advertising, translation and interpretation services, veterinary services, offices of physicians, offices of dentists, and other health practitioners Retail: includes but not limited businesses that have goods and food for sale including automotive vehicles and parts dealers, home furnishing stores, jewelers, electronics and appliance stores, building material and garden equipment and supplies dealers, food and beverage stores, full-service restaurants, limited service restaurant, fast food restaurants, cafeterias, dessert and snack establishments, bars, gasoline stations, clothing and clothing accessories, sporting goods, hobby stores, music instruments, book stores, general merchandise store, wireless phone stores and similar
Service: includes but is not limited to providers of personal and business services such as hair salons, nail salons, lock smiths, dry cleaners, auto service and maintenance shops, gyms, vacuum repair shops, educational, childcare, electronic equipment repair, personal care services, and similar
Please refer to Appendix A to see the factors assigned to each Business Type in each Zone.

Please refer to Appendix B to see how each Business License Description was categorized.

Conclusion
As discussed within this memo, the business landscape in the Downtown San Mateo area has changed since the original DBIA was formulated. There has been a pronounced increase in office space and foot traffic from those workers and office users. Meanwhile, there has been a natural increase in the cost of operations while revenues have remained flat. Due to the DSMA’s desire to provide increased services and improved equity among the payors for those services, there is a need for increased revenue.

403 of 676

Appendix A
Downtown San Mateo Association
Downtown Business Improvement Area
Proposed Assessment Rates for FY 2023/24 Assuming a Budget of $400,000, Zone 2 Factor of 50% Retail: $0 - $150,000 1.00 $166.36 1.00 $200.00 20.22% Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 2.00 332.72 2.00 400.00 20.22% Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 4.00 665.43 4.00 800.00 20.22% Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 6.00 998.15 6.00 1,150.00 15.21% Retail: $1,000,001 + 8.00 1,330.88 8.00 1,500.00 12.71% Professional 1 0.60 99.82 - - n/a Miscellaneous 2 0.60 99.82 - - n/a Service 1 0.80 133.08 - - n/a Hotel 3 1.60 266.18 - - n/a Financial 6.00 998.15 6.00 1,550.00 55.29% Mills Health Center 4 - - 24.00 n/a Professional: Up to 5 Employees 1 - 99.82 2.00 550.00 450.99% Professional: 6-15 Employees 1 - 99.82 4.75 1,200.00 1102.16% Professional: 16-35 Employees 1 - 99.82 9.00 2,300.00 2204.15% Professional: 36-75 Employees 1 99.82 12.00 3,050.00 2955.50% Professional: 76+ Employees 1 5 99.82 12.00 3,050.00 2955.50% Service: Up to 5 Employees 1 - 133.08 1.50 400.00 200.57% Service: 6-15 Employees 1 - 133.08 4.50 1,150.00 764.14% Service: 16-35 Employees 1 - 133.08 6.75 1,700.00 1177.43% Service: 36-75 Employees 1 133.08 9.00 2,300.00 1628.28% Service: 76+ Employees 1 6 133.08 9.00 2,300.00 1628.28% 3 - Only one business in the DBIA is classified as Hotel ; however, it is not actually a hotel, it is a rooming house.

In the future, NBS recommends that the Hotel category be consolidated into one of the Service categories. 4 - Assigned 24 times the Benefit Factor assigned to Retail: $1,000,001 + . 5 - Base rate of $3,050, plus $14.00 per employee over 75 employees. 6 - Base rate of $2,300, plus $10.00 per employee over 75 employees. 1 - The Professional and Service categories are proposed to be broken-up into five new categories, with tiers based on employee counts. For purposes of this analysis, assumptions were made regarding employee counts at existing businesses within the DBIA (using the listing of business licenses provided by the City of San Mateo), as such information is not available from the City of San Mateo. 2 - NBS proposes to eliminate the Miscellaneous category and reassign existing businesses with that designation into one of the Professional or Service categories.

Rate @ $400k
Annual %
Change
Zone 1
Current Structure Revised Structure
FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24
Business Type
Benefit
Factor Rate
Benefit
Factor

404 of 676

Appendix A
Downtown San Mateo Association
Downtown Business Improvement Area
Proposed Assessment Rates for FY 2023/24 Assuming a Budget of $400,000, Zone 2 Factor of 50% Retail: $0 - $150,000 0.40 $66.55 0.50 $100.00 50.26% Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 0.60 99.82 1.00 200.00 100.36% Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 0.80 133.10 2.00 400.00 200.53% Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 1.20 199.62 3.00 575.00 188.05% Retail: $1,000,001 + 2.00 332.72 4.00 750.00 125.41% Professional 1 0.40 66.55 - - n/a Miscellaneous 2 0.40 66.55 - - n/a Service 1 0.40 66.55 - - n/a Hotel 3 0.40 66.55 - - n/a Financial 4.00 665.44 3.00 775.00 16.46% Professional: Up to 5 Employees 1 - 66.55 1.00 275.00 313.22% Professional: 6-15 Employees 1 - 66.55 2.40 600.00 801.58% Professional: 16-35 Employees 1 - 66.55 4.50 1,150.00 1628.02% Professional: 36-75 Employees 1 66.55 6.00 1,525.00 2191.51% Professional: 76+ Employees 1 5 66.55 6.00 1,525.00 2191.51% Service: Up to 5 Employees 1 - 66.55 0.75 200.00 200.53% Service: 6-15 Employees 1 - 66.55 2.25 575.00 764.01% Service: 16-35 Employees 1 - 66.55 3.38 850.00 1177.24% Service: 36-75 Employees 1 66.55 4.50 1,150.00 1628.02% Service: 76+ Employees 1 6 66.55 4.50 1,150.00 1628.02% 3 - Only one business in the DBIA is classified as Hotel ; however, it is not actually a hotel, it is a rooming house.

Accordingly, NBS recommends that the Hotel category be consolidated into one of the Service categories. 4 - The Benefit Factor for all business types in Zone 2 have been modified to be 50% (Zone 2 Factor) of the Benefit Factor for corresponding busniess types in Zone 1. The Zone 2 Factor is not consistently applied under the current rate structure.
5 - Base rate of $1,525, plus $7.00 per employee over 75 employees. 6 - Base rate of $1,150, plus $5.00 per employee over 75 employees. 1 - Professional and Service categories are proposed to be broken-up into five new categories, with tiers based on employee counts. For purposes of this analysis, assumptions were made regarding employee counts at the existing businesses within the DBIA (using the listing of business licenses provided by the City of San Mateo), as such information is not available from the City of San Mateo. 2 - NBS proposes to eliminate the Miscellaneous category and reassign existing businesses with that designation into one of the Professional or Service categories.

Rate @ $400k
Annual %
Change
Zone 2
Current Structure Revised Structure
FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24
Business Type
Benefit
Factor Rate
Benefit
Factor 4

405 of 676

FINANCIAL
BANK

BANKING

COMMERCIAL BANK

FINANCIAL SVCS

SECURITIES BROKER

SECURITY BROKER

PROFESSIONAL
3D VISUALIZATION TRAINING

ACCOUNTING

ACCOUNTING SERVICES

ACCOUNTING, TAX SERVICES

ACUPUNCTURE

ACUPUNCTURE SERVICES

ACUPUNCTURIST

ARCHITECTURE

ASSET MANAGEMENT

ATTORNEY

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

BUILDING SCANNING AND BUILDING DATA HOSTING

BUSINESS CONSULTANTRECORDS STORAGE

CHIROPRACTIC

CHIROPRACTOR

CLINICAL LAB

CLOUD BASED INFASTRUCTURE FOR REAL TIME MESSAGING/MOBILE APP

COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND SERVICES

CONSULTANT

CONSULTING

COUNSELING SERVICES

COWORKING SPACE

CPA FIRM

DATA PROCESSING PLATFORM

DATABASE DEVELP

DENTAL OFFICE

DENTAL PRACTICE

DENTIST

DERMATOLOGY PRACTICE

DESIGN STRATEGY
Dispensing Optician

DOCTORS OFFICE

ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTS FOR SAILBOATS AND PADDLEBOARDS
ESCROW

EXECUTIVE SUITES BUSINESS

EXPORT AND IMPORT OFFICE

FINANCIAL SRVCS

GAME SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

GENERAL DENTAL PRACTICE

HOTEL MGT

INCOME TAX INSURANCE AND REGISTRATION SERVICE

INSURANCE

INSURANCE SALES

INSURANCE/FIN

INTERNET APPLICATIONS AND DIGITAL MEDIA

INTERNET CLOUD PLATFORM SERVICE

INVESTMENT ADVICE

KIDNEY DIALYSIS SERVICE

LAW FIRM

LAW OFFICE

LAW OFFICES

LAW PRACTICE

MANAGEMENT CONSULTING

MARKETING CONSULTING

MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPHY

MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPIST

MARRIAGE FAMILY THERAPY

MEDICAL

MEDICAL CLINIC

MEDICAL DOCTOR

APPENDIX B

406 of 676

PROFESSIONAL

MEDICAL OFFICE

MEDICAL PRACTICE

MEDICAL PSYCHIATRY GROUP PRACTICE

MEDICAL SERVICE

MEDICAL SERVICES

MENTAL HEALTH SV

MENTAL HEALTH/COUNSELING SERVICES

MERCHANT ACQUIRING

MOBILE GAME DEVELOPMENT

MOBILE/INTERNET APP DEVELOPMENT

MORTGAGE BROKER

ONLINE DATA BACKUP

ONLINE SOFTWARE SUBSCRIPTIONS DIY VIDEO

OPHTHALMOLOGY

OPTICAL STORE

OPTOMETRIST PRACTICE

OPTOMETRY OFFICE

PEDIATRIC URGENT CARE

PHYSICIAN

PODIATRY

PRIVATE OPERATING FOUNDATION

PROFESSIONAL SVC

PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSULTING

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

PROPERTY MGMT

PROSTHETIC AND ORTHOTIC SERVICES

PSYCHIATRIST

PSYCHOTHERAPIST AT BUILDING SOLUTIONS COUNSELING CENTER PSYCHOTHERAPIST: ELIZABETH ALVAREZ

PSYCHOTHERAPY

PSYCHOTHERAPY PRACTICE

PSYCHOTHERAPY SERVICES

PUBLIC ADVOCATE AND EDUCATION FOR CA FACIAL PLASTIC SURGERY

PUBLIC RELATIONS SERVICES

REAL ESTATE

REAL ESTATE BRKR

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

REAL ESTATE MGMT

RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY

RECRUITING COMPANY

RECRUITING SERVICES

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

RETAIL EYEWEAR

SALE OF INSURANCE

SALES OF SECURITY CAMERAS/SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

SALES-SATELLITE

SOFTWARE

SOFTWARE DEVELOPER

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT VIDEO GAMES

SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION FOR AG WATER AND ENERGY SECTOR

SOFTWARE PLATFORM FOR MODERN CLOUD APPLICATIONS

SOFTWARE PUBLICATION

SOFTWARE SERVICES
SOFTWARE SERVICES @SPACES

SPEECH THERAPY

TAX AND ACCOUNTING SERVICES

TAX PREPARATION

TAX SERVICES

VENTURE CAPITAL

VENTURE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT

VETERINARY SVCS
Wealth Managaement

WEBSITE CREATION

APPENDIX B

407 of 676

RETAIL

BAKERY (PASTERIES COOKIES)

BAKERY CAFE

BAKERY/CAFE
BAR

BEAUTY SUPPLIES

BEER WINE COCKTAIL BAR

BICYCLE RETAIL SERVICE REPAIRS

BICYCLE SHOP

BOBA MILK TEA

BOBA TEA CAFE

BUBBLE TEA JUICE BAR AND SMOOTHIES

CAFE SERVING BOBA TEA AND FRUIT TEA

CAKE DECOR/SALES

CELL PHONE ACCESSORIES

CHINESE RESTAURANT

COFFEE HOUSE

COFFEE SHOP

CONVENIENCE MARKET

CONVENIENCE STORE

CUPCAKERY
DELI

DESSERT RESTAURANT

DRINK AND SNACK STORE

DRINKING PLACE

DRUGSTORE

E COMMERCE DELIVERING AWESOME GIFTS FOR MEN

EXQUISITE TEA AND DESSERT

FAST CASUAL DINING AND TAKE OUT RESTAURANT

FAST FOOD

FAST FOOD RESTAURANT

FLORIST GIFTS

FOOD AND BEVERAGES

FOOD SERVICE

FOOD TO GO

FOOD TRUCK BURRITOS TACOS QUESADILLAS

FULL SERVICE JAPANESE RESTAURANT

FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT

FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT - DINING, CATERING

FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT AND DESSERT

FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT

GROCERY

HARDWARE - RETAIL

HAWAIIAN CAFE

JAPANESE RESTAURANT

JUICE AND ICE CREAM SHOP

LEATHER PRODUCTS

LIQUOR/GROCERY

MEAT MARKET

MEDITERRANEAN RESTAURANT

MEXICAN RESTAURANT

MISC RETAIL STORE

MOVIE THEATRE

NOODLE BAR

NOODLE SHOP

NOTARY, SHIPPING, PRINTING, MAILBOX RENTAL
OFFICE

ORTHOPEDIC SALES

PAINT/SUNDRIES
PIZZA

PIZZA PARLOR

PIZZA RESTAURANT

PIZZA SHOP

PIZZA/PASTA/BAR

PRODUCE MARKET

QUICK SERVICE CASUAL JAPANESE RESTAURANT

RESTAURANT

RESTAURANT, OFFER QUICK NOODLES SERVICE

RESTAURANT/BAR

RETAIL - CAFE

RETAIL - DONUTS

RETAIL CLOTHING

APPENDIX B

408 of 676

RETAIL

RETAIL COOKING SUPPLY STORE AND COOKING SCHOOL

RETAIL DANCEWEAR

RETAIL FLOORING SALES

RETAIL FOOD

RETAIL FRAMING

RETAIL FURNITURE

RETAIL HOME FURNISHINGS

RETAIL JEWELRY

RETAIL PLASTICS

RETAIL RESTAURANT

RETAIL SALE OF MARTIAL ARTS EQUIPMENT & INSTRUCTION

RETAIL SALES

RETAIL SALES OF GAS

RETAIL SALES OF WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS

RETAIL SHOES

RETAIL SKATEBOARD STORE

RETAIL SPECIALTY FOODS

RETAIL TOBACCO & NOVELTY PRODUCTS

RETAIL-FOOD SALE

SALE OF BICYCLES INCLUDING E-BIKES AND CYCLING EQUIPMENT SALES

SALES RETAILS OF GROCERIES AND MARKET PRODUCTS

SEA FOOD TO GO

SELLING CRAFTED TEA DRINKS

SMOKE SHOP

SOFT SERVE & TAIYAKI

SPORTS CLOTHES AND PHONES

SUSHI BAR RESTAURANT

TAKE OUT FOOD

TAQUERIA

TASTING ROOM AND RETAIL SALES
TECHNOLOGY STORE, SERVICE REPAIR AND SALES OF IPHONES LAPTOPS.

THAI FOOD RESTAURANT

VACUUM & SEWING SALES

WOMANS CLOTHING STORE

SERVICE
181 2ND AVE PARKING (SAN MATEO)

APPLIANCE REPAIR

AUTO BODY REPAIR

AUTO CARE

AUTO LUBE/OIL

AUTO REPAIR
Auto Repair and Tire Sales

AWARD PRODUCTS

BARBER SHOP

BEAUTY RETAIL STORE

BEAUTY SALON

BEAUTY SHOP

BOXING AND FITNESS

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT / SKIN CARE PRODUCT SALES

CENTERED SPANISH LEARNING

CHILDREN'S GYMNASTICS

CLEANERS

CLEANING SERVICES

CORPORATE PARKING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE

COSMETIC AND PARAMEDICAL TATTOO, PERMANENT MAKEUP

COURSES AND BOARDING

DRY CLEANER

DRY CLEANING

DRY CLEANING AND ALTERATIONS
ELECTRONIC REPAIR (CELL PHONES, TABLETS, COMPUTERS) AND SOME RETAIL.

ENTREPRENEURIAL CENTER PROVIDES TOOLS TO START-UPS

ESTHETICS SERVICES AND EYELASH EXTENSIONS

APPENDIX B

409 of 676

SERVICE

FITNESS CLUB

FITNESS STUDIO

FURNITURE/ACCESS

GAS STATION
GEN. CONTRACTOR

HAIR AND NAIL

HAIR AND NAILS

HAIR MAKEUP WAXING SALON

HAIR NAILS AND FACIALS

HAIR SALON
HAIR SALON - 6 STATIONS
HAIR STYLIST - IC @MAISON SALON

HAIR, NAIL, & FACIAL SALON

HAIRCUTTING

HAIRSTYLIST

HEALTH AND WELLNESS, PERSONAL TRAINING, GROUP CLASS

HEALTH/FITNESS

HOLISTIC HEALTH SPA

HOME CARE AGENCY (ADMIN OFFICE ONLY)

HYPNOTHERAPY
IC@BOREL HAIR CARE

INTERIOR DESIGN

IRON WORKS

LAUNDROMAT

LOCKSMITH

MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO

MASSAGE

MATH ACADEMIC TUTORING

MEETINGS AND BIBLE STUDY
METER COLLECTION (312 S ELLSWORTH AVE)
MONEY TRANSFER AND MONEY ORDER SERVICES AS WELL AS PUBLIC NOTARY AND REAL ESTATE AGENT SERVICES.

MULTIMEDIA PRODUCTION

MUSIC INSTRUCTION

NAIL AND HAIR SALON

NAIL SALON

NUTRITION CONSULTANT
ON LINE EDUCATIONAL WORKBOOKS, WORKSHEETS, ACTIVITIES AND GAMES FOR PREK -5TH GRADE PERMANENT MAKEUP. BEAUTY TATTOO

PERSONAL TRAINING

PHOTOCOPIES

PILATES FITNESS STUDIO

PILATES STUDIO

POSTAL BUSINESS

ROOFING AND SHEET METAL

ROOMING HOUSE

SAMPLES AND INFORMATION

SCALE SALES/SVC

SERVICE AND PRODUCT SALES

SERVICE STATION

SHIPPING, NOTARY PUBLIC, FINGERPRINTING, ETC SERVICES

SHOE REPAIR

SKIN AND BODY TREATMENT

SKIN CARE

SKIN CARE & BODY TREATMENT

SKIN CARE AND FACIAL BUSINESS

SMOG CHECK AND AUTO REPAIR SHOP

SOCIAL CLUB

SPA- COSMETOLOGY- ESTHETICIAN- MASSAGE

STAINED GLASS

SUPPLIMENTAL EDUCATION

TAILOR SHOP

TATTOO SHOP
TATTOOING. THE SPACE WILL BE USED FOR PRIVATE TATTOO SESSIONS

TEACHING POSTURE

TOWING YARD

TRANSLATION
TRAVEL

TRAVEL AGENCY

TUTORING AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
WE ARE A HEALTH AND WELLNESS COMPANY PROVIDING NUTRITIONAL AND WEIGHT LOSS SERVICES TO CITIZENS.

YOGA INSTRUCTOR AND SALES

YOGA STUDIO

APPENDIX B

410 of 676

32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
Fax: 951.296.1998
nbsgov.com
MEMO
To: Downtown San Mateo Association Board Members
From: Tim Seufert and Nick Dayhoff/NBS
Date: February20, 2020
Re: Business Improvement District Research and Analysis Executive Summary
Downtown San Mateo has gone through many changes over the past years, with more changes to come. Community leaders realized it was time to review the level of services provided, budget and method of funding within the Downtown Business Improvement Area (the “DBIA”). In particular, there has been a desire to update the fee structure so that it is more equitable, based on the benefits offered by the services that are provided.

As with many downtowns, there is a shift occurring in retail from goods to experiences, such as shopping to dining. In the City of San Mateo (the “City”) , there has also been a pronounced increase in office space and foot traffic from those workers and office users. At the same time, there has been a natural increase in the cost of operations (Downtown San Mateo Association [the “DSMA”] staff, cleaning, event production) while revenues have remained flat.

Therefore, this memo provides some background and comparative information, and briefly summarizes the proposed changes to the method of assessing the fees, with a focus on equity and fairness.

As further detailed in this memo, in order for the DSMA to generate desired revenue of $350,000, NBS recommends the following rates for each of the following categories in Zone 1 and Zone 2, based on the discussions with the DSMA and our understanding of the area:

Business Type
Current
Rate
Proposed
Rate Business Type
Current
Rate
Proposed
Rate
Retail: $0 - $150,000 $166.36 $182.72 Retail: $0 - $150,000 $66.55 $91.36 Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 332.72 365.44 Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 99.82 182.72 Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 665.43 730.88 Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 133.10 365.44 Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 998.15 1,096.32 Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 199.62 548.16 Retail: $1,000,001 + 1,330.88 1,461.76 Retail: $1,000,001 + 332.72 730.88 Financial 998.15 1,096.32 Financial 665.44 548.16
Mills Health Center - 4,385.28 Mills Health Center - n/a Professional: Up to 5 Employees - 365.44 Professional: Up to 5 Employees - 182.72 Professional: 6-15 Employees - 1,096.32 Professional: 6-15 Employees - 548.16 Professional: 16-35 Employees - 1,644.48 Professional: 16-35 Employees - 822.24 Professional: 36-75 Employees - 2,192.64 Professional: 36-75 Employees - 1,096.32 Professional: 76 + Employees
1 - 2,192.64 Professional: 76 + Employees
3 - 1,096.32
Service: Up to 5 Employees - 274.08 Service: Up to 5 Employees - 137.04 Service: 6-15 Employees - 822.24 Service: 6-15 Employees - 411.12 Service: 16-35 Employees - 1,233.36 Service: 16-35 Employees - 616.68 Service: 36-75 Employees - 1,644.48 Service: 36-75 Employees - 822.24 Service: 76 + Employees
2 - 1,644.48 Service: 76 + Employees
4 - 822.24
1 - plus $9.79 per employee over 75 employees. 3 - plus $4.89 per employee over 75 employees. 2 - plus $7.34 per employee over 75 employees. 4 - plus $3.67 per employee over 75 employees.

Zone 2Zone 1

APPENDIX C

411 of 676

 Page 2
Background – Downtown Business Improvement Area
The City established the DBIA in 1986, pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1979 , to levy an annual assessment on businesses within the DBIA in order to provide decorations, promote public events, furnish music, and generally promote business activities within the DBIA . The DSMA is the advisory board appointed by the City Council of the City (the “Council”) to make recommendations to the Council on the expenditure of revenues derived from the levy of assessments, on the classification of businesses, and on the method and basis of levying the assessments.

The Parking and Business Improvem ent Area Law of 1979 was repealed and replaced with the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (the “PBIA Law”), and, as such, the DBIA is currently subject to Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the PBIA Law, covering(1) Assessments,(2)Modifications to Boundaries, Assessments, Improvements, or Activities, and(3)Disestablishment, respectively.Pursuant to the PBIA Law,the City must renew the DBIAeach year
More recently, the DSMA has focused on beautification and cleanliness , public o utreach, promotion of the DBIA, and events. The City collects the annual assessment —on behalf of the DSMA—from each business within the DBIA as part of the annual business license tax, which provides the majority of the revenue needed to pay for these services and activities.

In advance of the next renewal proceedings, the DSMA Board is exploring the possibility of modifying the current assessment structure, which has been in place since 2009. As part of this process, the DSMA Board commissioned NBS to research methods that other Business Improvement Districts (“BIDs”) use to assess businesses, and to provide some guidance and options for amending the DSMA’s current method of assessment . This memorandu m serves to address these issues, among others.

Existing DBIA Assessment
All businesses within the DBIA , excluding non -profits, are currently subject to the levy of the annual assessment, based upon the location of the business, type of business, as well as gross sales if the business is classified as Retail.

There are two Zones within the DBIA. Zone 1 is the core of the City’s downtown area, and businesses within this zone receive the most benefit and impact from the DSMA’s services and activities, and as such pay a higher assessment than those businesses in Zone 2. Zone 2 is further out from the City’s downtown area, and businesses within this Zone receive less benefit from the DSMA’s services and activities, and as such pay a lower assessment than thosebusinesses in Zone

1. 412 of 676

 Page 3
Business are classified into six different types, for assessment purposes:
 Retail
 Financial
 Hotel
 Professional
 Service
 Miscellaneous
Existing assessments for each type of business are as follows:

TABLE 1 – EXISTING ASSESSMENT RATES
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Zone 1
Rate
Zone 2
Rate
Retail
$0 - $150,000 $166.36 $66.55
$150,001 - $400,000 332.72 99.82
$400,001 - $600,000 665.43 133.10
$600,001 – $1,000,000 998.15 199.62
$1,000,001 + 1,330.88 332.72
Professional 99.82 66.55
Miscellaneous 99.82 66.55
Service 133.08 66.55
Hotel 266.18 66.55
Financial 998.15 665.44
Potential Legal Risks of an Assessment Rate Increase
Legal challenges against new or increased assessments are not uncommon, and in fact, legal threats against new or increased assessments are fairly common. If an assessment is likely to be challenged, a city may consider “impounding” the assessment proceeds until the challenge has ended. Cities do this because once proceeds are paid to the association and expended on services, those proceeds will not be available for refunds or satisfaction of judgments.

Associations generally do not like impounding, since it prevents payment for services if funding is held-up by the city.

Legal challenges against assessments, it seems, are almost strictly limited to those assessments subject to Proposition 218, which requires a much more stringent analysis separating and quantifying special and general benefit prior to levying an assessment , as only special benefit may be assessed. The ‘good’ news is that, in 1999, the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that BIDs created by cities under thePBIA Law are not subject to the requirements of Proposition 218, and the court concluded that assessments levied pursuant to the PBIA Law do not constitute an "assessment" within the meaning of Proposition 218.

As a result of the adoption by the voters in 2010 of Proposition 26, a n assessment against businesses requires two -thirds voter approval as a special tax unless it meets one of severa l enumerated exceptions.

413 of 676

 Page 4
The exceptions most relevant in the context of BIDs are for:
 A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege.
 A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product.

Under Proposition 26, the local government bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs ofthe activity, and that the manner in which those costs are allo cated to a payor bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the payor's burdens on, or benefits received from, the activity.

The common BID seems to qualify for an exemption to Proposition 26, although that doesn’t guarantee a BID assessment will not be challenged. Note that agroup called San Diegans for Open Government has unsuccessfully challenged the validity of the City of San Diego’s BIDS on more than one occasion.

Therefore, t he most likely potential legal risk of a modification to the current assessment structure – or even the existing structure – is a successful majority protest at the annual public hearing on the re-authorization of the DBIA. If there is a successful majority protest against the proposed structural changes and assessments, the DSMA must wait for one year before attempting to renew the DBIA. For this reason, it is important that the DSMA reach out to business owners within the DBIA to keep them informed of any proposed structural changes or increases to assessments prior to the public hearing . Such outreach and h aving the largest assessees on board throughout the process helps to mitigate the risk of a successful majority protest.

Assessment Equity/Comparing the Existing DBIA Assessment with other Regional BIDs
As part of this project, NBS examined several other BIDs in the region and throughout the State of California to study what factors are used to levy their assessments and how they create equity in the assessment distribution among different categories of businesses. Appendix A details various characteristics of each of these examined BIDs, including: name of the BID, number of businesses within the BID, annual revenue, annual budget, services/activities, number of zones, assessment methodology, treatment of non-profit businesses, treatment of hospitals (if any), and treatment of businesses on the second floor or higher of buildings.

Most of the examined BIDs have categories similar tothose in the DBIA, specifically some version of retail, service, professional, and financial categories; however, there is some variation in regard to how th e assessment is determined. The examined BIDs provide many different examples of just this:

414 of 676

 Page 5
 the Park Street BIDassesses a rate per $1,000 ofgross receiptsfor retail businesses, while the other categories pay a flat rate;
 the Downtown Palo Alto BID uses theranges of employees as the basis of assessment for retail/restaurants, service, and professional businesses, the number of rooms for lodging businesses, and a flat rate for financial businesses;
 the Downtown Santa Cruz BID uses a rate per square foot of floor area for all types of businesses;
 Novato’s Downtown BID uses the ranges of employees as the basis of assessment, but only for retail/restaurant businesses. All other types of businesses are assessed flat fees of varying amounts;
 Petaluma’s Downtown BID uses the number of employees;  both of Santa Barbara’s BIDs use some percentage of the regular business license fee for most types of businesses as the basis for their assessment;  the Downtown Long Beach PBIA applies a base fee per business, plus a fee per employee;  the East Anaheim St reet PBIA uses flat rates for most categories, and the others pay a flat fee plus a per employee fee;
 the Downtown Santa Ana BID uses some percentage of the regular business license fee for all businesses types; and,
 the Huntington Beach Downtown BID uses ranges of square feet of floor area for retail/restaurant and service/office businesses , uses the number of rooms for hotel businesses, and utilizes a flat rate for other business types.

Through this research, it seems that the most common ways in which these other BIDs create equity in assessment distribution is by using gross sales figures, employee counts, square footage of businesses, flat fees per category, or some combination of these variables. Any of these methodologies seem reasonable as it relates to apportioning the DBIA assessment. It all comes down to whether or not such data is available for analysis.

415 of 676

 Page 6
In order to see how the DBIA’s assessments compare to a few other BIDs in the region i n terms of revenues generated and equity of assessments between categories, NBS focused -in on the Park Street BID, the Downtown Palo Alto BID, the Downtown Santa Cruz BID, and Novato’s Downtown BID. The following table shows some key points:

TABLE 2 – REGIONAL BID COMPARISON
BID
Number of
Businesses
BID
Revenue 1
Professional
to Base Retail
Ratio
Service to
Base Retail
Ratio
DBIA 525+ ~$190,000 60% 80%
Park Street BID 2 470+ ~122,000 51% 51%
Downtown Palo Alto BID 800+ ~112,500 27% 76%
Downtown Santa Cruz BID 3 650+ ~250,000 40% 40%
Novato’s Downtown BID 380+ ~55,500 83% 100%
1 –Only includes revenue from the BID assessment. Does not include revenue from grants or fundraising.
2 – Has both Retail Service (minimum of $172) and Retail Goods (minimum of $336) categories and are assessed $0.40 per $1,000 of gross sales in Area A. 3 – All business types are assessed $0.41 per square foot of floor area.

Refer to Appendix A for further details on the various assessment rates among the examined BIDs.

Ground Floor vs. Second Floor/Non-Profits
Like the DBIA, m ost of the examined BIDs treat businesses on the ground floor the same as businesses on upper floors. However, a few treat businesses that are not on the ground floor differently.

For example, in theDowntown Palo Alto Business Improvement District second floor (and higher) businesses located within Zone A are assessed the same as similar street-level businesses within Zone B. Depending on the type of business and the number of employees , the assessment to businesses on the upper floors of a buildingamounts to anywhere between 17% to 25% less than businesses on the ground floor.

The Huntington Beach Downtown Business Improvement D istrict has different rate s for Service/Office businesses that are not on the ground floor. Depending on the zone and square footage of the business, the assessment to these types of businesses on the upper floors of a building amounts to anywhere between 57% less to 150% more than businesses on the ground floor.

As it relates to considering potentia l structural changes to the DBIA assessment, NBS recommends assessing businesses on the second floor or higher the same as similar business types on the ground floor. In our opinion, there’s really no reason to assessthese businesses any differently because the people who work at businesses still have to use the sidewalks and benefit from the DSMA’s cleaning program , and the business still benefits from the DSMA’s marketing and outreach activities . In addition, b usinesses on the second floor are more likely to be

416 of 676

 Page 7
professional offices or similar (not retail based businesses) and would likely already be assessed at a different rate than retail-based businesses on the ground floorthat rely more-heavily on foot traffic at the sidewalk level.

Similarly to the DBIA, most of the examined BIDs specifically exempt non-profit businesses from paying an assessment. The exceptions being the Downtown Santa Cruz Business Improvement District and the East Anaheim Street PBIA in the City of Long Beach, with the latter only assessing a base fee of $100 to non -profit businesses. The Huntington Beach Downtown Business Improvement District, which doesn’t assess non -profit businesses on their regular schedule of assessments, does allow non-profit businesses to participate by paying $30. As it seems it is not too common to assess BID fees to non -profit businesses, NBS recommends that any modified structure continue to exempt non-profit businesses. The only exception here being if the DSMA desires to assess the Mills Medical Center, which lies within the boundaries of Zone 1 within the DBIA, but is currently not assessed . This medical center is the largest employer in the City and has a large footprint in the downtown area, and should likely be assessed.

Potential Revenue Generated from a Change in Assessment Fees and Potential Structural Changes to the DBIA Assessment
The potential revenue generated in any given year should generally be a function of the DSMA’s proposed budget in any given year. The DSMA should begin with a proposed budget for the upcoming year and assessments should then be apportioned to each business, based upon such annual budget. Assessments rates should ideally be re -evaluated each year or every few years depending on changes to both annual budget and the number and types of business within the DBIA. This is absolutely necessary due the uncertainty of economic conditions from year-to-year and how such conditions will affect the number and types of businesses that may exist within the DBIA in any given year.

As previously detailed, there are several ways in which other BIDs apportion assessments to businesses: some use a rate per $1,000 of gross receipts, some use a rate per floor area, some use employee counts, etc. Since none of these factors are available from the City, as they relate to the DBIA, NBS must work within the confines of the existing rate structure. This isn’t exactly ideal for purposes of analyzing potential new assessment structures, butit may actually be more favorable from a business owners’ perspective, as working within the existing rate structure at least provides acertain level of familiarity. It’s also worth noting that many of the other examined BIDs use business categories similar to those of the DSMA.

That being said, NBS does recommend some modifications to the existin g structure, as well as increasing the existing assessment rates, as the DSMA has expressed its desire to increase annual BID revenue to $350,000 , in order to hire an executive director, expand existing services and activities, and create value for the downtown area . Achieving this level of revenue under the current rate structure is simply not possible, as the DSMA anticipates only $190,000 in assessment revenue in FY2019/20, per the DSMA’s annual reportfor FY 2018/19.This represents a desired revenue increase of approximately 84.2% from current levels.

417 of 676

 Page 8
To start, NBS has analyzed the current listing of active businesses within the DBIA, as provided by the City. The count of each business type within each of the two Zones are shown in the following table:

TABLE 3 – COUNT OF EACH BUSINESS TYPE
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Zone 1
Count
Zone 2
Count
Total
Count
Retail
$0 - $150,000 31 8 39
$150,001 - $400,000 39 9 48
$400,001 - $600,000 14 3 17
$600,001 – $1,000,000 21 4 25
$1,000,001 + 50 12 62
Professional 146 21 167
Miscellaneous 22 9 31
Service 85 38 123
Hotel 0 1 1
Financial 11 1 12
TOTALS 419 106 525
Table 3 shows that there is only one business in the DBIA classified as Hotel. However, after researching the listing of business licenses provided by the City, it was discovered that this business is not actually a hotel in the traditional sense – it is actually a rooming house. As this is the only business classified in this mann er, NBS recommends that the Hotel category be consolidated with the Service category.

NBS also recommends that businesses in the Miscellaneous category be reassigned to either the Service or Professional category, and the Miscellaneous category be eliminated.

Regarding the Service category, the DSMA desires to break-up this classification into five tiers using ranges of employee counts: Up to 5 Employees, 6-15 employees, 16-35 employees, 36-75 employees, and 76+ employees . DSMA also would like to break -up the Professional category in the same manner.As employee count data is not available from the City, an estimate of the employee count range was made for each business classified aseitherServiceor Professional.

In addition, the DSMA wishes to assess the Mills Health Center, as it is the largest employer in the City . Although this medical complex is not currently assessed under the current rate structure, as it is a non -profit entity, the DSMA feels that it does benefit from the services and activities provided. Since it is such a large complex and a top employer, NBS suggests assessing the Mills Health Center 24 times more than businesses in the Retail $0 - $150,000 category.

Since we’re constrained to working mostly under the existing rate structure, in order to propose any modifications, we must f irst examine such structure by analyzing how the various rates for each category relate to the Zone 1 rate for Retail $0 - $150,000 (the “Base Assessment Rate”) businesses.

418 of 676

 Page 9
TABLE 4 – EXISTING RELATIVE RATE STRUCTURE
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Zone 1
Rate
Zone 1
Benefit
Factor 1
Zone 2
Rate
Zone 2
Benefit
Factor 1
Retail
$0 - $150,000 $166.36 1.00x $66.55 0.40x
$150,001 - $400,000 332.72 2.00x 99.82 0.60x
$400,001 - $600,000 665.43 4.00x 133.10 0.80x
$600,001 – $1,000,000 998.15 6.00x 199.62 1.20x
$1,000,001 + 1,330.88 8.00x 332.72 2.00x
Professional 99.82 0.60x 66.55 0.40x
Miscellaneous 99.82 0.60x 66.55 0.40x
Service 133.08 0.80x 66.55 0.40x
Hotel 266.18 1.60x 66.55 0.40x
Financial 998.15 6.00x 665.44 4.00x
1 – Relative to the Base Assessment Rate.

From Table 4, we can see how the current rates are structured. In Zone 1, businesses classified as Retail $150,001 - $400,000 are assessed two times the Base Assessment Rate , businesses classified as Retail $400,001 - $600,000 are assessed four times the Base Assessment Rate, etc.

The same follows in Zone 2: businesses classified as Retail $0 - $150,000 are assessed 0.40 times the Base Assessment Rate, businesses classified as Retail $150,001 - $400,000 are assessed 0.60 times the Base Assessment Rate, etc.

NBS recommends that the Retail benefit factors in Zone 1 be kept intact.

Next, we need to examine how the rates for each business type in Zone 2 relate to the corresponding business type in Zone 1:

TABLE 5 – EXISTING ZONE 2 FACTORS
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Zone 1
Rate
Zone 2
Rate
Zone 2
Zone
Factor 1
Retail
$0 - $150,000 $166.36 $66.55 0.40x
$150,001 - $400,000 332.72 99.82 0.30x
$400,001 - $600,000 665.43 133.10 0.20x
$600,001 – $1,000,000 998.15 199.62 0.20x
$1,000,001 + 1,330.88 332.72 0.25x
Professional 99.82 66.55 0.67x
Miscellaneous 99.82 66.55 0.67x
Service 133.08 66.55 0.50x
Hotel 266.18 66.55 0.25x
Financial 998.15 665.44 0.67x
1 – Relative to the corresponding business type in Zone 1.

419 of 676

 Page 10
From Table 5, we can see how the current rates for each business type in Zone 2 relate to the corresponding business types in Zone 1: businesses classified as Retail $0, - $150,000 in Zone 2 are assessed 0.40 times the corresponding rate in Zone 1, businesses classified as Retail $150,001 - $400,000 are assessed 0.30 times the corresponding rate in Zone 1 , etc. Curiously, this table shows that there are currently six different Zone 2 “Zone Factors”. In our experience in working with various assessment districts throughout the State, best practice dictates that a Zone Factor should be consistently applied among all categories or business types within a specific zone of benefit. E.g., if it is determined that businesses in one zone receive half of the benefit of another zone, a Zone Factor of 50% should be applied evenly among all business types within the zone benefitting less, relative to the same business types in the zone benefitting more. In the DBIA’s case, the average of the various existing Zone 2 Zone Factors is 0.40, or 40% the benefit of businesses in Zone 1. After discussing with the DSMA, we will apply a 0.50 Zone 2 Zone Factor in our proposed structural modifications and consistently apply this number across all business types in Zone 2, relative to the same business types in Zone 1.

After making the recommended modifications to the Service and Professional categories, eliminating the Hotel and Miscellaneous categories, adding a new category for the Mills Health Center, and consistently applying the 0.50 Zone 2 Zone Factor to all business types in Zone 2 relative to corresponding businesses in Zone 1, results in the following revisedbenefit factors for the DBIA:

TABLE 6 – PROPOSED RELATIVE RATE STRUCTURE
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Zone 1
Benefit
Factor
Zone 2
Benefit
Factor 1
Retail
$0 - $150,000 1.00x 0.50x
$150,001 - $400,000 2.00x 1.00x
$400,001 - $600,000 4.00x 2.00x
$600,001 – $1,000,000 6.00x 3.00x
$1,000,001 + 8.00x 4.00x
Financial 6.00x 3.00x
Mills Health Center 24.00x n/a
Professional:Up to 5 Employees 2.00x 1.00x
Professional: 6-15 Employees 6.00x 3.00x
Professional: 16-35 Employees 9.00x 4.50x
Professional: 36-75 Employees 12.00x 6.00x
Professional: 76 +Employees 12.00x 6.00x
Service:Up to 5 Employees 1.50x 0.75x
Service: 6-15 Employees 4.50x 2.25x
Service:16-35 Employees 6.75x 3.38x
Service:36-75 Employees 9.00x 4.50x
Service:76 +Employees 9.00x 4.50x
1 –50% of the benefit factor for the same business type in Zone 1.

420 of 676

 Page 11
In order to develop rates based on these new benefit factors, the benefit factors shown in Table 6 were applied to each of the businesses within the DBIA, mostly pursuant to the business types from the listing provided by the City (Hotel and Miscellaneous were reassigned, and a handful of businesses were reassigned to a more appropriate category). The total benefit factors within the DBIA is shown in the following table:

TABLE 7 – TOTAL BENEFIT FACTOR WITHIN THE DBIA
Type Annual Gross Receipts
Total
Benefit
Factor
Retail
$0 - $150,000 35.00
$150,001 - $400,000 87.00
$400,001 - $600,000 62.00
$600,001 – $1,000,000 132.00
$1,000,001 + 448.00
Financial 69.00
MillsHealth Center 24.00
Professional:Up to 5 Employees 193.00
Professional: 6-15 Employees 354.00
Professional: 16-35 Employees 99.00
Professional: 36-75 Employees 96.00
Professional: 76 +Employees 36.00
Service:Up to 5 Employees 116.25
Service: 6-15 Employees 123.75
Service:16-35 Employees 40.50
Service:36-75 Employees 0.00
Service:76 +Employees 0.00
TOTAL 1,915.50
Using the total benefit factor of 1,886.63 allows us to come up with a rate per 1.00 benefit factor, depending upon the DSMA’s desired annual budget. For this example, we’ll use the DSMA’s anticipated revenue for FY 2019/20:

TABLE 8 – RATE PER 1.00 BENEFIT FACTOR (19/20 REVENUE ESTIMATES) Total DBIA Benefit Factor 1,915.50
DSMA Budget $190,000.00
Rate per 1.00 Benefit Factor $99.19
This shows that the New Base Assessment Rate would need to be $99.19 to achieve a budget of $190,000, which is approximately 40.4% lower to the existing Base Assessment Rate of $166.36.

In order to meet the DSMA’s desired goal of a $350,000 annual budget, the New Base Assessment Rate would need to be $182.72, or about 9.8% higher than the existing structure:

421 of 676

 Page 12
TABLE 9 – RATE PER 1.00 BENEFIT FACTOR (PROPOSED)
Total DBIA Benefit Factor 1,915.50
DSMA Budget $350,000.00
Rate per 1.00 Benefit Factor $182.72
Appendix B shows the detailed schedule ofrecommended rates for each business type, assuming a FY 2020/21 budget $350,000, and a Zone 2 Zone Factor of 0.50.

Appendix C compares the average assessment for each general category of business under the existing structure with the average assessment for each general category of business under the proposed structure.

If other data points were available from the City, specifically gross sales, accurate employee counts, and/or gross floor area of each business, we could provide different options for a revised rate structure. Because we do not have such data, we are mostly constrained to working within the limitations of the existing model.

Conclusion
As discussed within this memo, the business landscape in the Downtown San Mateo area has changed a lot since the original DBIA was formulated. There has been a pronounced increase in office space and foot traffic from those workers and office users. Meanwhile, there has been a natural increase in the cost of operationswhile revenues have remained flat. Due to the DSMA’s desire to provide increased services and improved equity among the payors for those services, there is a need for increased revenue. Therefore, it’s important for the DSMA to re-evaluate its method of assessment for the DBIA. NBS believes that the rate modifications proposed within this memo will help put the DSMA on a sustainable path in terms of having a reliable source of annual revenue and creating assessment equity among the various categories.

422 of 676

Downtown Alameda Business
Association (Park Street
Business Improvement Area)
470+ • $122,000 from BIA Assessment
• $206,000 from other sources $328,000 see map
Special Events
Clean, Green and Safe Program
Promotions Program
Member outreach
Administration
2 Palo Alto Downtown Business
and Professional Association
(Downtown Palo Alto
Buisness Improvement
District)
800+ • $112,500 from BID Assessment
• $21,000 from other sources $133,500 see map
Banners
Summer Concert Series
Special Events
Downtown Street Team
Member outreach
Administration
2 Downtown Association of
Santa Cruz (Downtown Santa
Cruz Business Improvement
District)
650+ • $250,000 from BID Assessment
• $279,584 from other sources $526,084 n/a
Marketing
Special Events
Member outreach
Administration
2 Downtown Novato Business
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
380+
• $55,500 from BID Assessment
• $55,500 from City (dollar for dollar assmt match)
• $92,940 from other sources
$268,400 see map
Marketing
Special Events
Member outreach
Administration
2 Petaluma Downtown
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
175+ $65,000 $65,000 see map
Beautification
Marketing
Security
Administration
3 Downtown Organization of
Santa Barbara (Downtown
Business Improvement
District / Old Town Business
Improvemetn District)
1,480+ • $263,000 from BID Assessment
• $375,580 from other sources $637,270 see map
Marketing/Communications/Advertising
Outreach and Involvement
Administration
2 Downtown Long Beach PBIA 1,800+ $633,000 $633,000 see map Community Advocacy
Marketing and Communications
Economic Development
1 East Anaheim Street PBIA 425+ • $142,255 from BID Assessment • $100 from other sources $142,355 see map
Cleanliness
Event Support
Member and Area Marketing & Promotion
Member Representation & Communication
1 Downtown Santa Ana
Business Improvement
District
600+ $200,000 $200,000 see map
Decorations
Events
Promotion of Business Activities
1 Huntington Beach Downtown
Business Improvement
District
260 • $120,000 from BIA Assessment
• $588,000 from other sources $708,000 see map
Marketing
Special Events
Safety
Maintenance and Beautification
Administration
2 BID
Name # of Businesses Annual Reven ue Annual Budget Size Activities Number of Zones

423 of 676

BID
Name
Business Mix / Assessment
Methodology
Downtown Alameda Business
Association (Park Street
Business Improvement Area)
Financial/Utilities: Areas A & B: $1,136
Palo Alto Downtown Business
and Professional Association
(Downtown Palo Alto
Buisness Improvement
District)
Financial Institutions: Zones A & B: $500
Downtown Association of
Santa Cruz (Downtown Santa
Cruz Business Improvement
District)
$0.41/square foot
Retail & Food: Type 1 - 100%
Financial, Bars, and Theaters: Type 2 - 60%
Wholesale Trade, Services and Professions, Auto Dealers: Type 3 - 40% Zone Factors: Zone 1 - 100%; Zone 2 - 60%
Assessment = Business SqFt x $0.41 x Type% x Zone% + $50 Downtown Novato Business
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
Financial Institutions: Zones A & B: $525
Lodging (Bed & Breakfast): Zones A & B: $158
Lodging (Hotels and Motels): Zones A & B: $263
Petaluma Downtown
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
Based on Zone, type of business, number of employees
Downtown Organization of
Santa Barbara (Downtown
Business Improvement
District / Old Town Business
Improvemetn District)
Old Town BID
Businesses located on State Street: equal to 100% of business license (minimum of $100) Businesses not located on State Street: equal to 75% of business license (minimum of $100) Automobile Sales and Service Businesses: $600 max
Other Businesses: Wholesale. Professional, Real Estate: $100 Dowtown BID
Professionals: equal to 15% of business license (minimum of $50) All others: equal to 100% of business license
Downtown Long Beach PBIA
Independent Contractors: Base fee of $317.23 + $5.36 per employee All Other Businesses: Base fee of $461.92 + $7.76 per employee East Anaheim Street PBIA
Non-Profit: Base fee of $100
Commercial / Industrial Space Rental: Base fee of $120
Contractors, Insurance Companies, Manufacturing, Misc Mobile, Professionals, Services, Vending & Wholesale: Base fee of $200 + $15 per employee Financial Institutions, Recreation / Entertainment, Retail & Unique Business: Base fee of $300 + $15 per employee Downtown Santa Ana
Business Improvement
District

1.5 times the annual business license tax for the following businesses:

Amusement Services, Pawnbrokers, Service Stations, Retail Sales, Hotels, Motels, Theaters, Food Establishments

0.25 times annual business license tax for the following businesses:

Commercial Rental Property, Rental Property, Residential and Rooming House 1 times the annual business license tax for all other businesses Huntington Beach Downtown
Business Improvement
District
Non-Retail: Area A - $172
Area B - $110
Retail Service: Area A - $0.40/$1,000 Gross Receipts (min: $172; max: $2,259) Area B - $0.20/$1,000 Gross Receipts (min: $110; max: $1,136) Retail Goods: Area A - $0.40/$1,000 Gross Receipts (min: $336; max: $2,259; +surcharge of $4,495 if business exceeds 30k sqft) Area B - $0.20/$1,000 Gross Receipts (min: $172; max: $1,136) Retailers and Restaurants: Zone A: $225 (under 6 FTE); $340 (6-10 FTE); $450 (11+ FTE) Zone B: $170 (under 6 FTE); $260 (6-10 FTE); $340 (11+ FTE) Service Businesses: Zone A: $170 (under 4 FTE); $260 (4-6 FTE); $340 (7+ FTE) Zone B: $130 (under 4 FTE); $200 (4-6 FTE); $260 (7+ FTE) Professional Businesses: Zone A: $60 (0.26-1 FTE); $110 (2-4 FTE); $170 (5-9 FTE); $225 (10+ FTE) Zone B: $50 (0.26-1 FTE); $90 (2-4 FTE); $130 (5-9 FTE); $170 (10+ FTE) Lodging Businesses: Zone A: $225 (up to 20 rooms); $340 (21-40 rooms); $450 (41+ rooms) Zone B: $170 (up to 20 rooms); $260 (21-40 rooms); $340 (41+ rooms) Retailers/Restaurants: Zone A: $158 (1-3 employees); $263 (4-6 employees); $368 (7+ employees) Zone B: $79 (1-3 employees); $131 (4-6 employees); $184 (7+ employees) Service Businesses: Zone A: $158
Zone B: $79
Professional Businesses: Zone A: $131
Zone B: $65
Retail / Restaurants: Zone 1 - $351 (<= 1ksqft); $702 (1,001sqft-2,500sqft); $1,053 (2,501sqft-4,999sqft); $1,404 (5k+sqft) Zone 2 - $200 (<= 1ksqft); $400 (1,001sqft-2,500sqft); $600 (2,501sqft-4,999sqft); $800 (5k+sqft) Hotels: Zone 1 - $468 (<= 20 rooms); $936 (21-50 rooms); $1,404 (50+ rooms) Zone 2 - $400 (<= 20 rooms); $800 (21-50 rooms); $1,200 (50+ rooms) Services / Offices: Zone 1 - $281 (First Floor); $120 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, <=1ksqft); $150 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 1,001sqft-2,500sqft); $300 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 2,501sqft-4,999sqft); $700 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 5k+sqft) Zone 2 - $160 (First Floor); $90 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, <=1ksqft); $120 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 1,001sqft-2,500sqft); $150 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 2,501sqft-4,999sqft); $350 (Basment or 2nd Floor+, 5k+sqft) Cart / Kiosk: Zone 1 - $100
Zone 2 - $80
Banks / ATM: Zone 1 - $600
Zone 2 - $400
Seasonal: Zone 1 - $500
Zone 2 - $300

424 of676

BID
Name Non-Profit Hospital 2nd Floor
Downtown Alameda Business
Association (Park Street
Business Improvement Area)
No - only businesses
selling things are assessed
"Health/Medical
Professions" listed as a
Non-Retail use
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Palo Alto Downtown Business
and Professional Association
(Downtown Palo Alto
Buisness Improvement
District)
No - specifically exempt
"Doctors" listed as
Professional Business
use
Second floor (and higher)
businesses located within Zone A
are assessed the same as similar
street-level businesses within
Zone B
Downtown Association of
Santa Cruz (Downtown Santa
Cruz Business Improvement
District)
Yes
Yes - lots of medical
professions + Kaiser
Medical Office -
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Downtown Novato Business
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
Not clear if non-profits are
assessed
Yes - lots of medical
professions
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Petaluma Downtown
Association (Downtown
Business Improvement
District)
No - specifically exempt Some Medical/Dental
uses
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Downtown Organization of
Santa Barbara (Downtown
Business Improvement
District / Old Town Business
Improvemetn District)
No - specifically exempt Yes - if for profit Businesses treated the same as those on the ground floor
Downtown Long Beach PBIA No Yes - lots of medical
professions
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
East Anaheim Street PBIA Yes - base fee only Yes - lots of medical professions
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Downtown Santa Ana
Business Improvement
District
No Some Medical/Dental
uses
Businesses treated the same as
those on the ground floor
Huntington Beach Downtown
Business Improvement
District
No, but may voluntarily
participate by paying $30
Some Medical/Dental
uses Yes

425 of 676

Appendix B
Downtown San Mateo Association
Downtown Business Improvement Area
Proposed Assessment Rates for FY 2020/21 Assuming a Budget of $350,000, Zone 2 Factor of 50% Retail: $0 - $150,000 1.00 $166.36 1.00 $182.72 9.83%
Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 2.00 332.72 2.00 365.44 9.83% Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 4.00 665.43 4.00 730.88 9.84% Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 6.00 998.15 6.00 1,096.32 9.84% Retail: $1,000,001 + 8.00 1,330.88 8.00 1,461.76 9.83%
Professional 1 0.60 99.82 - - -100.00%
Miscellaneous 2 0.60 99.82 - - -100.00%
Service 1 0.80 133.08 - - -100.00%
Hotel 3 1.60 266.18 - - -100.00%
Financial 6.00 998.15 6.00 1,096.32 9.84%
Mills Health Center 4 - - 24.00 4,385.28 n/a
Professional: Up to 5 Employees 1 - - 2.00 365.44 n/a
Professional: 6-15 Employees 1 - - 6.00 1,096.32 n/a
Professional: 16-35 Employees 1 - - 9.00 1,644.48 n/a
Professional: 36-75 Employees 1 12.00 2,192.64 n/a
Professional: 76 + Employees 1 5 12.00 2,192.64 n/a
Service: Up to 5 Employees 1 - - 1.50 274.08 n/a
Service: 6-15 Employees 1 - - 4.50 822.24 n/a
Service: 16-35 Employees 1 - - 6.75 1,233.36 n/a
Service: 36-75 Employees 1 9.00 1,644.48 n/a
Service: 76 + Employees 1 6 9.00 1,644.48 n/a
Zone 1
Current Structure Revised Structure
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21
Benefit
Factor Rate
Benefit
Factor
1 - The Professional and Service categories are proposed to be broken-up into five new categories, with tiers based on employee counts. For purposes of this analysis, assumptions were made regarding employee counts at existing businesses within the DBIA (using the listing of business licenses provided by the City of San Mateo), as such information is not available from the City of San Mateo.

Rate @
$350k
Annual %
ChangeBusiness Type
3 - Only one business in the DBIA is classified as Hotel ; however, it is not actually a hotel, it is a rooming house. In the future, NBS recommends that the Hotel category be consolidated into one of the Service categories. 4 - Assigned 24 times the Benefit Factor assigned to Retail: $1,000,001 + . 2 - NBS proposes to eliminate the Miscellaneous category and reassign existing businesses with that designation into one of the Professional or Service categories.
5 - Base rate of $2,192.64, plus $9.79 per employee over 75 employees. 6 - Base rate of $1,644.48, plus $7.34 per employee over 75 employees.

426 of 676

Appendix B
Downtown San Mateo Association
Downtown Business Improvement Area
Proposed Assessment Rates for FY 2020/21 Assuming a Budget of $350,000, Zone 2 Factor of 50% Retail: $0 - $150,000 0.40 $66.55 0.50 $91.36 37.28%
Retail: $150,001 - $400,000 0.60 99.82 1.00 182.72 83.05% Retail: $400,001 - $600,000 0.80 133.10 2.00 365.44 174.56% Retail: $600,001 - $1,000,000 1.20 199.62 3.00 548.16 174.60% Retail: $1,000,001 + 2.00 332.72 4.00 730.88 119.67%
Professional 1 0.40 66.55 - - -100.00%
Miscellaneous 2 0.40 66.55 - - -100.00%
Service 1 0.40 66.55 - - -100.00%
Hotel 3 0.40 66.55 - - -100.00%
Financial 4.00 665.44 3.00 548.16 -17.62%
Professional: Up to 5 Employees 1 - - 1.00 182.72 n/a
Professional: 6-15 Employees 1 - - 3.00 548.16 n/a
Professional: 16-35 Employees 1 - - 4.50 822.24 n/a
Professional: 36-75 Employees 1 6.00 1,096.32 n/a
Professional: 76 + Employees 1 5 6.00 1,096.32 n/a
Service: Up to 5 Employees 1 - - 0.75 137.04 n/a
Service: 6-15 Employees 1 - - 2.25 411.12 n/a
Service: 16-35 Employees 1 - - 3.38 616.68 n/a
Service: 36-75 Employees 1 4.50 822.24 n/a
Service: 76 + Employees 1 6 4.50 822.24 n/a
Current Structure
FY 2019/20
Business Type
Benefit
Factor Rate
Zone 2
Annual %
Change
Revised Structure
5 - Base rate of $1,096.32, plus $4.89 per employee over 75 employees. 6 - Base rate of $822.24, plus $3.67 per employee over 75 employees. 2 - NBS proposes to eliminate the Miscellaneous category and reassign existing businesses with that designation into one of the Professional or Service categories.
3 - Only one business in the DBIA is classified as Hotel ; however, it is not actually a hotel, it is a rooming house.

FY 2020/21
Rate @
$350k
Benefit
Factor 4
1 - Professional and Service categories are proposed to be broken-up into five new categories, with tiers based on employee counts. For purposes of this analysis, assumptions were made regarding employee counts at the existing businesses within the DBIA (using the listing of business licenses provided by the City of San Mateo), as such information is not available from the City of San Mateo.

427 of 676

Appendix C
Downtown San Mateo Association
Downtown Business Improvement Area
Comparing Average Assessments Between Current Structure and Proposed Structure Current Structure Revised Structure
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21
Retail - All Tiers $739.98 $825.19
Professional - All Tiers 99.82 795.23
Service - All Tiers 133.08 474.61
Financial 998.15 1,113.10
Mills Health Center - 4,452.40
Current Structure Revised Structure
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21
Retail - All Tiers $183.92 $407.11
Professional - All Tiers 66.55 309.19
Service - All Tiers 66.55 226.93
Financial 665.44 556.55
Average
Assessment @
$350kBusiness Type
Average
Assessment
Zone 2
Zone 1
Business Type
Average
Assessment
Average
Assessment @
$350k

428 of 676

 
429 of 676

 
430 of 676

 
431 of 676

 
432 of 676

 
433 of 676

 
434 of 676

 
435 of 676

 
436 of 676

 
437 of 676

 
438 of 676

 
439 of 676

 
440 of 676

1 Jennifer Chen
From: Patrice Olds
Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2022 9:15 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo); Jennifer Chen
Subject: FW: Proposed BID Rate Schedule for Downtown San Mateo

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Wendy Klein
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2022 11:14 AM
To: Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed BID Rate Schedule for Downtown San Mateo

Dear Patrice:

My name is Wendy Klein and I am the co‐owner of Nandi Yoga ‐ just received the newsletter from the Downtown San Mateo Association that included the proposed rate increases.

In general we are supportive of their mission although we have seen virtually none of the investment here on the fringe of San Mateo ‐ its focus is really on downtown San Mateo.

What we are VERY opposed to is a proposal based on number of employees ‐ we are a business that has a large number of employees each working 1‐2 hours a week ‐ so on an FTE basis we might have 3‐4 employees which would pay $200 a year (3x what we are paying now) ‐ but under their proposal, we would pay $850 a year or more then 12x what we are paying now ‐ that is totally unacceptable to us.

Further, we have been very hard hit by COVID ‐ we have operated for the past 2.5 years at a significant deficit ‐ and are just starting to see people come back. We’ve had to make some tough decisions on cutting costs in order to keep our yoga teachers on staff and are simply not in a position where we can easily cover an increase of these fees now. (By the way, a lot of yoga studios have permanently closed because of COVID so we are grateful we are still in business but it’s been a very tough time).

If the city is going to make the changes to the rates and use employees as the deciding factor, I suggest you either need to put an FTE equivalent in your proposed structure or leave Nandi as a retail business since we sell clothes and yoga props. Further, the “Employee” definition is also not the right definition because there are a large number of companies with 50‐200 people working who are all contractors ‐ so they would pay zero $200 under your proposal as well ‐ there is a lack of fairness in this model.

We did give this feedback to the consultant that DSMA is using as well.

Please let me know if you require additional information or need me to come in for the meeting.

Regards,

Wendy Klein
Co‐Owner, Nandi Yoga

441 of 676

2 650‐343‐9642 (w)

442 of 676

POST-PACKET PUBLIC COMMENTS

THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED

AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE AGENDA PACKET AND
PUBLISHED AT 4PM ON THE DAY OF THE COUNCIL

MEETING

443 of 676

444 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
4 8

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 22 Section Name: PUBLIC HEARING Account Number: 26-3125 File ID: 22-6774 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:
2022 Triennial Building Code Update and Adoption of Dangerous Building Code – Ordinance Introduction RECOMMENDATION:

Introduce an Ordinance to adopt the 2022 Building Standards Code by reference with local amendments; amend various sections of San Mateo Municipal Code Title 23 “Buildings and Construction” to reflect the 2022 Building Standards Code; update procedural language and revise miscellaneous sections; adopt by reference the 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings; and adopt a Resolution to set forth express findings that amendments to the 2022 Building Standards Codes are reasonably necessary based on local climatic, topographical, or geological conditions.

BACKGROUND:
2022 Triennial Building Code Update: The California Building Standards Code (CBSC or State Code) is published in its entirety every three years by order of the California Legislature, with supplements published in intervening years. The State Code includes model Administrative, Building, Residential, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Energy, Historical, Fire, Existing Building, Green Building, and Reference Standards Codes. The 2022 State Code becomes effective statewide on January 1, 2023, as published, unless local jurisdictions adopt more stringent amendments in accordance with State law.

Accordingly, the City amends Title 23 of the Municipal Code, Building and Construction, to incorporate the current version of the State Code by reference. The last local and Triennial State Code Update was in 2019 and took effect on January 1, 2020. For this 2022 Triennial State Code update, the City Council in a separate report, will also review local amendments to the Green Building and Energy Codes, known as the REACH Code. This update under consideration does not contain the additional REACH Code amendments to the model Energy and Green Building Codes.

DISCUSSION:

The Triennial Building Code adoption proposal is like most code adoption years, as this Building Code update is essentially an amendment to reflect the most current version of the model codes, continuation of amendments adopted during previous code adoption cycles, and corrections to specific code sections. During the previous update adopted in 2019, Building Division staff proposed more extensive amendments in addition to adopting the latest version of the model codes. City Council adopted staff’s proposed amendments to accomplish the following:
•Eliminate redundant provisions, i.e. text that essentially tracks the model codes •Correct improper references to the model codes
•Incorporate additional model codes that were not included in previous Building Code updates, either due to staff oversight or because those codes had not been formally adopted by the Building Standards Commission •Incorporate by reference the Fire Code as adopted by the San Mateo Consolidated Fire District The previously adopted revisions needed to meet the 2019 State Code were not particularly burdensome to the building community. The proposed revisions to meet 2022 State Code are also expected to have a minimal impact.

In addition to the required State Codes and amendments, the State also provides Model Codes that are optional and may

445 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
4 8
or may not be adopted by local jurisdictions in the form of Appendices, which are recommended for adoption. A summary of the proposed local amendments to the 2022 State Code and optional Appendices are as follows:

Residential Code Amendment(s):

California Residential Code (CRC) Chapter 6 (Wall Construction) Section R602 Table R602.10.3(3) and Section R602.10.4.5 is amended to provide greater seismic design requirements by disallowing the use of poorly performing plaster, gypsum, and particle board products as bracing methods. This amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during the previous code adoption cycle. This amendment is also consistent with the design limitations for similar shear walls found in Table 2308.6.1 of the 2022 California Building Code.

Residential Code Appendices:

Appendix AH – Patio Covers relaxes certain provisions related to Patio Covers intended for recreational use regarding screening, glazing, light, ventilation, egress, footings, and structural design. This appendix helps streamline and expedite processing of recreational project permits not exceeding 12’ in height.

Appendix AK - Sound Transmissions relates directly to the psychological and long-term physical well-being of building occupants by mitigating the sound transmission from other spaces and between dwelling units. Adopting this appendix aligns the Residential Code with the provisions of the Building Code.

Appendix AX Swimming Pool Safety Act reflects and aligns the Residential Code with the provisions found in CA Health and Safety Code Sections 115920 through 115929 and Building Code section 3109, which itself is further enhanced for safety through compliance with the International Swimming Pool and Spa Code. This appendix provides enhanced safety measures for swimming pools and spas in residential settings.

Building Code Amendments:

California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 15 (Roof Assemblies) Sections 1505.1, 1505.1.3 is amended to provide greater fire resistance of roof coverings (minimum Class “B”) and by disallowing the lower “Class C” roof covering in all construction types. This amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during the previous code adoption cycle.

CBC Chapter 17 (Special Inspections) Section 1705.3 is amended to enhance regional consistency in the application and enforcement of the Building Code regarding the requirement of special inspections for isolated spread footings. This amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during the previous code adoption cycle.

CBC Chapter 19 (Concrete) Section 1905.1.7 is amended to provide greater seismic design requirements by limiting the use of plain concrete in isolated footings. This amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during the previous code adoption cycle.

CBC Chapter 23 (Wood) Section 2308 Table 2308.6.1 is amended to provide greater seismic design requirements by disallowing the use of poorly performing plaster, gypsum, and particle board products as bracing methods. This amendment is a continuation of an amendment adopted during the previous code adoption cycle.

CBC Section 3109 is amended in this cycle to include section 3109 in entirety. This allows enhanced regional consistency in the application and enforcement of the Building Code regarding the construction of swimming pools and spas, requiring compliance with the ISPSC (International Swimming Pool and Spa Code) thereby enhancing safety protection of pool and spa users.

Building Code Appendix:

Appendix G – Flood Resistant Construction, which is needed to ensure local compliance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements concerning construction in flood plains. The City’s Public Works Department is currently working toward completing the North Shoreview Levee and Pump Station Improvement Project, which would raise the City’s levee and remove most properties within the City’s North Shoreview and North Central neighborhoods from the flood plain by 2023. However, the City is required to ensure proper flood protection in the meantime, and for the

446 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
4 8
small number of properties that would remain within a flood zone after the levee is completed. Appendix G requires construction features such as raised floors and drainage vents that would accomplish this.

To adopt local amendments to the 2022 Building Standards Code, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17922, 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7, and 18941.5, the City is required to make express findings that the local amendments are reasonably necessary based on local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. These express findings are located in an Attachment 1 and should be adopted concurrently with the proposed ordinance.

Dangerous Building Code: On June 20, 2022, a study session was held to explore penalties for repeat offenders of the City’s tenant relocation from unsafe buildings ordinance. Part of the resulting direction from City Council was for staff to draft an ordinance to adopt the Dangerous Building Code, “1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings” (DBC).

This code was last published in 1997 and is an invaluable tool to assist in the identification, posting, notification, and appeal process for dangerous buildings. Staff recommends that City Council adopt the DBC in Title 23 Buildings and Construction, as a new Chapter 23.30 “Dangerous Building Code,” i.e., 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.

Based on the above, staff recommends adopting the 2022 California Building Standards Codes by reference with local amendments and appendices, the Dangerous Buildings Code, and adopting a resolution making express findings that amendments to the 2022 Building Standards Codes are reasonably necessary based on local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.

BUDGET IMPACT:

The main budgetary impacts are unsubstantial and relate to staff training and processing of this ordinance.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Introduction of an ordinance adopting by reference the 2022 Building Standard Codes with local amendments and the Dangerous Building Code is not a project subject to CEQA review because is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Proposed Resolution
Att 2 – Proposed Ordinance
Att 3 – Proposed Ordinance (redlined)

STAFF CONTACT
Michael Titsworth, Building Official
[email protected]
(650) 522-7195

447 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. ____ (2022)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH EXPRESS FINDINGS FOR REQUIRED AMENDMENTS TO THE 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE RELATIVE TO LOCAL CLIMATIC, TOPOGRAPHICAL, AND GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS.

WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17985.5 and 18941.S(b) permit the City to make changes or modifications to the requirements contained in the provisions of the 2022 California Building Standards Code and other regulations adopted pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 17922, when it determines, pursuant to the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7, that such modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions; and WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958.7 and 18941.5 require that the City Council, before making any modifications or changes to the 2022 California Building Standards Code pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 17985.5, make express findings that such changes or modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions; and WHEREAS, the Building Division of the San Mateo Community Development Department recommends that the 2022 California Building Standards Code, as set forth in an ordinance adopted concurrently with this resolution, be adopted by the City with certain changes or modifications to (i) the 2022 California Building Code; (ii) the 2022 California Residential Code; and (iii) the 2022 California Plumbing Code, which are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions and to safeguard life and property within the City of San Mateo as set forth as follows.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES that:

1. The changes or modifications to the 2022 California Building Standards Codes, as set forth in Title 23 of the City of San Mateo Municipal Code, and as recommended by the Building Division of the Community Development Department, are found to be reasonably necessary based upon the following local climatic, geologic, or topographic conditions:

A. Climatic Conditions
The City of San Mateo is located in a Mediterranean type climate with warm, dry summers and mild, damp winters. The region is experiencing its fourth consecutive dry year and is considered in an extended severe drought. These severe drought conditions lead to extended fire seasons with high burn intensity and add a significant amount of dry fuel to the heavily wooded hilly areas in the Laurelwood, Sugarloaf, and Baywood neighborhoods. The city is generally shielded from the Pacific Ocean by Montara and Santa Cruz Mountains, but two gaps in the mountains can channel ocean weather, resulting in gusty afternoon winds. These winds, which can cause small fires to spread quickly, are a contributing factor to a higher fire danger in the City.

448 of 676

7 4
2 3
The City of San Mateo being located in a Mediterranean type climate along with the severe drought conditions predisposes all fuels to rapid ignition and spread of fire. Therefore, there exists a need for an increased level of fire protection.

B. Geological Conditions
The City of San Mateo is located in a highly active seismic area. There are two major fault lines in the greater bay area. The San Andreas Fault runs through San Mateo County and the Hayward Fault runs north south in the east bay less than 20 miles away. Experts have predicted both fault lines are severely overdue for a major earthquake affecting the entire Bay Area region and a major earthquake will occur within the next 30 years. Such an event will have a negative impact on response capability and access by emergency responders due to potential damage to buildings, roadways, bridges, pipelines, and other infrastructure. Seismic hazards have the potential to produce substantial structure damage or structural failure, multiple major fires and additional fire dangers, as well as place a severe strain on the availability of police, firefighting and rescue resources. Therefore, this condition creates the need for enhanced structural safety, enhanced fire protection and life safety systems, and other measures that allow for buildings to better withstand damage and provide for better opportunities for self-preservation by building occupants.

C. Topographical Conditions
The City of San Mateo has over 12 square miles of land area which has highly varied terrain including bayfront beaches, creeks, streams, canyons, hillsides, mixed oak woodlands, and floodplains. These varied topographical conditions are contained within an irregular jurisdictional boundary.

Additionally, traffic and congestion presently exist in many areas of the City. The combination of these characteristics can contribute to delays in response times by critical emergency services. This condition will be exacerbated by any major disaster. Therefore, this condition creates the need for enhanced structural safety, enhanced fire protection and life safety systems, and other measures that allow for buildings to better withstand damage and provide for better opportunities for self- preservation by building occupants.

2. The amendments to the technical provisions of the 2022 California Building Standards Code are found reasonably necessary based upon the climatic, geologic, and/or topographic conditions cited in Section 1, above and are listed as follows:

Residential Code Section(s) Local Condition
CRC R602 Table R602.10.3(3) and R602.10.4.5 A, B, C
Building Code Section(s)
CBC 1505.1, 1505.1.3 A, C
CBC 1705.3 A, B, C
CBC 1905.1.7 A, B, C
CBC 2308 Table 2308.6.1 A, B, C
CBC 3109, 3109.1.1, 3109.6 A, B, C
Plumbing Code
CPC 719, 719.7 B, C

449 of 676

7 4
2 3
EXPRESS FINDINGS IN SECTION 1
Additional amendments, modifications and or deletions have been made to the 2022 California Buildings Standards Code. On the recommendation of the Building Division of the Community Development Department, such amendments, deletions, or modifications are hereby found to be either procedural or administrative in nature and therefore are exempt from the express finding requirements of California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958.7 and 18941.5.

3. The Building Division of the Community Development Department shall file copies of this resolution and the associated City Ordinance for Adoption of the 2022 California Building Standards Code with the State Building Standards Commission and the State Department of Housing and Community Development as prescribed in state law.

450 of 676

7 4
2 4

CITY OF SAN MATEO

DRAFT ORDINANCE
An Ordinance Adopting By Reference the 2022 Building Standards Codes with Local Amendments and Amending Chapter 23.06 “Administrative Code,” Chapter 23.07 “Residential Code,” Chapter 23.08 “Building Code,” Chapter 23.09 “Existing Building Code,” Chapter 23.12 “Electrical Code,” Chapter 23.16 “Plumbing Code,” Chapter 23.20 “Mechanical Code,” Chapter 23.36 “Historical Building Code,” and Chapter 23.38 “Referenced Standards Code,” of Title 23 “Buildings and Construction;” Amending Chapter 23.28 “Fire Code;” Amending Chapter 23.50 “Handicapped Access;” and Adopting By Reference the 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings by adding Chapter 23.30 “Dangerous Building Code” to Title 23 “Buildings and Construction” to the San Mateo Municipal Code
WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Codes are published every three years by the California Building Standards Commission; and
WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Commission has published the 2022 California Building Standards Codes by amending Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, effective January 1, 2023; and WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Codes may be adopted by cities by incorporation by reference;
WHEREAS, cities may establish more restrictive building standards than those in the California Building Standards Codes, if certain findings are made pertaining to local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Mateo has concurrently adopted a resolution of local findings supporting modifications to the technical provisions of the California Residential Code, 2022 Edition; California Building Code, 2022 Edition; and California Plumbing Code, 2022 Edition based on local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 23.06.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.06.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Administrative Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 1, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Administrative Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Administrative Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.

451 of 676

7 4
2 4
c. A copy of the Administrative Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 2. Section 23.06.120 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.06.120 Fees
a. General. All permit fees, surcharges, plan checking fees, fees for inspections and reinspections, and all other fees, shall be those established by resolution of the City Council. b. Expiration of Plan Review. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days on written request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken and that extension will not result in violation of this code or any other laws. An application shall not be extended more than two times. An application may be extended at the discretion of the Building Official if this code or any other pertinent laws or ordinances have been amended subsequent to the date of the application. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee, and the plans shall comply with the codes and other pertinent laws or ordinances in effect at the time of resubmittal.
(1) Planning Applications. For applications for which a planning application was approved, a completed building permit application shall be filed before the two-year expiration date of the planning approval; and a building permit shall be issued no later than six months after the expiration date.

Extension for issuance of a building permit may be granted at the discretion of the building official if the applicant demonstrates that the delay in performance was caused by circumstances beyond the control of the applicant and that the applicant has diligently pursued approval of the permit. c. Investigation Fees—Work Without a Permit.
(1) Investigation. Whenever work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit may be issued for such work.
(2) Fee. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The amount of the investigation fee shall be adopted by resolution of the City council. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt an applicant from compliance with all other provisions of either this code or the technical codes nor from the penalty prescribed by law.
d. Fee Refunds. The building official may authorize refunding of a fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected.

The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code.

452 of 676

7 4
2 4
The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit is withdrawn and if no plan review services have been rendered.

The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment.

Section 3. Section 23.07.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.07.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Residential Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2.5 and Appendices AH—Patio Covers, AK—Sound Transmission, and AX—Swimming Pool Safety Act, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Residential Code," are adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Residential Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it. c. A copy of the Residential Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 4. Section 23.07.110 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.07.110 TABLE R602.10.3(3) AND SECTION R602.10.4.5 PROHIBIT THE USE OF GYPSUM BOARD AND LIMIT THE

USE OF PORTLAND CEMENT PLASTER AS PRESCRIPTIVE WALL BRACING MATERIALS IN SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES D0, D1 AND D2 AMENDED.

1. Chapter 6 (Wall Construction) Table R602.10.3(3) (Bracing Requirements Based on Seismic Design Category) is amended as follows:

1.1 The title of Table R602.10.3(3) is amended to read:

TABLE R602.10.3(3)i, j

1.2 Footnotes “i” and “j” are added to Table R602.10.3(3), to read:
i. Methods PBS, HPS, SFB and CS-SFB are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2.
j. Methods GB, DWB and PCP are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2 where S1 is greater than or equal to 0.75.

2. Add a new subsection R602.10.4.5, to read:

453 of 676

7 4
2 4
R602.10.4.5 Limits on methods GB and PCP. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2, Method GB is not permitted for use as intermittent braced wall panels, but gypsum board is permitted to be installed when required by this section to be placed on the opposite side of the studs from other types of braced wall panel sheathing. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2, the use of Method PCP is limited to one-story single-family dwellings and accessory structures.

Section 5. Section 23.08.010 of the San Mato Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.08.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2 and Appendix G—Flood Resistant Construction, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Building Code," are adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
b. No section of the Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it. c. A copy of the Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 6. Section 23.08.120 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.08.120 SECTION 1705.3 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION AMENDED.

Section 1705.3 is amended to read as follows:

Section 1705.3. Concrete construction. The special inspections and verifications for concrete construction shall be as required by this section and Table 1705.3.

Exception: Special inspections shall not be required for:
(1) Isolated spread concrete footings of buildings three stories or less above grade plane that are fully supported on earth or rock, where the structural design of the footing is based on a specified compressive strength, f'c, no greater than 2,500 pound per square inch (psi) (17.2 Mpa) regardless of the compressive strength specified in the construction documents or used in the footing construction.

Section 7. Section 23.08.130 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.08.130 Section 1905.1.7 Plain Concrete In Earthquake Resisting Structures Amended 1905.1.7 ACI 318 Section 14.1.4. Delete ACI 318, Section 14.1.4, and replace with the following:

14.1.4 - Plain concrete in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F.

454 of 676

7 4
2 4

14.1.4.1 - Structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F shall not have elements of structural plain concrete, except as follows:
(a) Isolated footings of plain concrete supporting pedestals or columns are permitted, provided the projection of the footing beyond the face of the supported member does not exceed the footing thickness.
(b) Plain concrete footing supporting walls are permitted, provided the footings have at least two continuous longitudinal reinforcing bars. Bars shall not be smaller than No. 4 and shall have a total area of not less than 0.002 times the gross cross-sectional area of the footing. A minimum of one bar shall be provided at the top and bottom of the footing. Continuity of reinforcement shall be provided at corners and intersections.

Section 8. Section 23.08.140 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.08.140 SECTION 2308 Table 2308.6.1
a. Table 2308.6.1 (Wall Bracing Requirements) of CBC Chapter 23 (Wood) is amended as follows:

1. The title of Table 2308.6.1 is amended to read:

TABLE 2308.6.1a, f, g

2. Footnotes “f” and “g” are added to Table 2308.6.1, to read:
f. Methods PBS, HPS, and SFB are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D or E. g. Methods GB, DWB and PCP are not permitted in Seismic Design Category E.

Section 9. Section 23.08.150 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.08.150 SECTIONS 3109.1 SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES AND SAFETY DEVICES AMENDED.

Section 3109.1 is amended to add subsection 3109.1.1 to read as shown below:

455 of 676

7 4
2 4
Zoning Code, with the exception that the minimum clearance of 4 feet to the property line and 5 feet to surrounding buildings shall still apply.
(c) No portion of a swimming pool may be constructed in any public utility easement or drainage easement or utility right-of-way. There shall be not less than five feet of open space between the inside face of the pool and any structure.
(d) No part of a swimming pool (water area) shall be located or constructed directly under permanently-installed electric power lines. Pools shall be located in such a manner that overhead conductor clearances meet the requirements of the Electrical Code, Chapter 23.12 of the San Mateo Municipal Code. No pool shall be constructed in any location that violates any State law or Public Utility Commission rules for location in relation to electric power lines, service drops and/or communication lines.
(e) Swimming pools located on slopes must comply with setback requirements as prescribed in chapter 23.40 of the Site Development Code.

Section 10. Section 23.09.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.09.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Existing Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 10, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Existing Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
b. No section of the Existing Building Code shall imply a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section or not to enforce it.
c. A copy of the Existing Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 11. Section 23.12.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.12.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Electrical Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 3, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Electrical Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Electrical Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, said section shall be deemed to invest the City, and the appropriate

456 of 676

7 4
2 4
officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
c. A copy of the California Electrical Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 12. Section 23.16.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.16.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Plumbing Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 5, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Plumbing Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Plumbing Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it. c. One copy of the Plumbing Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 13. Section 23.20.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.20.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Mechanical Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 4, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Mechanical Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Mechanical Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, said section shall be deemed to invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof with discretion to enforce the section or not enforce it.
c. A copy of the Mechanical Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 14. Section 23.28.260 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 15. Chapter 23.30 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is added to Title 23 as follows:

Chapter 23.30
Dangerous Building Code

457 of 676

7 4
2 4

23.30.010 Adoption
a. The 1997 Uniform Code For The Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, hereinafter called "Dangerous Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. b. No section of the Dangerous Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
c. A copy of the Dangerous Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.30.020 Title and Scope
Chapter 1 Title and Scope is amended as follows:
a. Section 103 is amended as follows:

All buildings or structures which are to be repaired under the provisions of this code shall be subject to the provisions of the Building Code.

23.30.030 Enforcement
Chapter 2 Enforcement is amended as follows:
a. Section 204 is amended as follows:

All buildings or structures within the scope of this code and all construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official in accordance with and in the manner provided by this code and Sections 110 and 1701 of the Building Code. b. Section 205.1 is amended as follows:

General. Appeals to orders, decisions, or determinations made by the building official relative to the application of this code shall be reviewed by the City Council in accordance with Chapters 5 and 6 of this code. The City Council shall serve as the board of appeals. The hearing shall be informal and shall not require compliance with the formal rules of evidence. At the hearing, the City Council shall hear and consider all relevant evidence in reaching its decision. c. Section 205.2 is not adopted.

23.30.040 Definitions
Chapter 3 Definitions is amended as follows:

458 of 676

7 4
2 4
a. Section 301 is amended as follows:

The term “Building Code” is the California Building Code, promulgated by the International Code Council and as adopted by the City of San Mateo.

The term “Housing Code” is the California Residential Code and the International Property Maintenance Code promulgated by the International Code Council and as adopted by the City of San Mateo.
b. Section 301 is amended to include the following definition:

The term “board of appeals” or “board” shall mean the City Council. c. Section 302.15 is amended as follows:

15. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Director of the Community Development Department, building official or code enforcement manager to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease.

23.30.050 Appeal
Chapter 5 Appeal is amended as follows:
a. Section 501.1 Form of Appeal, first paragraph, is amended as follows:
501.1. Form of Appeal. Any person entitled to service under Section 401.3 may appeal from any notice and order or any action of the building official under this code by submitting a written appeal to the Director of the Community Development Department containing the following requisite information:
b. Section 501.2 Processing of Appeal is amended as follows:
501.2. Processing of Appeal. Upon receipt of any appeal filed pursuant to this Chapter, the Director of the Community Development Department shall as soon as practicable schedule an appeal hearing before the City Council.

23.30.060 Procedures for Conduct of Hearing Appeals
Chapter 6 Procedures for Conduct of Hearing Appeals is amended as follows:
a. Section 601 General is not adopted.

459 of 676

7 4
2 4
b. Section 603 Subpoenas is not adopted.
c. Section 604.2 Oral Evidence is not adopted.
d. Sections 605.2 Hearing Before Examiner; 605.3 Consideration of Report by Board-Notice; 605.4 Exceptions to Report; 605.5 Disposition by the Board; and 605.6 Proposed Decision Not Adopted are not adopted.

23.30.070 Performance of Work of Repair or Demolition
Chapter 8 Performance of Work of Repair or Demolition is amended as follows:
a. Section 801.1 Procedure is amended as follows:

When any work or repair or demolition is to be done pursuant to Section 701.3, Item 3, of this code, the building official shall prepare the work to be accomplished by the City or private contract under the direction of the Director of the Community Development Department. b. Section 801.2 Costs is amended as follows:

The cost of such work done may be made a special assessment against the property involved, or may be a personal obligation of the property owner, or by all other legal means as determined appropriate by the City Council.
c. Section 802 Repair and Demolition Fund is not adopted.

23.30.080 Recovery of Cost of Repair or Demolition
Chapter 9 Recovery of Cost of Repair or Demolition is amended as follows:
a. Section 901 Account of Expense, Filing of Report is amended as follows:

The Director of the Community Development Department shall keep an itemized account of the expense incurred by the City in the repair or demolition of any building done pursuant to the provisions of Section 701.3, Item 3, of this code. Upon the completion of the work of repair or demolition, said director shall prepare and file with the City Council a report specifying the work done, the itemized and total cost of the work, a description of the real property upon which the building or structure is or was located, and the names and addresses of the persons entitled to notice pursuant to Section 401.3.
b. Section 905.2 Personal Obligation is amended as follows:
905.2 Personal Obligation. If the City Council orders that the charge shall be a personal obligation of the property owner, the City Attorney may direct the collection of the charge by use of all appropriate legal remedies.

460 of 676

7 4
2 4
c. Section 912 Repayment of Repair and Demolition Fund is not adopted.

Section 16. Section 23.36.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.36.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Historical Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 8, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Historical Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
b. No section of the Historical Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
c. A copy of the Historical Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 17. Section 23.38.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.38.010 Adoption
a. The 2022 California Referenced Standards Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 12, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Referenced Standards Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
b. No section of the California Referenced Standards Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof.

Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
c. A copy of the California Referenced Standards Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 18. The title of Chapter 23.50 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

Chapter 23.50

ACCESS COMPLIANCE
Section 19. Section 23.50.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

461 of 676

7 4
2 4

23.50.010 ACCESS COMPLIANCE.

The Access Compliance Reference Materials of the state as prepared by the Division of State Architect shall be followed wherever they are applicable.

Section 20. Environmental Determination. This City Council Action is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.(CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
Section 21. Severability. In the event any section, clause or provision of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section, clause or provision shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 22. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published in summary in a newspaper of general circulation, posted in the City Clerk's Office, and posted on the City's website, all in accord with California Government Code section 6066.

Section 23. Legislative History and Effective Date. This ordinance was introduced on Clerk to complete., and adopted on Clerk to complete., and shall be effective on January 1, 2023.

462 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.06

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
Section 1. 23.06.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Administrative Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 1, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Administrative Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Administrative Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Administrative Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.06.011 APPLICATION TO EXISTING BUILDINGS AND BUILDING SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

Repealed.

23.06.012 DEFINITIONS.

Repealed.

23.06.013 CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.

When conflicting provisions or requirements occur between this code, the technical codes and other codes or laws, the most restrictive shall govern.

When conflicts occur between the technical codes, those provisions providing the greater safety to life shall govern. In other conflicts where sanitation, life safety or fire safety are not involved, the most restrictive provisions shall govern.

Where in a specific case, different sections of the technical codes specify different materials, methods of construction or other requirements, the most restrictive shall govern. When there is a conflict between a general requirement and a specific requirement, the specific requirement shall govern.

When conflicts occur between specific provisions of this code and administrative provisions in a technical code which is then applicable within this jurisdiction, those provisions becoming the law most recently shall govern.

463 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.06.014 ALTERNATE MATERIALS, METHODS OF DESIGN AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION.

Repealed.

23.06.015 MODIFICATIONS.

Repealed.

23.06.016 TESTS.

Repealed.

23.06.017 TEMPORARY BUILDING.

Real estate sales and leasing of the building or buildings under construction may be conducted from a temporary structure located on the construction site, subject to the conditions and procedures established in Section 26.04.130 of this code.

23.06.020 AUTHORITY.

Repealed.

23.06.021 POWERS AND DUTIES OF BUILDING OFFICIAL.

Repealed.

23.06.030 UNSAFE BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES OR BUILDING SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

Repealed.

23.06.040 APPEALS.

Repealed.

23.06.050 VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES.

Repealed.

23.06.060 Hours of Work
No work regulated by this code shall be permitted between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, nor prior to 9:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, nor prior to 12:00 noon or after 4:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. These hours do not apply to construction work that takes place inside a completely enclosed building and does not exceed the exterior ambient noise level as measured ten feet from the exterior property lines.

23.06.061 Hours of Work Exemption
(a) Exemptions from the hours of work designated in Section 23.06.060 may be granted:

464 of 676

7 4
1 9
(1) As a condition of approval of a planning application issued pursuant to Title 26 or Title 27; or
(2) Upon written application to the Building Official. The Building Official may approve such application in his or her sole discretion for emergency situations or exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. An application shall contain any information required by the Building Official, including, but not limited to the type of work to be performed, the equipment to be used, the date(s) and time(s) for the proposed hours of work, and the reason(s) therefor.
(b) The approved hours of construction activity shall be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by an interested member of the public. (c) The building official may revoke an exemption at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of the exemption or if it is determined that the peace, comfort and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential or commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction.

23.06.070 PERMITS.

Repealed.

23.06.080 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT.

Repealed.

23.06.090 PERMITS ISSUANCE.

Repealed.

23.06.100 Demolition Permits
(a) Demolition permits may be issued if at least one of the following is applicable:
(1) Demolition has been ordered by the building official because of major structural damage or a condition resulting in imminent or immediate danger to public health or safety; or (2) A building permit or site development permit has been issued authorizing work to be performed which requires the prior removal of an existing structure to accomplish the new construction; or
(3) The City has determined that demolition is necessary in order to perform appropriate soil tests for a proposed project; or

465 of 676

7 4
1 9
(4) Demolition is required by the City as a condition of approval of a planning application under Title 27 or a subdivision under Title 26 of this code, and the application for the demolition permit complies with the time frame set in the condition of approval. (5) The demolition involves a nonresidential structure smaller than 3,000 square feet. (6) The demolition involves an accessory building as defined in Section 27.04.010. (7) The demolition of structures where a master plan or specific plan has been approved for development of the site provided that: (1) the building official receives written confirmation that the demolition is needed to facilitate the timely construction of new structures under the approved master plan; (2) the structures are substantially vacant; (3) there is written documentation from a lending institution that the project (at least in substantial part) is capable of being financed and the applicant is credit worthy.
(b) All demolition permits shall comply with the following conditions:
(1) The site shall be fenced when open holes in the ground exist, if required by the building official because of other hazards or to ensure maintenance of the site. (2) All debris, weeds, and other nuisances shall be removed from the site, and the site shall be leveled unless requirements regarding hazardous wastes make leveling infeasible. If planting is not required and construction does not commence within 30 days after demolition, the soil shall be treated with a weed inhibitor approved by the City. (3) If deemed appropriate, the City may require that the entire site be planted and maintained with a drought tolerant ground cover that will fully cover all exposed soil within six months of planting, or covered to a minimum depth of two inches with crushed rock. (4) That the site be fenced according to code, or if deemed appropriate, the City may require that any driveway curb cuts not used be provided with bollards and chains, located and installed so as to prevent vehicular entry into the site. (5) The applicant shall comply with all other conditions that may be attached by the building official to ensure maintenance of the site, including, but not limited to, vacant lot maintenance requirements contained in Chapter 7.48 of the San Mateo Municipal Code.

23.06.110 INSPECTIONS.

Repealed.

23.06.120 Fees
(a) General. All permit fees, surcharges, plan checking fees, fees for inspections and reinspections, and all other fees, shall be those established by resolution of the City Council.

466 of 676

7 4
1 9
(b) Expiration of Plan Review. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days on written request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken and that extension will not result in violation of this code or any other laws. An application shall not be extended more than two times. An application shall notmay be extended at the discretion of the Building Official if this code or any other pertinent laws or ordinances have been amended subsequent to the date of the application. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee, and the plans shall comply with the codes and other pertinent laws or ordinances in effect at the time of resubmittal. (1) Planning Applications. For applications for which a planning application was approved, a completed building permit application shall be filed before the two-year expiration date of the planning approval; and a building permit shall be issued no later than six months after the expiration date. Extension for issuance of a building permit may be granted by at the discretion of the building official only if the applicant demonstrates that the delay in performance was caused by action or inaction of governmental permitting agencies other than the City of San Mateocircumstances beyond the control of the applicant , and that the applicant has diligently pursued approval of the permit.
(c) Investigation Fees—Work Without a Permit.
(1) Investigation. Whenever work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit may be issued for such work.
(2) Fee. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The amount of the investigation fee shall be adopted by resolution of the City council. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt an applicant from compliance with all other provisions of either this code or the technical codes nor from the penalty prescribed by law.
(d) Fee Refunds. The building official may authorize refunding of a fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected.

The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code.

The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit is withdrawn and if no plan review services have been rendered.

The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment.

467 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.06.130 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS.

Repealed.

23.06.140 STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION.

Repealed.

23.06.150 CONNECTION TO UTILITIES.

Repealed.

23.06.160 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

Repealed.

23.06.170 FIRE AND HEALTH PROTECTION.

Repealed.

468 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.07

RESIDENTIAL CODE

23.07.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Residential Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2.5 and Appendices AH—Patio Covers, AK—Sound Transmissions, and VAX—Swimming Pool Safety Act, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Residential Code," are adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Residential Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Residential Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.07.020 SECTION R319.1 SITE ADDRESS NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.07.030 SECTION R319.2 ADDRESS NUMBERS—MULTI-TENANT BUILDINGS NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.07.040 SECTION R319.3 ADDRESS NUMBERS—REAR ADDRESSING NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.07.060 SECTION R313.1 TOWNHOUSE AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS—EXCEPTION NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.07.070 SECTION R313.2 ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS— EXCEPTION NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.07.080 SECTIONS R902.1, R902.1.1, R902.1.3 ROOFING REQUIREMENTS AMENDED.

Repealed.

469 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.07.110 TABLE R602.10.3(3) AND SECTION R602.10.4.4 5 PROHIBIT THE USE OF GYPSUM BOARD AND

LIMIT THE USE OF PORTLAND CEMENT PLASTER AS PRESCRIPTIVE WALL BRACING MATERIALS IN SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES D0, D1 AND D2 AMENDED.

1. CRC Chapter 6 (Wall Construction) Table R602.10.3(3) (Bracing Requirements Based on Seismic Design Category) is amended as follows:

1.1. The title of Table R602.10.3(3) is amended to read:

TABLE R602.10.3(3)i, j

1.2. Footnotes “i” and “j” are added to Table R602.10.3(3), to read:
i. Methods PBS, HPS, SFB and CS-SFB are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2.
j. Methods GB, DWB and PCP are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2 where S1 is greater than or equal to 0.75.
(a) Add a new footnote "f" to the end of CRC Table R602.10.3(3), to read:
f. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2, Method GB is not permitted and the use of Method PCP is limited to one-story single-family dwellings and accessory structures. (b) Add the "f" footnote notation in the title of Table R602.10.3(3), to read:

TABLE R602.10.3(3)f
(c)2. Add a new subsection R602.10.4.45, to read:

R602.10.4.4 5 Limits on methods GB and PCP. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2, Method GB is not permitted for use as intermittent braced wall panels, but gypsum board is permitted to be installed when required by this section to be placed on the opposite side of the studs from other types of braced wall panel sheathing. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1, and D2, the use of Method PCP is limited to one-story single-family dwellings and accessory structures.

470 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.08

BUILDING CODE

23.08.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2 and Appendix G—Flood Resistant Construction, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Building Code," are adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. (b) No section of the Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.08.020 SECTION 501.2 PREMISES IDENTIFICATION—ADDRESS NUMBERS NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.08.030 SECTION 501.2.1 ADDRESS NUMBERS—MULTI-TENANT BUILDINGS NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.08.040 SECTION 501.2.2 ADDRESS NUMBERS—REAR ADDRESSING NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.08.045 SECTION 903.2 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS—WHERE REQUIRED NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.08.090 SECTION 905.3 STANDPIPE SYSTEMS—REQUIRED INSTALLATION NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.08.100 SECTIONS 1505.1, 1505.1.3 ROOFING REQUIREMENTS AMENDED.

The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this code shall be minimum Class B fire retardant as specified in Table 1505.1 and as classified in Section 1505.

TABLE 1505.1 Minimum Covering Classification for Types of Construction.

471 of 676

7 4
1 9
TABLE 1505.1 MINIMUM ROOF COVERING CLASSIFICATION FOR TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION

IA IB IIA IIB IIIA IIIB IV VA VB

B B B B B B B B B

23.08.120 SECTION 1705.3 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION AMENDED.

Section 1705.3 is amended to read as follows:

Section 1705.3. Concrete construction. The special inspections and verifications for concrete construction shall be as required by this section and Table 1705.3.

23.08.130 Section 1905.1.8 7 Plain Concrete In Earthquake Resisting Structures Amended 1905.1.8 7 ACI 318 Section 14.1.4. Delete ACI 318, Section 14.1.4, and replace with the following:

14.1.4 - Plain concrete in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F.

14.1.4.1 - Structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F shall not have elements of structural plain concrete, except as follows:
(a) Isolated footings of plain concrete supporting pedestals or columns are permitted, provided the projection of the footing beyond the face of the supported member does not exceed the footing thickness. (b) Plain concrete footing supporting walls are permitted, provided the footings have at least two continuous longitudinal reinforcing bars. Bars shall not be smaller than No. 4 and shall have a total area of not less than 0.002 times the gross cross-sectional area of the footing. A minimum of one bar shall be provided at the top and bottom of the footing. Continuity of reinforcement shall be provided at corners and intersections.

23.08.140 SECTION 2308 Table 2308.6.1SECTION 2308.9.3 BRACING REPEALED. a. Table 2308.6.1 (Wall Bracing Requirements) of CBC Chapter 23 (Wood) is amended as follows:

1. The title of Table 2308.6.1 is amended to read:

TABLE 2308.6.1a, f, g

2. Footnotes “f” and “g” are added to Table 2308.6.1, to read:
f. Methods PBS, HPS, and SFB are not permitted in Seismic Design Categories D or E.

472 of 676

7 4
1 9
g. Methods GB, DWB and PCP are not permitted in Seismic Design Category E.

23.08.150 SECTIONS 3109.1 SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES AND SAFETY DEVICES AMENDED.

Section 3109.1 is amended to read as shown below:

Section 3109.1 General. Swimming pools shall comply with the requirements of Sections 3109.2 through 3109.6 and other applicable sections of this code.

Section 3109.1.1 Location. A swimming pool may be placed or constructed in any of the required yard areas provided the pool is constructed at ground level and provided the following setbacks are maintained:
(a) For single-family dwellings, the inside face of the pool shall not be less than four feet from any property boundary of the lot or parcel on which the pool is located. (b) For multifamily dwellings, the inside face of an outdoor pool shall be not less than twenty feet from any property boundary. Indoor swimming pool structures for multifamily dwellings shall also be subject to the setback requirements for accessory buildings, as designated in Chapter 27.70 of the Zoning Code, with the exception that the minimum clearance of 4 feet to the property line and 5 feet to surrounding buildings shall still apply. (c) No portion of a swimming pool may be constructed in any public utility easement or drainage easement or utility right-of-way. There shall be not less than five feet of open space between the inside face of the pool and any structure.
(d) No part of a swimming pool (water area) shall be located or constructed directly under permanently-installed electric power lines. Pools shall be located in such a manner that overhead conductor clearances meet the requirements of the Electrical Code, Chapter 23.12 of the San Mateo Municipal Code. No pool shall be constructed in any location that violates any State law or Public Utility Commission rules for location in relation to electric power lines, service drops and/or communication lines.
(e) Swimming pools located on slopes must comply with setback requirements as prescribed in chapter 23.40 of the Site Development Code.

23.08.160 SECTION 3109.4.1 BARRIER HEIGHT AND CLEARANCES AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.08.170 SECTION 3109.6 POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE ADDED.

Section 3109.6 is added as follows:

Pool Equipment Enclosure. Pumps and other swimming pool equipment which produce sound above the level of 35 dba shall not be located within twenty-five feet of any neighboring property unless such equipment is enclosed in an enclosure that will reduce the sound at the

473 of 676

7 4
1 9
property line to a level of 35 dba or less. Swimming pool heaters need not be enclosed in a pool equipment enclosure.

474 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.09

EXISTING BUILDING CODE

23.09.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Existing Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 10, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Existing Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Existing Building Code shall imply a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Existing Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

475 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.12

ELECTRICAL CODE

23.12.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Electrical Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 3, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Electrical Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Electrical Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, said section shall be deemed to invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the California Electrical Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

476 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.16

PLUMBING CODE

23.16.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Plumbing Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 5, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Plumbing Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Plumbing Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) One copy of the Plumbing Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.16.020 SECTION 719.0 CLEANOUTS.

Section 719.0 is amended by adding Section 719.7 as follows:

Section 719.7 Cleanout. Cleanouts shall be installed adjacent to the property line where the private sewer system connects to the public sanitary sewer lateral and in conformance with the California Plumbing Code. All such line cleanouts shall be extended to grade with materials and according to specifications approved by the Director of Public Works, or designee, and terminate within a concrete box.

477 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.20

MECHANICAL CODE

23.20.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Mechanical Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 4, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Mechanical Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Mechanical Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, said section shall be deemed to invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission thereof with discretion to enforce the section or not enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Mechanical Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

478 of 676

7 4
1 9

479 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.28

FIRE CODE

23.28.010 Adoption
(a) The Fire Code adopted by the San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department, and as amended from time to time, hereinafter called "Fire Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within the City as to all matters therein, except otherwise provided. (b) No section of the Fire Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, said section shall be deemed to invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Fire Code, as defined herein, shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.28.020 APPLICABILITY.

Repealed.

23.28.030 TITLE—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.040 POLICY MANUAL—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.050 BOARD OF APPEALS—NOT ADOPTED.

Repealed.

23.28.060 GENERAL DEFINITIONS—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.090 BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.100 FIRE LANE DESIGNATION—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.110 ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION.

Repealed.

480 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.28.120 ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION—MULTI-TENANT BUILDINGS—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.130 ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION—REAR ADDRESSING—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.140 KEY BOX CONTENTS REQUIREMENTS—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.145 GATES—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.150 RECORDS REPORTING—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.160 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS—WHERE REQUIRED—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.170 NFPA 13R SPRINKLER SYSTEMS—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.180 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS—EXISTING BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.190 FIRE CONTROL ROOM—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.200 STANDPIPE SYSTEMS—REQUIRED INSTALLATIONS—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.210 FIRE ALARM CERTIFICATION—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.220 MIDRISE SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS—ADDED.

Repealed.

23.28.230 CONVENIENCE STAIRWAYS—ADDED.

Repealed.

481 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.28.240 APPENDIX C, NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION OF FIRE HYDRANTS—AMENDED.

Repealed.

23.28.250 VIOLATIONS.

It is unlawful to violate or fail to comply with any provisions of this code, or violate or fail to comply with any order made under this code or to build in violation of any detailed statement of specification or plans submitted and approved under this code, or any certificate or permit issued under this code.

23.28.260 FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY INSPECTIONS. REPEALED
Inspections by the Fire Department shall periodically be made of buildings and structures that are used for residential or non-residential purposes as follows:
(a) The time and frequency of inspections shall be determined by the Fire Chief. No buildings shall be inspected for a fee more than annually except for re-inspections to assure that code corrections have been made or hazards have been corrected.
(b) A fee for inspections shall be established in the adopted City Fee Schedule to offset costs of the 2016 California Fire Code regulatory inspection program and shall be collected upon inspection from each property subject to this chapter. Revenues shall be used for the inspection and enforcement program. (c) All properties shall be subject to inspection fees. (d) Nothing in this section is intended to prevent inspections of property under nuisance abatement or other laws.

482 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.30
Dangerous Building Code

23.30.010 Adoption
(a) The 1997 Uniform Code For The Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, hereinafter called "Dangerous Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Dangerous Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Dangerous Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.30.020 Title and Scope
Chapter 1 Title and Scope is amended as follows:
(a) Section 103 is amended as follows:

All buildings or structures which are to be repaired under the provisions of this code shall be subject to the provisions of the Building Code.

483 of 676

7 4
1 9

23.30.030 Enforcement
Chapter 2 Enforcement is amended as follows:
(a) Section 204 is amended as follows:

484 of 676

7 4
1 9
All buildings or structures within the scope of this code and all construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official in accordance with and in the manner provided by this code and Sections 110 and 1701 of the Building Code.
(b) Section 205.1 is amended as follows:

General. Appeals to orders, decisions, or determinations made by the building official relative to the application of this code shall be reviewed by the City Council in accordance with Chapters 5 and 6 of this code. The City Council shall serve as the board ofaAppealsof Appeals. The hearing shall be informal and shall not require compliance with the formal rules of evidence. At the hearing, the City Council shall hear and consider all relevant evidence in reaching its decision.
(c) Section 205.2 is not adopted.

23.30.040 Definitions
Chapter 3 Definitions is amended as follows:
(a) Section 301 is amended as follows:

The term “Building Code” is the California Building Code, promulgated by the International Code Council and as adopted by the City of San Mateo.

The term “Housing Code” is the California Residential Code and the International Property Maintenance Code promulgated by the International Code Council and as adopted by the City of San Mateo.
(b) Section 301 is amended to include the following definition:

The term “board of appeals” or “board” shall mean the City Council. (c) Section 302.15 is amended as follows:

23.30.050 Appeal
Chapter 5 Appeal is amended as follows:

485 of 676

7 4
1 9
(a) Section 501.1 Form of Appeal, first paragraph, is amended as follows:
501.1. Form of Appeal. Any person entitled to service under Section 401.3 may appeal from any notice and order or any action of the building official under this code by submitting a written appeal to the Director of the Community Development Department containing the following requisite information:…
(b) Section 501.2 Processing of Appeal is amended as follows:
501.2. Processing of Appeal. Upon receipt of any appeal filed pursuant to this Chapter, the Director of the Community Development Department shall as soon as practicable schedule an appeal hearing before the City Council.

23.30.060 Procedures for Conduct of Hearing Appeals
Chapter 6 Procedures for Conduct of Hearing Appeals is amended as follows:
(a) Section 601 General is not adopted.
(a)
(b) Section 603 Subpoenas is not adopted.
(c) Section 604.2 Oral Evidence is not adopted.
(d) Sections 605.2 Hearing Before Examiner; 605.3 Consideration of Report by Board-Notice; 605.4 Exceptions to Report; 605.5 Disposition by the Board; and 605.6 Proposed Decision Not Adopted are not adopted.

23.30.070 Performance of Work of Repair or Demolition
Chapter 8 Performance of Work of Repair or Demolition is amended as follows:
(a) Section 801.1 Procedure is amended as follows:

The cost of such work done may be made a special assessment against the property involved, or may be a personal obligation of the property owner, or by all other legal means as determined appropriate by the City Council.
(c) Section 802 Repair and Demolition Fund is not adopted.

23.30.080 Recovery of Cost of Repair or Demolition
Chapter 9 Recovery of Cost of Repair or Demolition is amended as follows:

486 of 676

7 4
1 9
(a) Section 901 Account of Expense, Filing of Report is amended as follows:

The Director of the Community Development Department shall keep an itemized account of the expense incurred by the City in the repair or demolition of any building done pursuant to the provisions of Section 701.3, Item 3, of this code. Upon the completion of the work of repair or demolition, said director shall prepare and file with the City Council a report specifying the work done, the itemized and total cost of the work, a description of the real property upon which the building or structure is or was located, and the names and addresses of the persons entitled to notice pursuant to Section 401.3. (b) Section 905.2 Personal Obligation is amended as follows:
905.2 Personal Obligation. If the City Council orders that the charge shall be a personal obligation of the property owner, the City Attorney may direct the collection of the charge by use of all appropriate legal remedies.
(c) Section 912 Repayment of Repair and Demolition Fund is not adopted.

487 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.36
Historical Building Code

23.36.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Historical Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 8, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Historical Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the Historical Building Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it.
(c) A copy of the Historical Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

488 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.38
Referenced Standards Code

23.38.010 Adoption
(a) The 2019 2022 California Referenced Standards Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 12, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Referenced Standards Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations, and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.
(b) No section of the California Referenced Standards Code shall impose a mandatory duty of enforcement on the City, or on any officer, official, agent, employee, board, council, or commission thereof. Instead, if any section purports to impose a mandatory duty of enforcement, that section shall invest the City, and the appropriate officer, official, agent, employee, board, council or commission with discretion to enforce the section, or not to enforce it. (c) A copy of the California Referenced Standards Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

489 of 676

7 4
1 9
Chapter 23.50

HANDICAPPED ACCESS COMPLIANCE

23.50.010 HANDICAPPED ACCESS COMPLIANCE.

The Handicapped Access Compliance Regulations Reference Materials of the state as prepared by the Office Division of State Architect shall be followed wherever they are applicable.

490 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
0 0

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 23 Section Name: PUBLIC HEARING Account Number: 10-3134 File ID: 22-6512 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:
“Appeal of Administrative Citation” Amendments – Ordinance Introduction RECOMMENDATION:

Introduce an Ordinance to amend San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 1.10, Section 1.10.060 "Appeal of Administrative Citation" and Chapter 2.21 “Community Relations Commission” to create an administrative citation appeal procedure before an impartial hearing officer related to violations of technical building and health and safety codes.

BACKGROUND:

At the June 20, 2022 study session, the City Council received information from staff concerning penalties for repeat violators of the City’s Tenant Relocation Ordinance, information about dangerous buildings and the Dangerous Buildings Code, and the City’s Code Enforcement penalty structure. Part of the discussion focused on the City’s Administrative Citation process in that it has been problematic regarding the appeal process for these citations. Specifically, Code Enforcement has not utilized this administrative penalty because the appeals and hearings associated with the administrative citations are within the powers and duties of the Community Relations Commission. This has been problematic because many of the violations subject to such penalties relate to technical building codes and health and safety codes, which require review by persons with technical expertise in those subject areas. Currently, the Commissioners are not required to have any training or specific knowledge related to interpretation and implementation of technical building codes or health and safety codes. At the study session, staff recommended establishing a process with an impartial hearing officer with subject matter expertise, with a further appeal to Council, and was directed to return to Council with amendments to that affect. The proposed amendments are contained in Attachment 1.

As for tenant relocation procedures and penalties, staff were not directed to make any changes at this time. Staff were directed to return to Council for introduction of a Dangerous Buildings Code Ordinance. That item has been incorporated with the triennial Building Code update, which is also scheduled for introduction during the October 17, 2022 regular Council meeting.

BUDGET IMPACT:

There is no budget impact, as this is simply a change in procedure and minor code amendment prepared by staff.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This City Council action is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements have been met.

491 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 6
0 0

ATTACHMENTS
Att. 1 – Proposed Ordinance
Att 2 – San Mateo Municipal Code Section 1.10.060 with track changes Att 3 – San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 2.21 with track changes

STAFF CONTACT
Christina Horrisberger
Community Development Department Director
[email protected]
(650) 522-7210

492 of 676

7 4
0 5

CITY OF SAN MATEO

DRAFT ORDINANCE
An Ordinance Amending San Mateo Municipal Code Section 1.10.060, “Appeal of Administrative Citation,” of Title 1, “General Provisions,” and Amending San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 2.21, “Community Relations Commission,” of Title 2 “Administration and Personnel,” to Form an Administrative Citation Appeal Procedure Before an Impartial Hearing Office for Administration Citations Related to Technical Building Codes and Health & Safety Codes
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 53069.4 authorizes local agencies to make any violation of the San Mateo Municipal Code subject to administrative fines or penalties, including violations of technical building codes and health and safety codes by ordinance; and WHEREAS, the ordinance must set forth the procedures for the imposition, enforcement, collection, and administrative review of a violation; and
WHEREAS, San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 1.10 governs the City’s procedures for the imposition, enforcement, collection, and review of administrative citations; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to San Mateo Municipal Code Section 1.10.060 and Chapter 2.21, the review of administrative citations is currently heard by the Community Relations Commission; and WHEREAS, the Community Relations Commission does not possess the technical expertise related to violations of building codes and health and safety codes; and WHEREAS, the City desires to establish an administrative review procedure for administrative citations related to violations of technical building codes and health and safety codes before an impartial hearing officer with a final appeal to City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 1.10.060 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

1.10.060 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION.
(a) Persons receiving an administrative citation may appeal it within 10 working days from the date the administrative citation is served. The notice of appeal must be in writing, and accompanied by the nuisance abatement fee, and must specify the basis for the appeal. It must be received by the Director of the Community Development Department within 10 working days. If the deadline falls on a weekend or City holiday, then the deadline shall be extended until the next regular business day. (b) The Community Relations Commission will hear and decide administrative citation appeals, except for administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter 7.14, Chapters 23.06 through 23.56, Chapter

23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code.

A hearing officer will hear and decide administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter

7.14, Chapters 23.06 through 23.56, Chapter 23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code. The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall appoint a hearing officer for administrative citation hearings under this section who shall not

493 of 676

7 4
0 5
be the citing enforcement officer. The evaluation, compensation, and/or other benefits of the hearing officer shall not be directly or indirectly conditioned upon the amount of the administrative fees or penalties, or the rulings upheld, revised, or otherwise issued by the hearing officer. (c) As soon as practicable after receiving the written notice of appeal, the Director of the Community Development Department shall review it for sufficiency. If found to be complete and in conformance with this section, the City shall set the appeal hearing for the next available Community Relations Commission meeting, or for administrative citation appeals held pursuant to subsection (b) above, a hearing before a hearing officer.

Written notice of the time and place for the hearing may be served by personal service, or first class mail to the address provided by the responsible party on the notice of appeal. (d) The failure of any person with an interest in the property to receive such properly addressed notice of the hearing shall not affect the validity of any proceedings under this chapter. Service by first class mail shall be effective on the date of mailing.
(e) Failure of any person to file an appeal in accordance with the provisions of this section shall constitute a waiver of that person's rights to contest the merits of the citation and the imposition of the nuisance abatement fee.
(f) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall conduct an orderly fair hearing and accept evidence on which persons commonly would rely in the conduct of their business affairs as follows:
(1) A valid citation and any additional report submitted on behalf of the City shall constitute presumptive evidence of the facts contained in those documents and prima facie evidence of the violation;
(2) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer may conduct the hearing informally, both as to the rules of procedure and admission of evidence, and in any manner which will provide a fair hearing to obtain additional evidence;
(3) The owner, agent, responsible party, or any other interested person may present testimony or evidence concerning the violation and the means and time frame for correction; and (4) The failure of any alleged violator to appear at the hearing after proper notice or, in the alternative, to present written or other evidence shall constitute an admission of the violation and an exhaustion of administrative remedies that will bar judicial review. (g) The City shall establish all appropriate administrative regulations for conducting hearings and rendering decisions pursuant to this section.
(h) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall determine whether to affirm or dismiss the administrative citation. The Commission or hearing officer may reduce, waive or conditionally reduce the nuisance abatement fee stated in the citations or any late fees assessed based on a showing of good cause. The Commission or hearing officer may impose conditions and deadlines for correction of violations and make such direction to enforcement officers to assure compliance.

494 of 676

7 4
0 5
(i) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall make findings based on the record of the hearing and make a written decision based on the findings. The City shall preserve all exhibits submitted by the parties for a 180-day period and shall serve the decision by first class mail on the contestant within 10 working days after the hearing. The decision of the Commission or hearing officer may be appealed to the City Council in writing within 10 working days of the day the Commission's or hearing officer’s decision is served. The appeal before the City Council will follow the same procedures and requirements as the underlying appeal hearing before the Community Relations Commission or hearing officer.

Section 2. Section 2.21.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

2.21.010 ORGANIZATION.

The Community Relations Commission of the City shall consist of no more than five members appointed by the Council. In making appointments, the Council shall insure that the persons appointed are representative of the neighborhoods and ethnic communities to be served by the Commission as hereinafter provided.

Each member of the Community Relations Commission shall serve at the pleasure of the Council and for a term of four years, or until the appointment and qualification of a successor. No member shall be eligible for reappointment after serving two consecutive four-year terms.

Section 3. Section 2.21.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

2.21.020 MEETINGS.

The Community Relations Commission shall elect a chair and vice-chair to serve at the pleasure of the Commission. The Commission may adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the conduct of its business. A regular time and place of meetings shall be established and adhered to in the manner of holding public meetings for legislative bodies in the state. All meetings shall be open to the public unless by law otherwise provided.

Section 4. Section 2.21.030 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

2.21.030 POWERS—DUTIES.

The Community Relations Commission shall have the following powers and duties:
(a) To conduct public hearings pursuant to Chapter 7.16. (b) Reserved.
(c) To hear requests from the Director of the Community Development Department, or his or her designee, for orders to abate violations of Title 25 or Title 27, as provided in Chapter 7.16. (d) To hear appeals for administrative citations pursuant to Section 1.10.060, except for administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter 7.14, Chapters 23.06 through 23.56, Chapter 23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code.

495 of 676

7 4
0 5
(e) To study, investigate, mediate and hold public hearings on community-wide problems arising in this City, especially those which may result in intergroup tensions or discrimination because of race, religion, color, ancestry or place of birth.
(f) To provide oversight of Federal, State or other grant programs that implement public service, housing, and community development programs, and make recommendations on those programs which may be assigned to them by the Council.
(g) To work with organizations of similar intent formulated by public agencies having jurisdiction within the City and with the Human Relations Commission of the County. To this end, a member shall be assigned as liaison to each group and shall attend the meetings thereof and report thereon to the Commission. Any person assigned as liaison from the County Commission, or other such group, to this Community Relations Commission shall be an ex officio member but shall have no vote.
(h) Such other powers and duties as maybe prescribed from time to time by ordinance or resolution of the Council.

The Community Relations Commission shall make recommendations to the Council to correct, reduce or eliminate existing inequalities and disadvantages and prepare, encourage and coordinate programs of voluntary affirmative action to insure the complete utilization of the human resources of this community for the betterment of all its inhabitants.

Section 5. Section 2.21.050 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

2.21.050 APPEALS.

Decisions of the Community Relations Commission regarding violations of the San Mateo Municipal Code and public nuisances may be appealed to the City Council as set forth in this Code.

Section 6. Environmental Determination. This City Council Action is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
Section 7. Severability. In the event any section, clause or provision of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section, clause or provision shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 8. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published in summary in a newspaper of general circulation, posted in the City Clerk's Office, and posted on the City's website, all in accord with Section 2.15 of the City Charter.

Section 9. Legislative History and Effective Date. This ordinance was introduced on Clerk to complete., and adopted on Clerk to complete., and shall be effective 30 days after its adoption.

496 of 676

1.10.060 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION.
(a) Persons receiving an administrative citation may appeal it within 10 working days from the date the administrative citation is served. The notice of appeal must be in writing, and accompanied by the nuisance abatement fee, and must specify the basis for the appeal. It must be received by the Director of the Community Development Department City within 10 working days. If the deadline falls on a weekend or City holiday, then the deadline shall be extended until the next regular business day. (b) The Community Relations Commission will hear and decide administrative citation appeals, except for administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter 7.14, Chapters 23.06 through

23.56, Chapter 23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code..

A hearing officer will hear and decide administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter 7.14, Chapters 23.06 through 23.56, Chapter 23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code.

The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall appoint a hearing officer for administrative citation hearings under this section who shall not be the citing enforcement officer. The evaluation, compensation, and/or other benefits of the hearing officer shall not be directly or indirectly conditioned upon the amount of the administrative fees or penalties, or the rulings upheld, revised, or otherwise issued by the hearing officer.
(b)(c) As soon as practicable after receiving the written notice of appeal, the City Director of the Community Development Department shall review it for sufficiency. If found to be complete and in conformance with this section, the City shall set the appeal hearing for the next available Community Relations Commission meeting, or for administrative citation appeals held pursuant to subsection (bb)(1) above, a hearing before a hearing officer. Written notice of the time and place for the hearing may be served by personal service, or first class mail to the address provided by the responsible party on the notice of appeal.
(c)(d) The failure of any person with an interest in the property to receive such properly addressed notice of the hearing shall not affect the validity of any proceedings under this chapter.

Service by first class mail shall be effective on the date of mailing. (d)(e) Failure of any person to file an appeal in accordance with the provisions of this section shall constitute a waiver of that person's rights to contest the merits of the citation and the imposition of the nuisance abatement fee.
(e)(f) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall conduct an orderly fair hearing and accept evidence on which persons commonly would rely in the conduct of their business affairs as follows:

497 of 676

(1) A valid citation and any additional report submitted on behalf of the City shall be constitute presumptive evidence of the facts contained in those documents and prima facie evidence of the violation;
(2) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall may conduct the hearing informally, both as to the rules of procedure and admission of evidence, and in any manner which will provide a fair hearing to obtain additional evidenceaccept testimony by declaration under penalty of perjury relating to the violation and the appropriate means of correcting the violation;
(3) The owner, agent, responsible party, or any other interested person may present testimony or evidence concerning the violation and the means and time frame for correction; and.
(3)(4) The failure of any alleged violator to appear at the hearing after proper notice or, in the alternative, to present written or other evidence shall constitute an admission of the violation and an exhaustion of administrative remedies that will bar judicial review. (f)(g) The City shall establish all appropriate administrative regulations for conducting hearings and rendering decisions pursuant to this section.
(g)(h) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall determine whether to affirm or dismiss the administrative citation. The Commission or hearing officer may reduce, waive or conditionally reduce the nuisance abatement fee stated in the citations or any late fees assessed based on a showing of good cause. The Commission or hearing officer may impose conditions and deadlines for correction of violations and make such direction to enforcement officers to assure compliance. (h)(i) The Community Relations Commission or hearing officer shall make findings based on the record of the hearing and make a written decision based on the findings. The City shall preserve all exhibits submitted by the parties for a 180-day period and shall serve the decision by first class mail on the contestant within 10 working days after the hearing. The decision of the Commission or hearing officer may be appealed to the City Council in writing within 10 working days of the day the Commission's or hearing officer’s decision is served. The appeal before the City Council will follow the same procedures and requirements as the underlying appeal hearing before the Community Relations Commission or hearing officer.hearing.

498 of 676

Chapter 2.21

COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMISSION

2.21.010 ORGANIZATION.

The Community Relations Commission of the City shall consist of no more than six five members appointed by the Council until no later than June 10, 2014, and thereafter shall have five members. In making appointments, the Council shall insure that the persons appointed are representative of the neighborhoods and ethnic communities to be served by the Commission as hereinafter provided.

2.21.020 MEETINGS.

The Community Relations Commission shall meet within a month of its formation and establish itself by electing a chair and vice-chair to serve at the pleasure of the Commission. The Commission may adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the conduct of its business. A regular time and place of meetings shall be established and adhered to in the manner of holding public meetings for legislative bodies in the state. All meetings shall be open to the public unless by law otherwise provided.

2.21.030 POWERS—DUTIES.

The Community Relations Commission shall have the following powers and duties:
(a) To conduct public hearings pursuant to Chapter 7.16. (b) Reserved.To hear appeals from any notice and order or any action of the building official issued pursuant to Chapter 7.14.
(c) To hear requests from the building official, zoning administrator, or senior code enforcement officerDirector of the Community Development Department, or his or her designee, for orders to abate violations of Title 25 or Title 27, as provided in Chapter 7.16. (d) To hear appeals for administrative citations pursuant to Section 1.10.060, except for administrative citation appeals relating to violations of Chapter 7.14, Chapters 23.06 through 23.56, Chapter 23.70, and Chapter 23.72 of this Code.
(e) To study, investigate, mediate and hold public hearings on community-wide problems arising in this City, especially those which may result in intergroup tensions or discrimination because of race, religion, color, ancestry or place of birth.
(f) To provide oversight of Federal, State or other grant programs that implement public service, housing, and community development programs, and make recommendations on those programs which may be assigned to them by the Council.

499 of 676

(g) To work with organizations of similar intent formulated by public agencies having jurisdiction within the City and with the Human Relations Commission of the County. To this end, a member shall be assigned as liaison to each group and shall attend the meetings thereof and report thereon to the Commission. Any person assigned as liaison from the County Commission, or other such group, to this Community Relations Commission shall be an ex officio member but shall have no vote. (h) Such other powers and duties as maybe prescribed from time to time by ordinance or resolution of the Council.

2.21.040 FEDERAL AND STATE LAW.

It is the intent of the Council that the activities of the Community Relations Commission shall not conflict with areas which are the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal government, the State, or any of its political subdivisions as established by statute.

2.21.050 APPEALS.

Decisions of the Community Relations Commission regarding violations of the ordinances San Mateo Municipal Code on housing maintenance and public nuisances may be appealed to the City Council as set forth in Chapter 7.16this Code.

500 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
0 9

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 24 Section Name: PUBLIC HEARING Account Number: 10-1311 File ID: 22-6700 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Manager's Office
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT:

Sustainability-Related Amendments to the 2022 California Building Standards Code – Ordinance Introduction RECOMMENDATION:

Introduce an Ordinance to amend the San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.40 "Energy Code" to adopt the 2022 California Energy Code by reference; amend the San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.70 "Green Building Code" to adopt the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code with local amendments to require enhanced electric vehicle charging infrastructure beyond state requirements, require all-electric new construction, and require electric-readiness and electric appliances during residential building remodels; and Adopt a Resolution adopting express findings required for local amendments to the 2022 Green Building Code.

BACKGROUND:

Every three years the State of California updates the California Building Standards Codes. Jurisdictions may adopt local amendments that exceed State requirements, often referred to as “reach codes”, to require more sustainable building design and construction. The adoption of reach codes is an important strategy for meeting the City’s Climate Action Plan goals and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from buildings and transportation. The City’s current new construction reach codes for building electrification and enhanced electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure will expire on December 31, 2022 and require adoption of the updated codes to prevent a lapse in requirements.

Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) is a joint powers agency established in 2016 to provide clean electricity in San Mateo County.

In the previous code cycle, PCE supported jurisdictions in the adoption of reach codes by providing cost-effectiveness studies, model ordinances and technical support to City staff. This year, PCE is leading the newly formed Bay Area Reach Codes group that includes East Bay Clean Energy (EBCE) and Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) and providing this same type of support to local governments.

In February 2022, staff began collaborating with PCE to explore reach code options for remodels of existing buildings that would be effective during the upcoming building code cycle. In March 2022, the Bay Area Reach Codes group released first drafts of new construction reach codes for building electrification and EV infrastructure. Staff presented reach code options for new construction and remodels of existing buildings at the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission (SIC) meetings on April 13, 2022 and July 13, 2022. Staff hosted a virtual community meeting on the proposed reach code options for residential building remodels on August 30, 2022 and launched an online survey on August 31, 2022.

At the September 19, 2022 City Council study session, staff provided a detailed report and presentation of the importance of building electrification and EV infrastructure and introduced options for reach codes for new construction and remodels of existing buildings. The September 19, 2022 agenda report includes comprehensive analysis and discussion of the proposed reach codes and a summary of SIC and community feedback. At the September 19, 2022 study session, City Council directed staff to develop an ordinance to require all-electric new construction, require enhanced EV infrastructure

501 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
0 9
in new construction, and require electric-readiness and electric appliances during remodels of existing buildings.

DRAFT ORDINANCE
In 2020, the City amended the California Energy Code to require the new construction of residential buildings and office buildings be all-electric. In 2021, the California Energy Commission sent a letter in response to the City of South San Francisco’s all-electric new construction reach code submittal stating that the all-electric requirement does not constitute an energy efficiency or conservation standard and is outside of the scope of the California Energy Commission’s authority.

Thus, the Bay Area Reach Codes group recommends amending the Green Building Standards Code for building electrification requirements instead of the Energy Code. The draft ordinance adopts the California Energy Code as required by State law and removes the current reach codes that will expire on December 31, 2022.

EV Infrastructure Requirements for New Construction
At the September 19, 2022 City Council study session, the City Council discussed the Bay Area Reach Codes model code options for multifamily buildings and recommended the updated model code option requiring 15% Level 2 EVCS and 85% Level 2 ready (low-power). The City Council directed staff to develop an ordinance based on the Bay Area Reach Codes model code for EV infrastructure for new construction. EV charging requirements for new construction are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Reach Codes for EV Charging Infrastructure in New Construction Impacted buildings Proposed reach code requirement
Single Family Homes and
Two-Family Townhomes
One Level 2 EV Ready per dwelling unit;
One Level 1 EV Ready space if second space provided
Multifamily Buildings 15% Level 2 EVCS
85% Level 2 Ready (low-power)
Total: 100% of dwelling units with spaces
Affordable Housing
15% Level 2 EVCS
25% Level 2 Ready (low-power)
60% Level 1 EV Ready
Total: 100% of dwelling units with spaces
Non Residential Office Use
20% Level 2 EVCS
30% Level 2 EV Capable
Total: 50% of spaces
All Other Uses
10% Level 2 EVCS
10% Level 2 EV Capable
Total: 20% of spaces
Definitions:
•Level 1 EV Ready - Includes full 110/120 V 20-amp circuit with a receptacle or outlet •Level 2 EV Capable - Includes panel capacity for 208/240 V 40-amp circuit and conduit or raceways •Level 2 EV Ready (low-power) - Includes full 208/240 V 20-amp circuit with a receptacle or outlet •Level 2 EV Ready - Includes full 208/240 V 40-amp circuit with a receptacle or outlet •Level 2 EV Charging Space (EVCS) - Includes full charging capability with EVSE (Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) installed
The draft ordinance contains a provision regarding EV infrastructure for existing multifamily buildings. This provision is a California Green Building Code requirement and is not a City reach code. This provision is being codified in the ordinance because the City’s reach codes involved reorganization of some California Green Building Code provisions.

Electrification Requirements for New Construction
The draft ordinance addresses building electrification requirements in both new construction and during remodels of existing buildings. At the September 19, 2022 City Council study session, Council directed staff to develop an ordinance in

502 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
0 9
line with the Bay Area Reach Code model ordinance that requires all-electric new construction and includes exceptions for commercial kitchens and hotel/motel laundry. Since that meeting, the All-electric Nonresidential Cost-Effectiveness Study demonstrates that it is cost-effective to require hotel/motel laundry be electric. PCE has since removed the exception for hotel/motel laundry from the Bay Area Reach Codes model code. Per Council direction, the draft ordinance includes a provision allowing buildings with biotechnology use to apply for an exception to use fossil gas for space conditioning in laboratory areas. Staff recommends adoption of the draft ordinance based on the recently updated Bay Area Reach Codes model code without the exception for hotel/motel laundry to be consistent with PCE’s recommendation and with an exception for buildings with biotechnology use.

Electrification Requirements for Existing Residential Building Remodels The draft ordinance also addresses electric-readiness and electric appliance requirements for existing residential buildings during remodels. Requirements for single family homes, duplexes, and residential buildings are summarized in Table 2. The ordinance includes the five reach code options for existing residential building remodels that were supported by City Council at the September 19, 2022 Study Session.

Table 2: Reach Codes for Electrification in Existing Residential Buildings Remodels Reach code topic Impacted buildings Proposed reach code requirement 1) Electric-readiness:
panel capacity
Residential buildings Requires panel replacement and panel upgrade projects to include panel capacity/breaker space for future electrification 2) Electric-readiness:
outlets installed
Single family homes
and duplexes
Requires all residential kitchen and laundry renovations include installation of an outlet to allow for the use of electric appliances in the future
3) Heat pump air
conditioning
Single family homes
and duplexes
Requires installation of heat pump air conditioning when new air conditioning is installed or replaced, in conjunction with furnace replacement
4) Pools and outdoor
equipment
Residential buildings Prohibits the extension of fuel gas infrastructure into the backyard for uses such as fire pits, grills, and pools
5) Heat pump water
heaters
Single family homes
and duplexes
Requires heat pump water heater installation during addition and alteration projects that include water heater replacement

RESOLUTION
To make local amendments to the California Building Standards Code, the California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 requires the City to find that the local amendments are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geographical, or topographical conditions. According to the California Green Building Standards Code Section 107.1 “Findings and filings,” climatic, topographical or geological conditions include local environmental conditions as established by the local jurisdiction. The resolution summarizes the need for local amendments due to local conditions that make San Mateo extremely vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and other hazards due to San Mateo’s geological and topographical conditions. The express findings are detailed in Exhibit A of the resolution.

NEXT STEPS
Following City Council adoption of the draft ordinance, staff will file the proposed local amendments with the Building Standards Commission. If approved by the City Council, the reach codes would go into effect on January 1, 2023 and would expire at the end of the building code cycle on December 31, 2025. The City will have to re-adopt reach codes for future building code cycles.

503 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
3 7
0 9
Per Council’s direction, staff will work on a Decarbonization Strategy and develop a roadmap to decarbonize our community and evaluate City Council’s proposed 2030 “End of Flow” target date for the termination of fuel gas infrastructure. As part of that effort, staff will evaluate the Bay Area Reach Codes Model Existing Building Decarbonization Ordinance with a January 1, 2025 target date for requiring electric appliances upon replacement and other policies and partnerships to advance decarbonization in San Mateo.

BUDGET IMPACT:

The proposed local amendments will not have a budgetary impact on the City since the City is required to enforce the California Green Building Code.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The adoption of the reach code amendments is categorically exempt from CEQA review because it consists of an action, as authorized by state or local ordinance, intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the protection of the environment and the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15308.)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met. The ordinance will be published in summary in a newspaper of general circulation, posted in the City Clerk's Office, and posted on the City's website, all in accordance with California Government Code section 6066.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Draft Ordinance
Att 2 - Energy Code - Track Changes
Att 3 - Green Building Code - Track Changes
Att 4 - Proposed Resolution
Att 5 - Public Comments

STAFF CONTACT
Andrea Chow, Sustainability Analyst
[email protected]
(650) 522-7007

504 of 676

7 3
9 3

CITY OF SAN MATEO

DRAFT ORDINANCE
An Ordinance amending San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.24 “Energy Code,” of Title 23, “Building and Construction,” to adopt the California Energy Code, 2022 Edition, by reference and amending San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.70 “ Green Building Code,” of Title 23, “Building and Construction,” to adopt the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, with Local Amendments WHEREAS, the California Energy Code and Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, have been released by the State and requires adoption by local jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo’s (City) Climate Action Plan recommended the City review local amendments to the California Energy Code and Green Building Standards Code to promote building electrification and electric vehicle adoption; and
WHEREAS, the California Energy Commission advised local jurisdictions that local amendments requiring electrification are not energy conservation or efficiency standards and thus fall outside of the scope of the California Energy Commission and therefore the City desires to adopt the California Energy Code, 2022 Edition, by reference without local amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to adopt the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, by reference with local amendments to include electrification requirements; and WHEREAS, the local amendments amend the California Green Building Standards Code to require enhanced electric vehicle charging infrastructure beyond state requirements, require all-electric new construction, and require electric-readiness and electric appliances during residential building remodels; and WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17922, 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7, and 18941.5 authorizes the City to make local amendments to the California Green Building Standards Code upon express findings that the local amendments are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geographical, or topographical conditions; and
WHEREAS, concurrent with this ordinance, the City Council of the City of San Mateo has adopted a resolution adopting express findings in support of local amendments to the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 23.24.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.24.010 Adoption
(a) The California Energy Code, 2022 Edition, Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Energy Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended.

505 of 676

7 3
9 3
(b) One copy of the Energy Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 2. Section 23.24.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 3. Section 23.24.030 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 4. Section 23.24.040 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 5. Section 23.24.050 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 6. Section 23.24.060 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 7. Section 23.24.070 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 8. Section 23.24.080 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is repealed.

Section 9. Section 23.70.010 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.010 Adoption
(a) The California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Green Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended;
(b) One copy of the Green Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Section 10. Section 23.70.020 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.020 Local Amendments to Definitions
(a) The most commonly used definitions of the Green Building Code are set forth below:

Addition. An extension or increase in floor area of an existing building or structure.

Alteration or Alter. Any construction or renovation to an existing structure other than repair for the purpose of maintenance or addition.

Electric Vehicle (EV). An automotive-type vehicle for on-road use, such as passenger automobiles, buses, trucks, vans, neighborhood electric vehicles, electric motorcycles, and the like, primarily powered by an electric motor that draws current from a rechargeable storage battery, fuel cell, photovoltaic array, or other source of electric current. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) are considered electric vehicles. For purposes of the California Electrical Code, off-road, self-propelled electric vehicles, such as industrial trucks, hoists, lifts, transports, golf carts, airline ground support equipment, tractors, boats, and the like, are not included.

506 of 676

7 3
9 3
Electric Vehicle Charging Space (EV Space). A space intended for future installation of EV charging equipment and charging of electric vehicles.

Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). The conductors, including the undergrounded, grounded, and equipment grounding conductors and the electric vehicles connectors, attachment plugs, and all other fittings, devices, power outlets, or apparatus installed specifically for the purpose of transferring energy between premises wiring and the electric vehicle.

Newly Constructed (or New Construction). A newly constructed building (or new construction) does not include additions, alterations or repairs.

Off-Street Loading Spaces. An area, other than a public street, public way, or other property (and exclusive of off-street parking spaces), permanently reserved or set aside for the loading or unloading of motor vehicles, including ways of ingress and egress and maneuvering areas. Whenever the term "loading space" is used, it shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, be construed as meaning off-street loading space. This excludes designated passenger loading/unloading. (b) Green Building Code Section 202 is amended to include the following definitions:

Affordable Housing. Residential buildings that entirely consist of units below market rate and whose rents or sales prices are governed by local agencies to be affordable based on area median income.

All-Electric Building. A building that contains no combustion equipment or plumbing for combustion equipment serving space heating (including fireplaces), water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances (including barbeques), and clothes drying, within the building or building property lines, and instead uses electric heating appliances for service.

Appliance Upgrade. The installation, relocation, or replacement of any appliance.

Automatic Load Management System (ALMS). A control system designed to manage load across one or more electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), circuits, panels and to share electrical capacity and/or automatically manage power at each connection point. ALMS systems shall be designed to deliver no less than 3.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 16-ampere) to each EV Capable, EV Ready or EVCS space served by the ALMS, and meet the requirements of California Electrical Code Article 625. The connected amperage to the building site for the EV charging infrastructure shall not be lower than the required connected amperage per California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24 Part 11.

Combustion Equipment. Any equipment or appliance used for space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying and/or lighting that uses fuel gas.

Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC). A parking space provided with electrical infrastructure that meets the following conditions:
(1) A minimum of 48 kVa (480 volt, 100-ampere) capacity wiring.

507 of 676

7 3
9 3
(2) Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) located within three (3) feet of the parking space providing a minimum capacity of 80-ampere.

Electric Heating Appliance. A device that produces heat energy to create a warm environment by the application of electric power to resistance elements, refrigerant compressors, or dissimilar material junctions, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

Electric Vehicle Charging Station (EVCS). A parking space that includes installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) at an EV Ready space. An EVCS space may be used to satisfy EV Ready space requirements. EVSE shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code, Article 625.

Fuel Gas. A gas that is natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

Fuel Gas Infrastructure. Piping, other than service pipe, in or in connection with a building, structure or within the property lines of premises, extending from the point of delivery at the gas meter, service meter assembly, outlet of the service regulator, service shutoff valve, or final pressure regulator, whichever is applicable, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

Laboratory. A room, building or area where the use and storage of hazardous materials are utilized for testing, analysis, instruction, research or developmental activities.

Level 1 EV Ready. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
(1) A minimum of 2.2 kVa (110/120 volt, 20-ampere) capacity wiring. (2) A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three (3) feet of the parking space. If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE shall be 16-ampere.
(3) Conduit oversized to accommodate future Level 2 EV Ready (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) at each parking space.

Level 2 EV Capable. A parking space provided with electrical infrastructure that meets the following requirements:
(1) Conduit that links a listed electrical panel with sufficient capacity to a junction box or receptacle located within three (3) feet of the parking space. (2) The conduit shall be designed to accommodate at least 8.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) per parking space. Conduit shall have a minimum nominal trade size of 1 inch inside diameter and may be sized for multiple circuits as allowed by the California Electrical Code. Conduit shall be installed at a minimum in spaces that will be inaccessible after construction, either trenched underground or where penetrations to walls, floors, or other partitions would otherwise be required for future installation of

508 of 676

7 3
9 3
branch circuits, and such additional elements deemed necessary by the Building Official. Construction documents shall indicate future completion of conduit from the panel to the parking space, via the installed inaccessible conduit.
(3) The electrical panel shall reserve a space for a 40-ampere overcurrent protective device space(s) for EV charging, labeled in the panel directory as “EV CAPABLE.” (4) Electrical load calculations shall demonstrate that the electrical panel service capacity and electrical system, including any on-site distribution transformer(s), have sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge all EVs at all required EV spaces at a minimum of 40 amperes. (5) The parking space shall contain signage with at least a 12” font adjacent to the parking space indicating the space is EV Capable.

Level 2 EV Ready. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
(1) A minimum of 8.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) capacity wiring. (2) A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three feet of the parking space.
(3) If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE shall be 30-ampere.

Low Power Level 2 EV Ready. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
(1) A minimum of 4.1 kVA (208/240 Volt, 20-ampere) capacity wiring. (2) A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three (3) feet of the parking space. If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE shall be 16-ampere.
(3) Conduit oversized to accommodate future Level 2 EV Ready (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) at each parking space.

Repair. Reconstruction, replacement, or renewal of any part of an existing building for the purpose of its maintenance or to correct damage, as defined in the California Existing Building Code. (c) Green Building Code Section 202 is amended to delete the following definitions:

Electric Vehicle (EV) Capable Space. A vehicle space with electrical panel space and load capacity to support a branch circuit and necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted, to support EV charging.

509 of 676

7 3
9 3
Electric Vehicle (EV) Ready Space. [HCD] A vehicle space which is provided with a branch circuit; any necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted; to accommodate EV charging, terminating in a receptacle or a charger.

Level 2 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). [HCD] The 208/240 Volt 40ampere branch circuit, and the electric vehicle charging connectors, attachment plugs, and all other fittings, devices, power outlets, or apparatus installed specifically for the purpose of transferring energy between the premises wiring and the electric vehicle.

Low Power Level 2 Electric Vehicle [EV] Charging Receptable. [HCD] A 208/240 Volt 20- ampere minimum branch circuit and a receptacle for use by an EV driver to charge their electric vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle.

Section 11. Section 23.70.030 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.030 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New One- and Two-Family Dwellings and Town-Houses
(a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.1, "New one- and two-family dwellings and town-houses with attached private garages," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.1 New one- and two-family dwellings and town-houses with attached private garages. (b) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.1.1, "Identification," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.1.1 New Construction. One parking space provided shall be a Level 2 EV Ready space. If a second parking space is provided, it shall be provided with a Level 1 EV Ready space.

Section 12. Section 23.70.040 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.040 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New Multifamily Residential Construction (a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4 “Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new construction,” is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4 Electric vehicle (EV) charging. New construction shall comply with Section 4.106.4.1 or

4.106.4.2, and 4.106.4.3, to facilitate future installation and use of EV chargers. Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code, Article 625. For EVCS signs, refer to Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-01 (Zero Emission Vehicle Signs and Pavement Markings) or its successor(s). Calculation for spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Exceptions:

1. On a case-by-case basis, where the local enforcing agency has determined EV charging and infrastructure are not feasible based upon one or more of the following conditions:

1.1 Where there is no local utility power supply or the local utility is unable to supply

510 of 676

7 3
9 3
adequate power.

1.2 Where there is evidence suitable to the local enforcing agency substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly related to the implementation of Section 4.106.4, may increase construction cost by an average of $4,500 per parking space for market rate housing or $400 per parking space for affordable housing. EV infrastructure shall be provided up to the level that would not exceed this cost for utility service.

1.3 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) without additional parking facilities and without electrical panel upgrade or new panel installation. ADUs and JADUs without additional parking but with electrical panel upgrades or new panels must have reserved breakers and electrical capacity according to the requirements of 4.106.4.1.

2. Projects with multifamily residential units that submitted Planning Applications prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

3. Parking spaces accessible only by automated mechanical car parking systems are not required to comply with this code section.
(b) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2, "New multifamily dwellings, hotels and motels and new residential parking facilities," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.2 New multifamily dwellings and new residential parking facilities. Requirements apply to parking spaces that are assigned or leased to individual dwelling units, as well as unassigned residential parking. Visitor or common area parking is not included. (c) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.1, "Multifamily development projects with less than 20 dwelling units; and hotels and motels with less than 20 sleeping units or guest rooms," is amended to read as follows:

Eighty-five percent (85%) of dwelling units with parking spaces shall be provided with a Low Power Level 2 EV Ready space. EV ready spaces and EVCS in multifamily developments shall comply with California Building Code, Chapter 11A, Section 1109A. EVCS shall comply with the accessibility provisions for EV chargers in the California Building Code, Chapter 11B.

Note: The total number of EV spaces should be one-hundred percent (100%) of dwelling units or one- hundred percent (100%) of parking spaces, whichever is less. (d) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2, "Multifamily development projects with 20 or more dwelling units, hotels and motels with 20 or more sleeping units or guest rooms," is amended to read as follows:

511 of 676

7 3
9 3
of the total number of parking spaces added or altered, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future Level 2 EVSE.

Notes:

1. Construction documents are intended to demonstrate the project’s capability and capacity for facilitating future EV charging.

2. There is no requirement for EV spaces to be constructed or available until EV chargers are installed for use.
(e) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1 “Electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS)” is not adopted (f) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1.1 “Location” is not adopted (g) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1.2 “Electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) dimensions” is not adopted
(h) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1.3 “Accessible EV spaces” is not adopted (i) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.3 “EV Space requirements” is not adopted (j) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.4 “Identification” is not adopted (k) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.5 “Electric Vehicle Ready Space Signage” is not adopted (l) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.3 “Electric vehicle charging for additions and alterations of parking facilities serving existing multifamily buildings,” is amended, and adds new subsections to read as follows:

4.106.4.3 Electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS). Electric vehicle charging stations required by Section

4.106.4.2 shall comply with Section 4.106.4.3.

Exception: Electric vehicle charging stations serving public accommodations, public housing, motels, and hotels shall not be required to comply with this section. See California Building Code, Chapter 11B, for applicable requirements.

4.106.4.3.1 Location. EVCS shall comply with at least one of the following options:

1. The charging space shall be located adjacent to an accessible parking space meeting the requirements of the California Building Code, Chapter 11A, to allow use of the EV charger from the accessible parking space.

2. The charging space shall be located on an accessible route, as defined in the California Building Code, Chapter 2, to the building.

Exception: Electric vehicle charging stations designed and constructed in compliance with the California Building Code, Chapter 11B, are not required to comply with Section 4.106.4.3.1 and Section 4.106.4.3.2.

4.106.4.3.2 Dimensions. The charging spaces shall be designed to comply with the following:

512 of 676

7 3
9 3

1. The minimum length of each EV space shall be 18 feet (5486 mm).

2. The minimum width of each EV space shall be 9 feet (2743 mm).

3. One in every 25 charging spaces, but not less than one, shall also have an 8-foot (2438 mm) wide minimum aisle. A 5-foot (1524 mm) wide minimum aisle shall be permitted provided the minimum width of the EV space is 12 feet (3658 mm).
a. Surface slope for this EV space and the aisle shall not exceed 1 unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2.083 percent slope) in any direction.

Exception: Where the City’s Municipal or Zoning Code permits parking space dimensions that are less than the minimum requirements stated in this section 4.106.4.3.2, and the compliance with which would be infeasible due to particular circumstances of a project, an exception may be granted while remaining in compliance with California Building Code Section Table 11B- 228.3.2.1 and 11B-812, as applicable.
(m) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4, "Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new construction," is amended to add a new subsection and read as follows:

4.106.4.4 Direct current fast charging stations. One DCFC may be substituted for up to five (5) EVCS to meet the requirements of 4.106.4.1 and 4.106.4.2. Where ALMS serve DCFC stations, the power demand from the DCFC shall be prioritized above Level 1 and Level 2 spaces.

Section 13. Section 23.70.050 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.050 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New Non-residential Construction (a) Green Building Code Section 5.106.5.3, "Electric vehicle (EV) charging," is amended, and adds new subsections to read as follows:

5.106.5.3 Electric vehicle (EV) charging. Construction to provide electric vehicle infrastructure and facilitate electric vehicle charging shall comply with Section 5.106.5.3 and shall be provided in accordance with regulations in the California Building Code and the California Electrical Code. Accessible EVCS shall be provided in accordance with the California Building Code Chapter 11B Section 11B-228.3.

For EVCS signs, refer to Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-01 (Zero Emission Vehicle Signs and Pavement Markings) or its successor(s). Calculation for spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Exceptions:

513 of 676

7 3
9 3
$4,500 per parking space. EV infrastructure shall be provided up to the level that would not exceed this cost for utility service.

2. Parking spaces accessible only by automated mechanical car parking systems are not required to comply with this code section.

5.106.5.3.1 Nonresidential Occupancy Class B Offices – Shared Parking Space.

5.106.5.3.1.1 New Construction. Twenty percent (20%) of parking spaces shall be EVCS with Level 2 EV Ready. ALMS shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging. Thirty percent (30%) of parking spaces provided shall be Level 2 EV Capable.

5.106.5.3.2 Hotel and Motel Occupancies – Shared Parking Facilities.

5.106.5.3.2.1 New Construction. Five percent (5%) of parking spaces provided shall be EVCS with Level 2 EV Ready. ALMS shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging.

Twenty-five percent (25%) of parking spaces provided shall be Low Power Level 2 EV Ready space. Ten percent (10%) of parking spaces provided shall be Level 2 EV Capable.

5.106.5.3.3 All Other Nonresidential Occupancies – Shared Parking Facilities.

5.106.5.3.3.1 New Construction. Ten percent (10%) of parking spaces provided shall be EVCS with Level 2 EV Ready. ALMS shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging. Ten percent (10%) of parking spaces provided shall be Level 2 EV Capable.

5.106.5.3.4 Direct current fast charging stations. One DCFC may be substituted for up to five (5) EVCS to meet the requirements of 5.106.5.3.1, 5.106.5.3.2, and 5.106.5.3.3. Where ALMS serve DCFC stations, the power demand from the DCFC shall be prioritized above Level 1 and Level 2 spaces. (b) Green Building Code Section 5.106.5.4 “Electric vehicle (EV) charging: medium-duty and heavy-duty,” is amended to read as follows:

5.106.5.4 Electric vehicle (EV) charging readiness. Construction shall comply with Section 5.106.5.4.1 to facilitate future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Construction for warehouses, grocery stores and retail stores with planned off-street loading spaces shall also comply with Section

5.106.5.4.1 for future installation of medium- and heavy-duty EVSE. Accessible EVCS shall be provided in accordance with the California Building Code Chapter 11B Section 11B-228.3. For EVCS signs, refer to Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-01 (Zero Emission Vehicle Signs and Pavement Markings) or its successor(s).

Exceptions:

514 of 676

7 3
9 3
implementation of Section 5.106.5.3, may increase construction cost by an average of $4,500 per parking space. EV infrastructure shall be provided up to the level that would not exceed this cost for utility service.

Section 14. Section 23.70.060 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.060 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Requirements for New Residential Construction (a) Green Building Code Section 4.106 “Site Development,” is amended to include new subsections to read as follows:

4.106.5 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings shall comply with Section 4.106.5.1 or

4.106.5.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to accommodate installation of electric heating appliances.

4.106.5.1 New construction. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings.

Exceptions:

If the applicant establishes that there is not an all-electric prescriptive compliance pathway for the building under the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and that the building is not able to achieve the performance compliance standard applicable to the building under the Energy Efficiency Standards using commercially available technology and an approved calculation method, then the local enforcing agency may grant a modification. The applicant shall comply with Section 4.106.5.2.

Inactive Fuel Gas Infrastructure may be extended to spaces that are anticipated to qualify for the exceptions contained in this chapter. The inactive Fuel Gas Infrastructure shall not be activated, have a meter installed, or otherwise used unless the exemptions specified in this chapter have been confirmed as part of the issuance of a building permit. If the Fuel Gas Infrastructure is no longer serving one of the exceptions contained in this chapter, it shall either be capped, otherwise terminated, or removed by the entity previously entitled to the exemption, in a manner pursuant to all applicable Codes.

The City of San Mateo shall have the authority to approve alternative materials, design and methods of construction or equipment per California Building Code Section 104.

4.106.5.2 Requirements for combustion equipment.

Where combustion equipment is allowed per Exceptions under 4.106.5.1, the construction drawings shall indicate electrical infrastructure and physical space accommodating the future installation of an electrical heating appliance in the following ways, as certified by a registered design professional or licensed electrical contractor:

515 of 676

7 3
9 3
receptacle or junction box within five feet of the appliance that is accessible with no obstructions. Appropriately sized conduit may be installed in lieu of conductors; and

2. Labeling of both ends of the unused conductors or conduit shall be with “For Future Electrical Appliance”; and

3. Reserved circuit breakers in the electrical panel for each branch circuit, appropriately labeled (i.e “Reserved for Future Electric Range”), and positioned on the opposite end of the panel supply conductor connection; and

4. Connected subpanels, panelboards, switchboards, busbars, and transformers shall be sized to serve the future electrical heating appliances. The electrical capacity requirements shall be adjusted for demand factors in accordance with the California Electric Code; and

5. Physical space for future electrical heating appliances, including equipment footprint, and if needed a pathway reserved for routing of ductwork to heat pump evaporator(s), shall be depicted on the construction drawings. The footprint necessary for future electrical heating appliances may overlap with non-structural partitions and with the location of currently designed combustion equipment.

Section 15. Section 23.70.070 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.070 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Requirements for New Nonresidential Construction (a) Green Building Code Section 5.106 “Site Development” is amended to include new subsections as follows:

5.106.13 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings shall comply with Section 5.106.13.1 or

5.106.13.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to facilitate future electrification.

5.106.13.1. New construction. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings.

Exceptions:

1. Nonresidential buildings containing kitchens located in a place of public accommodation, as defined in the California Building Code Chapter 2, may apply to the local enforcing agency for a modification to install commercial food heat-processing equipment served by fuel gas. The local enforcing agency may grant the modification if they find:
a. A business-related need to cook with combustion equipment; and b. The need cannot be achieved equivalently with an electric heating appliance; and c. The applicant has installed energy efficient equipment based on Energy Star or California Energy Wise qualifications, as available.
d. The applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.13.2.

516 of 676

7 3
9 3

2. Laboratory areas within Non-Residential Buildings may contain non-electric Space Conditioning Systems. To take advantage of this exception, an applicant shall provide third party verification that the All-electric space heating requirement is not cost effective and feasible.

3. If the applicant establishes that there is not an all-electric prescriptive compliance pathway for the building under the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and that the building is not able to achieve the performance compliance standard applicable to the building under the Energy Efficiency Standards using commercially available technology and an approved calculation method, then the local enforcing agency may grant a modification. The applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.13.2
Inactive Fuel Gas Infrastructure may be extended to spaces that are anticipated to qualify for the exceptions contained in this chapter. The inactive Fuel Gas Infrastructure shall not be activated, have a meter installed, or otherwise used unless the exemptions specified in this chapter have been confirmed as part of the issuance of a building permit. If the Fuel Gas Infrastructure is no longer serving one of the exceptions contained in this chapter, it shall either be capped, otherwise terminated, or removed by the entity previously entitled to the exemption, in a manner pursuant to all applicable Codes.

The City of San Mateo shall have the authority to approve alternative materials, design and methods of construction or equipment per California Building Code Section 104.

5.106.13.2. Requirements for combustion equipment. Where combustion equipment is allowed per exceptions under Section 5.106.13.1, the construction drawings shall indicate electrical infrastructure and physical space accommodating the future installation of an electrical heating appliance in the following ways, as certified by a registered design professional or licensed electrical contractor:

1. Branch circuit wiring, electrically isolated and designed to serve all electrical heating appliances in accordance with manufacturer requirements and the California Electrical Code, including the appropriate voltage, phase, minimum amperage, and an electrical receptacle or junction box within five feet of the appliance that is accessible with no obstructions.

Appropriately sized conduit may be installed in lieu of conductors; and

2. Labeling of both ends of the unused conductors or conduit shall be with “For Future Electrical Appliance”; and

517 of 676

7 3
9 3
appliances may overlap with non-structural partitions and with the location of currently designed combustion equipment.

Section 16. Section 23.70.080 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is amended as follows:

23.70.080 Local Amendment Regarding Electrification Requirements for Existing Residential Buildings (a) Green Building Code Section 4.106 “Site Development” is amended to include new subsections as follows:

4.106.5.3 Existing one- and two-family dwellings.

4.106.5.3.1 Space cooling appliance upgrades in conjunction with space heating appliance upgrades shall use electricity for space heating, unconnected to fuel gas infrastructure. Any other space heating system serving the space shall be removed or configured to provide supplemental heat.

4.106.5.3.2 Alterations and additions that include water heater appliance upgrades shall be all- electric, unconnected to fuel gas infrastructure.

4.106.5.3.3 Kitchen alterations shall include a 240v, 50 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of the cooktop, oven, and/or range location.

4.106.5.3.4 Alterations to areas designated for the installation of laundry equipment shall include a 240v, 30 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of clothes drying appliance location.

4.106.5.4 Existing residential buildings.

4.106.5.4.1 Alterations or additions that involve or require an increase to the capacity of electrical panels or transformers as part of the scope, the electrical panel shall include reserved physical space for overcurrent protection devices, and transformers shall include reserved electrical capacity, as calculated per California Electric Code Section 220 for the following current or proposed appliances, as applicable to the project site, that will not be connected to fuel gas infrastructure:

1. Electric water heaters meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code.

2. Electric space heater and air-conditioner meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code.

3. Electric pool and/or spa water heater.

4. Electric clothes dryer.

5. Electric cooking equipment.

6. Electric vehicle charger
Exceptions:

518 of 676

7 3
9 3

1. Buss bar electrical capacity shall not be required to exceed the proposed utility electrical service to the building. Capacity and overcurrent protection spaces shall be reserved in the priority listed above to the extent allowable under the proposed buss bar capacity.

2. Reserved electric vehicle charger panel capacity may be shared with one of the following: water heater, clothes dryer, or cooking equipment.

3. Electrical panels with internet-connected overcurrent protection devices that monitor circuit load and manage power distribution.

4.106.5.4.2 Existing fuel gas infrastructure shall not be extended to any appliance, system or device within the building or building property. Inactive fuel gas infrastructure shall not be activated or otherwise operated.

Exceptions: The following are exempt from the provisions of Section 4.106.5.3 “Existing one- and two-family dwellings” and Section 4.106.5.4 “Existing residential buildings,”

1. Where meeting the provisions of Section 4.106.5.3 or 4.106.5.4 would necessitate an increase in capacity for an electrical panel, feeders, transformer, or electrical service that is not part of the appliance upgrade scope, in order to meet the requirements of the California Electrical Code. To qualify for this exception, applicant must provide a calculation conforming to the California Electrical Code.

2. Economic hardship exemptions shall be provided if the replacement cost for an all-electric system, including all incentives, is greater than 110 percent of a like-for-like fuel gas system replacement, including the future costs of electrification retrofits. The building official shall consult with the Community Development Director in deciding whether to approve an economic hardship exemption.

Section 17. Section 23.70.090 of the San Mateo Municipal Code is added to Chapter 23.70 as follows:

23.70.090 Expiration
These local code amendments shall sunset when the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, is no longer in effect.

Section 18. Environmental Determination. In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, section 15308, adoption of this ordinance is categorically exempt from CEQA, because adoption of these green building standards is authorized by the state and is intended to assure the protection of the environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Section 19. Severability. In the event any section, clause or provision of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section, clause or provision shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.

519 of 676

7 3
9 3
Section 20. Publication. This ordinance shall be published in summary in a newspaper of general circulation, posted in the City Clerk's Office, and posted on the City's website, all in accord with California Government Code section 6066.

Section 21. Legislative History and Effective Date. This ordinance was introduced on Clerk to complete., and adopted on Clerk to complete., and shall be effective January 1, 2023.

520 of 676

Chapter 23.24

ENERGY CODE

23.24.010 Adoption
(a) The California Energy Code, 202219 Edition, Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Energy Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended. for so long as the 2019 Edition of the Building Energy Code is in effect;
(b) One copy of the Energy Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.24.020 Local Amendment to Definitions
Subchapter 1, "All Occupancies – General Provisions," Section 100.1(b), of the 2019 state Energy Code is amended to add the following definitions:

Affordable unit means housing that meets either of the following criteria:
(a) housing that is affordable to very low-income, low-income, or moderate-income households, or designated as 100% for senior households. Very low-income, low-income, and moderate-income households have the meaning set forth in the Health and Safety Code sections 50105, 50079.5, 50093, respectively. Senior households means households composed of qualifying residents as defined in Section 51.3 of the Civil Code; or
(b) housing that meets the criteria of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Project or Department of Housing and Urban Development programs that assist low-income and moderate-income households.

All-electric building or all-electric design is a building or building design that uses a permanent supply of electricity as the only source of energy for space conditioning (including heating and cooling), water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances, and clothes drying appliances, and has no natural gas or propane plumbing installed at the building.

Mixed-fuel building or mixed-fuel design is a building or building design that uses natural gas or propane as fuel for space heating, water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances or clothes drying appliances or is plumbed for such equipment.

23.24.030 Local Amendment Regarding Mandatory Solar Installations Subchapter 5—"Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency," Section 140.0(b), of the state Energy Code is amended to include:

A. Solar photovoltaic systems shall be installed as follows:

521 of 676

1. New residential buildings four stories or more shall provide a minimum of a 3- kilowatt photovoltaic system.

2. New non-residential buildings with less than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area shall provide a minimum of a 3- kilowatt photovoltaic system.

3. New non-residential buildings greater than or equal to 10,000 square feet of gross floor area shall provide a minimum of a 5-kilowatt photovoltaic system.

Exception to Section A: As an alternative to a solar photovoltaic system, all of the building types listed above may provide a solar hot water system (solar thermal) with a minimum collector area of 40 square feet.

23.24.040 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Requirements for Residential Buildings and Buildings with Office Use.
(a) Subchapter 2 "All Occupancies—Mandatory Requirements for The Manufacture, Construction And Installation Of Systems, Equipment And Building Components" is amended to add a new section 110.13 "All-Electric Buildings." Section 110.13 "All-Electric Buildings" shall read as follows:
(b) All newly constructed office buildings and residential buildings shall be designed, constructed, and equipped as All-Electric Buildings.

Exception to Section 110.13. Multifamily buildings that consist of 100% affordable units shall be exempt from the all-electric building provisions of this section. For purposes of this exception, "affordable unit" is defined in Section 100.1(b).

23.24.050 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric or Energy Efficiency Standards for High-Rise Multifamily Residential Buildings with 100% Affordable Units. (a) All-electric high-rise multifamily buildings that consist of 100% affordable units are required to meet the established energy efficiency standards in Subchapter 5, "Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency," of the 2019 state Energy Code. (b) Mixed-fuel high-rise multifamily buildings that consist of 100% affordable units shall comply with increased energy efficiency standards. Subchapter 5, "Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency," of the 2019 state Energy Code is amended to require increased energy efficiency standards in the performance or prescriptive compliance approaches as follows:
(1) Performance Approach: Energy Code Section 140.1 "Performance Approach: Energy Budgets" is amended to include the following performance standards for mixed-fuel high-rise multifamily building that consists of 100% affordable units: A newly constructed mixed-fuel high-rise multifamily building that consists of 100% affordable units complies with the performance approach if the energy budget calculated for the Proposed Design Building under

522 of 676

Subsection (b) has a compliance margin exceeding the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building under Subsection (a) of at least 5%. (2) Prescriptive Approach: Energy Code Section 140.2 "Prescriptive Approach" is amended to include the following prescriptive standards for newly constructed mixed-fuel high- rise multifamily buildings that consist of 100% affordable units:
(A) Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no greater than 0.22. (B) Design Variable Air Volume (VAV) box minimum airflows to be equal to the zone ventilation minimums.
(C) Include economizers and staged fan control in air handlers with a mechanical cooling capacity ≥ 33,000 Btu/h
(D) Reduce the total lighting power density (Watts/ft2) by ten percent (10%) from that required from Table 140.6-C in the 2019 state Energy Code. (E) Improve lighting without claiming any Power Adjustment Factor credits:
(i) Control to daylight dimming plus off per 2019 state Energy Code Section 140.6(a)2H, and
(ii) Perform Institutional Tuning per 2019 state Energy Code Section 140.6(a)2J.
(F) For all ducted central forced air heating systems and central fan integrated ventilation systems the duct distribution system shall be designed to reduce external static pressure to meet a maximum fan efficacy equal to 0.25 Watts per cfm according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 state Energy Code Reference Appendices RA3.3. (G) Hot water pipe insulation shall be verified by a HERS inspector, in accordance with the 2019 state Energy Code Reference Appendices Section RA3.6.3.

23.24.060 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Buildings or Energy Efficiency Standards for Low-Rise Residential Buildings with 100% Affordable Units.
(a) All-electric low-rise residential buildings that consist of 100% affordable units are required to meet the established energy efficiency standards in Subchapter 8, "Low-rise Residential Buildings – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches," of the 2019 state Energy Code. (b) Mixed-fuel low-rise residential buildings that consist of 100% affordable units shall comply with increased energy efficiency standards. Subchapter 8, "Low-rise Residential Buildings – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches," of the 2019 state Energy Code is amended to require

523 of 676

increased energy efficiency standards in the performance and prescriptive compliance approaches as follows:
(1) Performance Approach: Section 150.1.b. "Performance standards" is amended to include the following performance standard for newly constructed mixed-fuel low-rise residential buildings that consist of 100% affordable units:

The Total Energy Design Rating calculated for the Proposed Design Building shall be at least 0.5 EDR points less than the Total Energy Design Rating calculated for the Standard Design Building.
(2) Prescriptive Approach: Section 150.1.c. "Prescriptive standards/component packages" is amended to include the following prescriptive standards for newly constructed mixed-fuel low-rise residential buildings that consist of 100% affordable units:
(A) Slab floor perimeter insulation shall be installed with an R-value equal to or greater than R10. The minimum depth of concrete-slab floor perimeter insulation shall be 16 inches or the depth of the footing of the building, whichever is less. (B) The hot water distribution system shall be designed and installed to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 state Energy Code Reference Appendices RA4.4.6. (C) Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems. Central forced air system fans used to provide outside air, shall have an air-handling unit fan efficacy less than or equal to 0.35 W/CFM. The airflow rate and fan efficacy requirements in this section shall be confirmed through field verification and diagnostic testing in accordance with all applicable procedures specified in 2019 state Energy Code Reference Residential Appendix RA3.3. Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems shall be certified to the Energy Commission as Intermittent Ventilation Systems as specified in 2019 state Energy Code Reference Residential Appendix RA3.7.4.2.
(D) Energy storage or Solar Thermal. Either of the following shall be installed:
(i) A battery energy storage system with a capacity equivalent to the PV system shall be installed. The system shall have automatic controls programmed to have the ability to charge anytime PV generation is greater than the building load and discharge to the electric grid during the highest priced time of use hours of the day , OR
(ii) A solar water heating system with a minimum solar savings fraction of 0.20.

524 of 676

23.24.070 Infeasibility Exemption.
(a) Exemption. If an applicant believes that circumstances exist that makes it infeasible to meet the requirements of this Chapter, the applicant may request an exemption from the Building Official or designee at the time of planning application submittal. In applying for an exemption, the burden is on the applicant to show infeasibility. The applicant shall indicate the maximum threshold of compliance he or she believes is feasible to fully comply with this Chapter. (b) Infeasibility. Circumstances that constitute infeasibility include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) There is a lack of commercially available materials and technologies to comply with the requirements of this Chapter;
(2) Applying the requirements of this Chapter would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. (c) Granting of Exemption. If the Building Official or designee determines that it is infeasible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of this Chapter based on the information provided, the Building Official or designee, shall determine the maximum feasible threshold of compliance reasonably achievable for the project. The decision of the Building Official or designee shall be provided to the applicant in writing. If an exemption is granted, the applicant shall be required to comply with this Chapter in all other respects and shall be required to achieve, in accordance with this Chapter, the threshold of compliance determined to be achievable by the Building Official or designee. (d) Denial of Exemption. If the Building Official or designee determines that it is reasonably possible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of this Chapter, the request shall be denied and the Building Official or designee shall so notify the applicant in writing. The project and compliance documentation shall be modified to comply with this Chapter prior to further review of any pending planning or building permit application.
(e) Appeals of Exemption Denial. If denied the infeasibility exemption, the applicant may appeal in writing to the Community Development Department (CDD) Director. The CDD Director will consider the information provided and render a written decision regarding infeasibility based on the factors set forth in this Chapter. The decision of the CDD Director shall be final.

23.24.080 Expiration.

These local code amendments shall sunset when the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, is no longer in effect.

525 of 676

7 3
6 3
Chapter 23.70

GREEN BUILDING CODE

23.70.010 Adoption
(a) The California Green Building Standards Code, 202219 Edition, Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Green Building Code," is adopted as the rules, regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended; (b) One copy of the Green Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.

23.70.020 Local Amendments to Definitions
(a) The definitions contained Chapter 2, "Definitions" of the state Green Building Code are adopted.
(b)(a) The most commonly used definitions of the Green Building Code are set forth below:

ADDITION. An extension or increase in floor area of an existing building or structure.

ALTERATION OR ALTER. Any construction or renovation to an existing structure other than repair for the purpose of maintenance or addition.

Electric Vehicle Charging Space (EV Space). A space intended for future installation of EV charging equipment and charging of electric vehicles.

NEWLY CONSTRUCTED (or NEW CONSTRUCTION). A newly constructed building (or new construction) does not include additions, alterations or repairs.

OFF-STREET LOADING SPACES. An area, other than a public street, public way, or other property (and exclusive of off-street parking spaces), permanently reserved or set aside for the loading or unloading of motor vehicles, including ways of ingress and egress and maneuvering areas. Whenever the term

526 of 676

7 3
6 3
"loading space" is used, it shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, be construed as meaning off-street loading space. This excludes designated passenger loading/unloading. (c)(b) Chapter 2 "Definitions,"Green Building Code Section 202 of the state Green Building Code is amended to include the following definitions:

AFFORDABLE HOUSING. Residential buildings that entirely consist of units below market rate and whose rents or sales prices are governed by local agencies to be affordable based on area median income.

ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDING. A building that contains no combustion equipment or plumbing for combustion equipment serving space heating (including fireplaces), water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances (including barbeques), and clothes drying, within the building or building property lines, and instead uses electric heating appliances for service.

APPLIANCE UPGRADE. The installation, relocation, or replacement of any appliance.

AUTOMATIC LOAD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ALMS). A control system designed to manage load across one or more electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), circuits, panels and to share electrical capacity and/or automatically manage power at each connection point. ALMS systems shall be designed to deliver no less than 3.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 16-ampere) to each EV Capable, EV Ready or EVCS space served by the ALMS, and meet the requirements of California Electrical Code Article 625. The connected amperage to the building site for the EV charging infrastructure shall not be lower than the required connected amperage per California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24 Part 11.

COMBUSTION EQUIPMENT. Any equipment or appliance used for space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying and/or lighting that uses fuel gas.

DIRECT CURRENT FAST CHARGING (DCFC). A parking space provided with electrical infrastructure that meets the following conditions:
i. A minimum of 48 kVa (480 volt, 100-ampere) capacity wiring. ii. Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) located within three (3) feet of the parking space providing a minimum capacity of 80-ampere.

ELECTRIC HEATING APPLIANCE. A device that produces heat energy to create a warm environment by the application of electric power to resistance elements, refrigerant compressors, or dissimilar material junctions, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION (EVCS). A parking space that includes installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) at an EV Ready space. An EVCS space may be used to satisfy EV Ready space requirements. EVSE shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code, Article 625.

FUEL GAS. A gas that is natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

FUEL GAS INFRASTRUCTURE. Piping, other than service pipe, in or in connection with a building, structure or within the property lines of premises, extending from the point of delivery at the gas meter,

527 of 676

7 3
6 3
service meter assembly, outlet of the service regulator, service shutoff valve, or final pressure regulator, whichever is applicable, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

LABORATORY. A room, building or area where the use and storage of hazardous materials are utilized for testing, analysis, instruction, research or developmental activities.

LEVEL 1 EV READY. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
i. A minimum of 2.2 kVa (110/120 volt, 20-ampere) capacity wiring. ii. A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three (3) feet of the parking space. If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE shall be 16-ampere.
iii. Conduit oversized to accommodate future Level 2 EV Ready (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) at each parking space.

LEVEL 2 EV CAPABLE. A parking space provided with electrical infrastructure that meets the following requirements:
i. Conduit that links a listed electrical panel with sufficient capacity to a junction box or receptacle located within three (3) feet of the parking space.
ii. The conduit shall be designed to accommodate at least 8.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) per parking space. Conduit shall have a minimum nominal trade size of 1 inch inside diameter and may be sized for multiple circuits as allowed by the California Electrical Code. Conduit shall be installed at a minimum in spaces that will be inaccessible after construction, either trenched underground or where penetrations to walls, floors, or other partitions would otherwise be required for future installation of branch circuits, and such additional elements deemed necessary by the Building Official. Construction documents shall indicate future completion of conduit from the panel to the parking space, via the installed inaccessible conduit. iii. The electrical panel shall reserve a space for a 40-ampere overcurrent protective device space(s) for EV charging, labeled in the panel directory as “EV CAPABLE.” iv. Electrical load calculations shall demonstrate that the electrical panel service capacity and electrical system, including any on-site distribution transformer(s), have sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge all EVs at all required EV spaces at a minimum of 40 amperes. v. The parking space shall contain signage with at least a 12” font adjacent to the parking space indicating the space is EV Capable.

LEVEL 2 EV READY. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
i. A minimum of 8.3 kVa (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) capacity wiring. ii. A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three (3) feet of the parking space. If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE shall be 30-ampere.

LOW POWER LEVEL 2 EV READY. A parking space that is served by a complete electric circuit with the following requirements:
i. A minimum of 4.1 kVA (208/240 Volt, 20-ampere) capacity wiring. ii. A receptacle labeled “Electric Vehicle Outlet” or electric vehicle supply equipment located within three (3) feet of the parking space. If EVSE is provided the minimum capacity of the EVSE

528 of 676

7 3
6 3
shall be 16-ampere.
i.iii. Conduit oversized to accommodate future Level 2 EV Ready (208/240 volt, 40-ampere) at each parking space.

REPAIR. Reconstruction, replacement, or renewal of any part of an existing building for the purpose of its maintenance or to correct damage, as defined in the California Existing Building Code.

Level 2 EVSE. An EVSE capable of charging at 30 amperes or higher at 208 or 240 VAC. An EVSE capable of simultaneously charging at 30 amperes for each of two vehicles shall be counted as two Level 2 EVSE. (c) Green Building Code Section 202 is amended to delete the following definitions:

ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CAPABLE SPACE. A vehicle space with electrical panel space and load capacity to support a branch circuit and necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted, to support EV charging.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) READY SPACE. [HCD] A vehicle space which is provided with a branch circuit; any necessary raceways, both underground and/or surface mounted; to accommodate EV charging, terminating in a receptacle or a charger.

LEVEL 2 ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT (EVSE). [HCD] The 208/240 Volt 40ampere branch circuit, and the electric vehicle charging connectors, attachment plugs, and all other fittings, devices, power outlets, or apparatus installed specifically for the purpose of transferring energy between the premises wiring and the electric vehicle.

LOW POWER LEVEL 2 ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING RECEPTACLE. [HCD] A 208/240 Volt 20- ampere minimum branch circuit and a receptacle for use by an EV driver to charge their electric vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle.

23.70.030 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging For New One- and Two-Family Dwellings and Town-Houses
(a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.1, "New one- and two-family dwellings and town-houses with attached private garages," is amended to require the Tier 1 and Tier 2 requirement per Section A4.106.8.1 and A4.106.8.1.1 of the Green Building Code as followsread as follows:

4.106.4.1 New one- and two-family dwellings and town-houses with attached private garages. (b) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.1.1, "Identification," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.1.1 New Construction One parking space provided shall be a Level 2 EV Ready space. If a second parking space is provided, it shall be provided with a Level 1 EV Ready space. .(1) Tier 1 and Tier 2. For each dwelling unit, a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit shall be installed in the raceway required by Section 4.106.4.1. The branch circuit and associated overcurrent protective device shall be rated at 40 amperes minimum. Other electrical components, including a receptacle or blank cover, related to this section shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code.

529 of 676

7 3
6 3
A4.106.8.1.1 Identification. The service panel or sub-panel circuit directory shall identify the overcurrent protective device designated for future EV charging purposes as "EV READY" in accordance with the California Electrical Code. The receptacle or blank cover shall be identified as "EV READY."

23.70.040 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging For New Multifamily Residential Construction
(a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4 “Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new construction,” is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4 Electric vehicle (EV) charging. New construction shall comply with Section 4.106.4.1 or

Exceptions:

1. On a case-by-case basis, where the local enforcing agency has determined EV charging and infrastructure are not feasible based upon one or more of the following conditions:

1.1. Where there is no local utility power supply or the local utility is unable to supply adequate power.

1.2. Where there is evidence suitable to the local enforcing agency substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly related to the implementation of Section 4.106.4, may increase construction cost by an average of $4,500 per parking space for market rate housing or $400 per parking space for affordable housing. EV infrastructure shall be provided up to the level that would not exceed this cost for utility service.

2. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) without additional parking facilities and without electrical panel upgrade or new panel installation. ADUs and JADUs without additional parking but with electrical panel upgrades or new panels must have reserved breakers and electrical capacity according to the requirements of 4.106.4.1.

3. Projects with multifamily residential units that submitted Planning Applications prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

4. Parking spaces accessible only by automated mechanical car parking systems are not required to comply with this code section.
(b) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2, "New multifamily dwellings, hotels and motels and new residential parking facilities," is amended to read as follows:
(b)

530 of 676

7 3
6 3
Tier 1: 15 percent of the total number of parking spaces on a building site, provided for all types of parking facilities, but in no case less than one, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Calculations for required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Requirements related to EV spaces for multifamily residential projects can be found in Green Building Code Sections 4.106.4.2.3 "Single EV space required" and 4.106.4.2.4 "Multiple EV spaces required."

4.106.4.2 New multifamily dwellings and new residential parking facilities. Requirements apply to parking spaces that are assigned or leased to individual dwelling units, as well as unassigned residential parking. Visitor or common area parking is not included. (c)Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.1, "Multifamily development projects with less than 20 dwelling units; and hotels and motels with less than 20 sleeping units or guest rooms," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.2.1 New Construction. Fifteen percent (15%) of dwelling units with parking spaces shall be EVCS with Level 2 EV Ready. ALMS shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging. Eighty-five percent (85%) of dwelling units with parking spaces shall be provided with a Low Power Level 2 EV Ready space. EV ready spaces and EVCS in multifamily developments shall comply with California Building Code, Chapter 11A, Section 1109A. EVCS shall comply with the accessibility provisions for EV chargers in the California Building Code, Chapter 11B.

Note: The total number of EV spaces should be one-hundred percent (100%) of dwelling units or one-hundred percent (100%) of parking spaces, whichever is less. (d) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2, "Multifamily development projects with 20 or more dwelling units, hotels and motels with 20 or more sleeping units or guest rooms," is amended to read as follows:

4.106.4.2.2 Existing Buildings. When new parking facilities are added, or electrical systems or lighting of existing parking facilities are added or altered and the work requires a building permit, ten (10) percent of the total number of parking spaces added or altered, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future Level 2 EVSE.

Notes:

1. Construction documents are intended to demonstrate the project’s capability and capacity for facilitating future EV charging.

531 of 676

7 3
6 3
(g) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1.2 “Electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) dimensions” is not adopted
(h) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.2.1.3 “Accessible EV spaces” is not adopted (i) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.3 “EV Space requirements” is not adopted (j) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.4 “Identification” is not adopted (k) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2.5 “Electric Vehicle Ready Space Signage” is not adopted (c) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.3 “Electric vehicle charging for additions and alterations of parking facilities serving existing multifamily buildings,” is amended, and adds new subsections to read as follows:
(l)

4.106.4.3 Electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS). Electric vehicle charging stations required by Section

4.106.4.2 shall comply with Section 4.106.4.3.

4.106.4.3.1 Location. EVCS shall comply with at least one of the following options:

2. The charging space shall be located on an accessible route, as defined in the California Building Code, Chapter 2, to the building.

Exception: Electric vehicle charging stations designed and constructed in compliance with the California Building Code, Chapter 11B, are not required to comply with Section

4.106.4.3.1 and Section 4.106.4.3.2.

4.106.4.3.2 Dimensions. The charging spaces shall be designed to comply with the following:

1. The minimum length of each EV space shall be 18 feet (5486 mm).

2. The minimum width of each EV space shall be 9 feet (2743 mm).

3. One in every 25 charging spaces, but not less than one, shall also have an 8- foot (2438 mm) wide minimum aisle. A 5-foot (1524 mm) wide minimum aisle shall be permitted provided the minimum width of the EV space is 12 feet (3658 mm).
a. Surface slope for this EV space and the aisle shall not exceed 1 unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2.083 percent slope) in any direction.

Exception: Where the City’s Municipal or Zoning Code permits parking space dimensions that are less than the minimum requirements stated in this section 4.106.4.3.2, and the compliance

532 of 676

7 3
6 3
with which would be infeasible due to particular circumstances of a project, an exception may be granted while remaining in compliance with California Building Code Section Table 11B- 228.3.2.1 and 11B-812, as applicable.
(m) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4, "Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new construction," is amended to add a new subsection and read as follows:

23.70.050 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New Non-residential Construction
(a) Green Building Code Section 5.106.5.3.3, "EV charging space calculationElectric vehicle (EV) charging," is amended, and adds new subsections to read as follows require increased standards for new non-residential buildings with ten parking spaces or more as follows:

Exceptions:

2. Parking spaces accessible only by automated mechanical car parking systems are not required to comply with this code section.

5.106.5.3.1 Nonresidential Occupancy Class B Offices – Shared Parking Space.

533 of 676

7 3
6 3

5.106.5.3.2 Hotel and Motel Occupancies – Shared Parking Facilities.

5.106.5.3.2.1 New Construction. Five percent (5%) of parking spaces provided shall be EVCS with Level 2 EV Ready. ALMS shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging. Twenty-five percent (25%) of parking spaces provided shall be Low Power Level 2 EV Ready space. Ten percent (10%) of parking spaces provided shall be Level 2 EV Capable.

5.106.5.3.3 All Other Nonresidential Occupancies – Shared Parking Facilities.

5.106.5.3.4 Direct current fast charging stations. One DCFC may be substituted for up to five (5) EVCS to meet the requirements of 5.106.5.3.1, 5.106.5.3.2, and 5.106.5.3.3. Where ALMS serve DCFC stations, the power demand from the DCFC shall be prioritized above Level 1 and Level 2 spaces.
(b) Green Building Code Section 5.106.5.4 “Electric vehicle (EV) charging: medium-duty and heavy- duty,” is amended to read as follows:

Exceptions:

1. On a case-by-case basis where the local enforcing agency has determined compliance with this section is not feasible based upon one of the following conditions:
a. Where there is no local utility power supply.
b. Where the local utility is unable to supply adequate power. c. Where there is evidence suitable to the local enforcing agency substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly related to the implementation of Section 5.106.5.3, may increase construction cost by an average of $4,500 per parking space. EV infrastructure shall be provided up to the level that would not exceed this cost for utility service.to
(1) Ten percent of the total number of parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities shall be EV spaces capable of supporting future EVSE. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. (2) Five percent of the total number of parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities shall be equipped with Level 2 EVSE. Calculations for the required number of spaces with Level 2 EVSE shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.

534 of 676

7 3
6 3
Requirements related to EV spaces for nonresidential projects can be found in Green Building Code Sections 5.106.5.3.1 "Single charging space requirements" and 5.106.5.3.2 "Multiple charging space requirements."

4.106.5 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings shall comply with Section 4.106.5.1 or

4.106.5.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to accommodate installation of electric heating appliances.

4.106.5.1 New construction. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings.

Exceptions:

The applicant shall comply with Section 4.106.5.2.

The City of San Mateo shall have the authority to approve alternative materials, design and methods of construction or equipment per California Building Code Section 104.

4.106.5.2 Requirements for combustion equipment.

2. Labeling of both ends of the unused conductors or conduit shall be with “For Future Electrical Appliance”; and

535 of 676

7 3
6 3

23.70.060 Local Amendment RegardingEe Electric Vehicle Space Design Requirements Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2, "New multifamily dwellings," and Section 5.106.5.3.3, "EV charging space calculation" are amended to require EV space design requirements as follows:

For all projects subject to Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 11B, construction documents shall indicate how many accessible EV spaces would be required under the California Code of Regulations Title 24, Chapter 11B, if applicable, in order to convert EV spaces to include EVSE.

Construction documents shall also demonstrate that the facility is designed such that compliance with accessibility standards, including Chapter 11B accessible routes, will be feasible for the required accessible EV Space at the time of EVSE installation. Surface slope for any area designated for accessible EV Space shall meet slope requirements in Chapter 11B and vertical clearance requirements in Chapter 11B at the time of original building construction.

23.70.070 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Requirements for New Nonresidential Construction (a)Green Building Code Section 5.106 “Site Development” is amended to include new subsections and read as follows:

5.106.13 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings shall comply with Section 5.106.13.1 or

5.106.13.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to facilitate future electrification.

5.106.13.1. New construction. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings.

Exceptions:

536 of 676

7 3
6 3
c. The applicant has installed energy efficient equipment based on Energy Star or California Energy Wise qualifications, as available.
d. The applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.13.2.

The City of San Mateo shall have the authority to approve alternative materials, design and methods of construction or equipment per California Building Code Section 104.

2. Labeling of both ends of the unused conductors or conduit shall be with “For Future Electrical Appliance”; and

537 of 676

7 3
6 3

23.70.070 Modifications
If an applicant for a Covered Project believes that circumstances exist that make it infeasible to meet the requirements of this Chapter, the applicant may request a modification set forth in Section

23.06.015 of the Municipal Code. In applying for the modification, the burden is on the Applicant to show infeasibility. The Building Official may grant a modification to exempt the applicant from these requirements if he or she makes either of the following findings:
(a) Where there is insufficient electrical supply; or
(b) Where there is evidence substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly related to the implementation of these requirements, may have a significant adverse impact the construction cost of the project.

23.70.080 Local Amendment Regarding Electrification Requirements for Existing Residential Buildings Expiration
(a)Green Building Code Section 4.106 “Site Development” is amended to include new subsections and read as follows:

4.106.5.3 Existing one- and two-family dwellings.

4.106.5.3.2 Alterations and additions that include water heater appliance upgrades shall be all- electric, unconnected to fuel gas infrastructure.

4.106.5.3.3 Kitchen alterations shall include a 240v, 50 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of the cooktop, oven, and/or range location.

4.106.5.4 Existing residential buildings.

4.106.5.4.1 Alterations or additions that involve or require an increase to the capacity of electrical panels or transformers as part of the scope, the electrical panel shall include reserved

538 of 676

7 3
6 3
physical space for overcurrent protection devices, and transformers shall include reserved electrical capacity, as calculated per California Electric Code Section 220 for the following current or proposed appliances, as applicable to the project site, that will not be connected to fuel gas infrastructure:

1. Electric water heaters meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code.

2. Electric space heater and air-conditioner meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code.

3. Electric pool and/or spa water heater.

4. Electric clothes dryer.

5. Electric cooking equipment.

6. Electric vehicle charger
Exceptions:

2. Reserved electric vehicle charger panel capacity may be shared with one of the following: water heater, clothes dryer, or cooking equipment.

3. Electrical panels with internet-connected overcurrent protection devices that monitor circuit load and manage power distribution.

Exceptions: The following are exempt from the provisions of Section 4.106.5.3 “Existing one- and two- family dwellings” and Section 4.106.5.4 “Existing residential buildings,”

1.2. Economic hardship exemptions shall be provided if the replacement cost for an all-electric system, including all incentives, is greater than 110 percent of a like-for-like fuel gas system replacement, including the future costs of electrification retrofits. The building official shall consult with the Community Development Director in deciding whether to approve an economic hardship exemption.

Expiration

539 of 676

7 3
6 3
These local code amendments shall sunset the when the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, is no longer in effect.23.70.090 Expiration [new section] These local code amendments shall sunset when the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, is no longer in effect.

540 of 676

CITY OF SAN MATEO
RESOLUTION NO. ____ (2022)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO ADOPTING EXRESS FINDINGS FOR LOCAL SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, 2022 EDITION, RELATIVE TO LOCAL

CLIMATIC, GEOGRAPHICAL, OR TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the California Energy Code and Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, have been released by the State and requires adoption by local jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the City of San Mateo’s (City) Climate Action Plan recommended the City review local amendments to the California Energy Code and Green Building Standards Code to promote building electrification and electric vehicle adoption; and
WHEREAS, concurrent with this resolution, the City Council will adopt the Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, by reference with local amendments to require enhanced electric vehicle charging infrastructure beyond state requirements, require all-electric new construction, and require electric-readiness and electric appliances during residential building remodels; and WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17922, 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7, and 18941.5 authorize the City to make local amendments to the provisions in the California Building Standards Code upon express findings that the local amendments are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geographical, or topographical conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined and finds that local amendments are needed and reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions of the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY FINDS that:

1. Adoption of this resolution adopting express findings in support of local amendments to the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, is not subject to CEQA review because it is an action taken by a regulatory agency, as authorized by state ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for the protection of the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15308.)

2. The City Council makes findings that local amendments to the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, in Ordinance No. 2022-__ are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological and topographical conditions summarized in Exhibit A attached and incorporated to this resolution.

541 of 676

7 3
9 2
Exhibit A
Findings Supporting Local Amendments to the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations
Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the provisions in the uniform codes that are published in the California Building Standards Code.

Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions in the uniform codes and published in the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.

Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation, including amendments made only for administrative consistency, do not require findings.

Code: California Green Building Standards Code
Section(s) Title Add Deleted Amended Justification
(See below
for Key)
202 Definitions X A, B, C, D

4.106.4 Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new
construction
X A, D

4.106.4.1 New one- and two-family dwellings and
town-houses with attached private garages
X A, D

4.106.4.2 New multifamily dwellings, hotels and
motels and new residential parking facilities
X A, D

4.106.4.3 Electric vehicle charging for additions and
alterations of parking facilities serving
existing multifamily buildings
X A, D

4.106.4.4 Direct current fast charging stations X A, D

5.106.5.3 Electric vehicle (EV) charging X A, D

5.106.5.4 Electric vehicle (EV) charging: medium-duty
and heavy-duty
X A, D

4.106.5 All-electric buildings X A, B, C, D

5.106.13 All-electric buildings X A, B, C, D
Key:

A. Climatic
The local amendments are justified on the basis of a local climatic conditions in San Mateo. Failure to address and significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could result in rises in sea level, including in San Francisco Bay, that could put at risk City homes and businesses, public facilities, and Highway 101 (Bayshore

542 of 676

7 3
9 2
Freeway), particularly the mapped Flood Hazard areas of the City. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure is a key component in reducing GHG emissions, and EV charging installations can help the City of San Mateo reduce its share of the GHG emissions that contribute to climate change. EV charging infrastructure will contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions by supporting the demand for EVs and the associated charging infrastructure.

Furthermore, electricity will become cleaner over time as utilities achieve more stringent Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements and translate the clean energy benefits to electric vehicles.

Natural gas combustion and gas appliances emit a wide range of air pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx, including NO2), particulate matter (PM), and formaldehyde, which according to a UCLA study, have been linked to various acute and chronic health effects, and additionally exceed levels set by national and California-based ambient air quality standards. The burning of fossil fuels used in gas appliances for the heating of buildings contributes to climate change and GHG emissions. All-electric new buildings benefit the health, safety, and welfare of San Mateo residents. Requiring all-electric construction without gas infrastructure will reduce the amount of GHG emissions produced in San Mateo.

B. Geological
The local amendments are justified on the basis of local geological conditions in San Mateo. Major faults cross through all nine Bay Area counties. The closest active faults in San Mateo are the San Andreas Fault located two miles west and the Hayward Fault, 14 miles east of San Mateo. A powerfully damaging earthquake similar to the 1906 earthquake or 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake is rare but likely to occur in the next 30 years. Smaller magnitude earthquakes are also likely to occur, potentially producing significant local damage. The reduction of natural gas infrastructure in new buildings would reduce the hazards associated with gas leaks during seismic events.

C. Topographic
The local amendments are justified on the basis of local topographic conditions in San Mateo. The City of San Mateo topography includes areas that are subject to wildland type fires due to existing vegetation, particularly chaparral, the steep slopes, and the temperate climate with dry summer months. These wildland areas pose substantial risk to nearby residences and the natural environment. The elimination of natural gas infrastructure in new buildings and the transition to electric appliances in existing residential buildings would reduce fire hazards in buildings near highly combustible wildland areas.

D. Environmental
The local amendments improve the public health and welfare by promoting the environmental and economic health of the City through the design, construction, maintenance, operation and deconstruction of buildings and sites by incorporating green practices into all development. The local amendments are consistent with the goals of the Green Building Code and help achieve the following goals:
•Reduce the use of natural gas in buildings which improves indoor environmental quality and health •Reduce the use of natural gas which will reduce the natural gas infrastructure and fire risk over time;(d •Promote the health and productivity of residents, workers, and visitors to the city •Increase electric vehicle charging infrastructure to encourage electric vehicle adoption which in turn reduces greenhouse gas emissions and improves air quality

543 of 676

544 of 676

545 of 676

546 of 676

From: Shayna Blum
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Climate Action in San Mateo County
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 6:16:35 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action ). Delaying
the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Shayna Blum
—
Student at Burlingame High

547 of 676

From: Nancy Schneider
To: Drew Corbett; City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Decarbonization in San Mateo
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 10:29:24 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on Monday, September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from all of you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes and other buildings.

Sincerely,
Nancy Schneider
San Mateo homeowner
--
Nancy Schneider
Mobile:

548 of 676

From: Michelle Mandel
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Electrification of Buildings/Reach Codes
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 9:12:42 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. I attended and spoke at the meeting on September 19th.

It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
Michelle Mandel

549 of 676

From: Ricki McGlashan
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Electrification Ordinance
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 11:15:17 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, I was happy to see so much community support for an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes in 2022 at your recent Study Session. But I’m very disappointed to learn that staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff.

The calls by the teenagers on Monday night were especially powerful. You could hear the urgency and fear in their voices. It is not too late. We urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially our youth, please take critically needed action by bringing a full electrification ordinance forward for consideration by City Council this year.

Doug and Ricki McGlashan

550 of 676

From: Libby Traubman
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Electrify Everything follow up
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 11:56:35 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of The City Council, City Manager Corbett, Assistant City Manager Kleinbaum, and Sustainability Analyst Chow,
On behalf of everyone at The San Mateo Climate Action Team, thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings at your recent Study Session.

It was wonderful to hear so much support from Council and staff about an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in existing homes and businesses.

I was encouraged by the overwhelming support that residents and businesses expressed when we went door to door in my neighborhood in District 1. EVERYONE we talked to is deeply concerned about the planet. EVERYONE was encouraged to learn how they can take personal action.

I am 81 years old and have owned a home in San Mateo for more than 45 years. I have been taking steps to electrify my home and am helping others do the same. Not everyone understands the huge need to act now, so leaders need to educate and take brave steps to respond to the signs of the time. I am requesting leadership from all 5 Council Members.

Residents and businesses can be well served by existing building electrification measures that are adopted NOW.

In the building of the proposed Hillsdale Mall, it will be critical to make it all electric, environmentally sound materials (no plastic), shops that support basic needs rather than those that encourage consumerism thus using resources the living system simply cannot supply. In other words, it will model and encourage choosing a regenerative life style. A focus on nature and gathering in community settings will go a long way in helping Life to continue. More is not better. Meaning and purpose are what make life worth living.

Because there is so much support for this key electrification policy and the model ordinance has already been so well-studied and discussed, I was very disappointed to see the City Council and staff call for more time to consider action, and that the Council majority and staff seem to be working together for that delay.

Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the existing building electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action ).

Delaying the existing building electrification ordinance to next year is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

It is not too late. We urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially our youth, please take critically needed action by bringing a full electrification ordinance forward at the next City Council meeting, for consideration by this City Council this fall. San Mateo has always been a model of doing the right thing and now more than ever, we are being called to be strong for the good of ALL.

551 of 676

Sincerely,
Libby Traubman, Elders Action Network (elders working for the grandchildren)

552 of 676

553 of 676

From: Linh Dan
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Follow up: Reach Codes for Existing Buildings
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 9:03:02 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for discussing Reach Codes for Existing Buildings at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. Though a growing number of cities are requiring that new construction be all electric, existing building stock still forms the majority of our buildings - and letting the gas appliances in those buildings continue through their life cycle and letting those gas appliances be replaced with gas appliances will keep exacerbating the devastation from climate change that we are already experiencing.

There is ample community support for this key electrification policy, and the model ordinance has already been so well-studied and discussed. For these reasons, I am very disappointed to learn that staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff recommended delays. This is no time for delay - this is a time for leadership.

I am a resident of nearby Menlo Park, and I have been urging the Menlo Park City Council - and I do the same of the City of San Mateo - to take leadership and set an example for the rest of the state, and country.

Over 430 members of the public, including many students, have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate

Action). Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Linh Dan Do

554 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Reach Codes - Electrification Ordinance
Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 4:07:07 PM

From: Donna Davies < >
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 4:06 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Drew Corbett <[email protected]>
Subject: Reach Codes - Electrification Ordinance

Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed.

Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year. Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Donna Davies

555 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers; Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Would it be poosible to distribut thes comments before tonight"s meeting? Thank you.

Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 8:01:17 PM

From: LAURENCE KINSELLA < >
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2022 5:17 PM
To: Rick Bonilla <[email protected]>; Diane Papan <[email protected]> Cc: Joe Goethals <[email protected]>; City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Amourence Lee <[email protected]>; Eric Rodriguez <[email protected]>
Subject: Would it be poosible to distribut thes comments before tonight's meeting? Thank you.

EXISTING HOMES GO ALL ELECTRIC...are you serious? Who's going to pay for it because I can't...what is hapenning to the City of San Mateo?

You have unelected sustainability commissioners running the show...this is outrageous...what are you thinking...are you that removed from the general public to even entertain such a disastrous proposition.

DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ELECTRICITY AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT ELECTRIC CAR mandates!!! WHERE IS ALL THIS ELECTRICITY GOING TO COME FROM?? Coal? and the batteries that would be needed to store enough energy to use on a home 24/7? Where are the batteries and the costs of producing them going to be hidden? Seriously, has anyone done any research, as to how we are going to generate enough electricity to support these many "green" proposals? It clearly doesn't pencil. There's enough comprehensive studies done now to show that solar costs are far more damaging and negative than the zealots are will to admit.

I seriously don't believe what has have become of the council and the damage you are all in the process of doing to the City of San Mateo.

OVERRIDE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING ZONING...YOU WILL SOON DESTROY THIS CITY...Isn't the density increases that have been approved for MARKET RATE HOUSING enough for you?

This
will only increase the cost of housing because it's a golden opportunity for investors, who care about nothing but the almighty buck.

So existing homeowners will get another financial bonus with this up-zoning. Zoning is now meaningless and better yet redefined for the predatory Weiner crowd.

Has anyone proven how this will lead to affordable housing in reality??? No it won't...even if you doubled the amount of homes in the Bay Area the price will remain out of reach for so many of our fellow citizens.

556 of 676

PUSH your friendly developers to do real affordable in some kind of decent number and I will support you 100%.

Don't just pander to them as a ticket to the board or some other higher office.

REIMAGINE THE BOHANNON CORP. as doing a large number of affordable units if them want all of the approvals they have coming before you.

You can always ask for more affordable...asking doesn't hurt you and may, in such a great market lead Bohannon to be willing to 'pay' more for those hugely profitable approvals.

I've seen it happen many times. I've been part of those kind of negotiations.

Sincerely
Yours,

Laurence
Kinsella

557 of 676

From: Claire Shintani
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: In Support of Electrification Ordinance this Fall Date: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 11:42:38 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, As a member of the youth who will have to bear the burdens that come with our dependence on fossil fuels, I'd like to thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Although there is no shortage of support for this key electrification policy and the model ordinance has already been so well-studied and discussed, I’m disappointed to learn that staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff recommended delays.

Over 430 members of the public, including many students (such as myself), have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo

Climate Action). Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year, as Staff requested, is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our greater community and especially to us, the youth.

It is not too late. We urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially the youth, please take critically needed action by bringing a full electrification ordinance forward for consideration by City Council this year.

Sincerely,
Claire Shintani

558 of 676

From: Rick Moody
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Make Reach Code apply to existing buildings
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2022 8:20:50 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager CorbettL I understand the City Council is going to delay revising ordinances that would govern the Reach Code for existing buildings. It's great to put in place a revision for the regulations that expire on Dec. 31, 2022. But applying the law only to new buildings leaves out 95% of the buildings in San Mateo.

Can't we do better than that?
San Mateo has the potential to be a leader in curbing greenhouse gas emissions by starting close to home: in fact, in the home.

My gas-fired heater will break down before long: our apartment in the condo where we live is 40 years old. Soon we certainly will replace it with an electric heater.

I won't pay more for the electric heater than I would to replace the gas heater.

Where's the burden on that?
What's wrong with asking others to do what we're already planning to do? Delaying the Reach Code revision simply postpones the time to act.

Why can't the City Council do what needs to be done?
Sincerely,
Harry R. Moody,
, San Mateo, CA

559 of 676

From: Mary Rose LeBaron
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Need Electrification Ordinance- Please don"t delay! Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 4:11:44 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
Mary Rose LeBaron

560 of 676

From: Robert Whitehair
To: City Council (San Mateo); Clerk; Drew Corbett; Kathy Kleinbaum; Andrea Chow Cc: Sustainability & Infrastructure Commission; Michelle Hudson Subject: Not too late to change course on electrifying existing buildings.

Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 10:08:25 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of The City Council, City Manager Corbett, Assistant City Manager Kleinbaum, and Sustainability Analyst Chow
On behalf of everyone at The San Mateo Climate Action Team, thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings at your recent Study Session.

It was wonderful to hear so much support from Council and staff about an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in existing homes and businesses.

I am 75 years old and have owned a home in San Mateo for 40 of those. You know that I have fully electrified my home and that I am helping others do the same. In conversations with so many people, I have learned that about one third of San Mateans need a little push or financial help to electrify, one third will support you without a push but the financial help makes it easier, and there is another one third who will fight electrification at every step.

It is to the first two thirds that I am directing my time. It is for those San Mateans that I am requesting leadership from all 5 Council Members. Residents and businesses can be well served by existing building electrification measures that are adopted NOW.

Climate Action). Delaying the existing building electrification ordinance to next year is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Robert Whitehair, Co Leader San Mateo Climate Action Team, and activist in Elders Action Network

561 of 676

From: Bruce Naegel
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Pass the strong electrification code
Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 9:18:10 AM
[email protected]; [email protected] Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
Bruce Naegel

562 of 676

From: Elaine Salinger
To: Drew Corbett; City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Please adopt the Full Reach Codes
Date: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 11:32:46 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

It is not too late. I represent 200 CCL members who live in the city of San Mateo and i urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially our youth, please take critically needed action by bringing a full electrification ordinance forward for consideration by City Council this year.

Please be the leaders we need you to be. Please.

Sincerely,
Elaine Salinger, Group Co-Leader
San Mateo County Chapter

563 of 676

564 of 676

From: Noelle Gross
To: Drew Corbett; City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Please reconsider
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 5:22:21 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action). Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Noelle

565 of 676

From: Mark Hoffberg
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Please support electrification ordinance now, this year Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 1:08:05 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
Mark Hoffberg
Retired Physicist

566 of 676

From: Megan Strain
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Reach Codes and Electrification Ordinance in San Mateo Date: Friday, September 23, 2022 1:25:47 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Although there is no shortage of support for this key electrification policy and the model ordinance has already been so well-studied and discussed, I must say that I am disappointed to learn that staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff recommended delays.

Action). Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

It is not too late. I urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially our youth, please take critically needed action by bringing a full electrification ordinance forward for consideration by the City Council this year.

Sincerely,
Megan Strain
San Mateo resident

567 of 676

From: James Higbie
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Reach Codes for Fall 2022
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 8:51:36 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council, and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance that would phase out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

I'm disappointed to learn that despite the fact that the model ordinance has already been well studied and discussed staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff on recommended delays.

Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action ). Delaying
the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious disservice to our community and especially our youth, who have decades of worsening climate facing them.

Sincerely,
James

568 of 676

From: Gary Trott 2
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Cc: ; "Gary Trott 2"
Subject: Reach Codes Now and The Future Health of San Mateo City Date: Friday, September 23, 2022 9:09:02 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Although there is no shortage of support for this key electrification policy and the model ordinance has already been so well-studied and discussed, I’m very disappointed to learn that staff are calling for more time to consider action, and that City Council is deferring to Staff recommended delays.
è Given the IPCC has indicated there is only seven years’ worth of emissions before climate change is irreversible, the question is; How long will it take for City of San Mateo to make a significant reduction in Green House Gas emissions from existing buildings? There was no information provided by staff on how long any Reach Code plan of action will take to implement with respect to reduction of GHG. Therefore, knowing that there will be impediments to implementation, the staff should reconsider the implementation plan timeline and bring forward a full electrification ordinance. The costs of the changing environment and medical costs of smoke and pollution far outweigh the installation conversion costs (which can be reduced with rebates) ç Over 430 members of the public including many students have been calling for urgent action on climate in San Mateo, and specifically in support of the electrification ordinance going forward this year (please see the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action). Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Dr. Gary Trott

569 of 676

From: Joan Vaughan
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Reach Codes
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 1:31:43 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
JoAn Vaughan
San Mateo resident

570 of 676

From: Wendy Chou
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Reach codes: our future in your hands
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 6:07:38 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents and business people throughout San Mateo.

I worry
about climate change a lot -- so much -- having a 10-year-old son and being deeply concerned about his future. A full model reach code for existing buildings would put San Mateo on the map as a leading city that prioritizes clean energy like wind, solar, and storage.

Putting off the ordinance shockingly ignores the way physics and mother nature operate on our quickly warming planet.

Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a serious and unacceptable disservice to our community and especially our youth who have the biggest burdens to bear -- worse storms, fires, droughts, and myriad disasters than we can even imagine here in 2022.

Sincerely,
Wendy Chou
San Mateo resident and volunteer member of the San Mateo Climate Action Team

571 of 676

From: Rick Moody
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Reconsider your Vote on Reach Codes
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 8:08:01 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager CorbettL I testified on Monday night before the City Council and I spoke in favor of extending the Reach Codes for existing buildings.

It was great that you've taken this proposal seriously. The work by staff on it was most impressive.

But now is not the time to delay acting. Well over 400 members of our community have urged you to act, by signing the petition for San Mateo Climate Action, which you've already seen of coure.

It is not too late tp act. I urge you to reconsider your decision and not to delay.

Sincerely,

Harry R. Moody,
, San Mateo, CA

572 of 676

From: Michelle Hudson
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Cc: Robert Whitehair; Michelle Hudson
Subject: San Mateo Climate Action Team Position on Outcome of 9/19 City Council Study Session on Reach Codes Date: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 5:04:30 PM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, This letter expresses the official position of the San Mateo Climate Action Team (SMCAT) on the outcome of the September 19, 2022 City Council study session on Reach Codes.

We thank the City Council and Staff of San Mateo for taking up the critical, time-sensitive, well-studied and sufficiently outreached issue of Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022. We are pleased to hear that most of you support the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. This is in line with the overwhelming support that community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo. The main issue at stake appears to be timing:

Staff asserted that much more time is needed to think about action, while SMCAT and over 430 members of the public including many students call for urgent action as the necessary and responsible choice for the City.

Here is what we understood to be the current status of the Council Members’ views on Reach Codes for existing buildings as of the conclusion of the September 19, 2022 City Council meeting on Reach Codes:

Mayor Bonilla and Council Member Lee supported SMCAT’s request for the City Council to adopt in the Fall of 2022, an ordinance for existing buildings to take effect January 1, 2025, as we have outlined in our Petition for San Mateo Climate Action . The ordinance
requires that those homeowners and businesses that replace gas-fired equipment, such as water heaters and furnaces, will receive building permits for electric replacements only (including ample flexibility & exemptions for hardship).

A majority of City Council Members support the Electrification Ordinance but were pressed by Staff to delay action with additional studies and additional outreach on SMCAT’s proposed ordinance for an extra 3-6 months. In practical terms, what this means is that the current City Council Members will not be able to vote on such an ordinance, and any such ordinance will need to be considered by the next City Council, three members of which will take office on December 5, 20222, with a fourth likely to take office after a public application and selection process.

The Staff approach to study the issue to oblivion is unnecessary and out of step with our City’s climate goals.

The Electrification Ordinance is critically necessary, time-sensitive, and sufficiently studied and outreached to be adopted this Fall 2022 .

SMCAT’s requested ordinance is critically necessary (see Petition for San Mateo Climate Action).

SMCAT’s requested ordinance is time-sensitive for the following two reasons:

1. 573 of 676

According to the IPCC, we have just 7 years left to emit greenhouse gas emissions at the current rate before going beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming compared to pre-industrial levels; however, all of the existing gas infrastructure on the planet is currently putting us on the path toward a catastrophic 2 degrees Celsius of warming.

2. Reach Codes are highly technical, nuanced and poorly understood by the uninitiated.

The current City Council members understand them thanks to the great work they have done on Reach Codes since 2019. Moreover, the current City Council members understand the call of climate scientists and advocates for swift action (see point #1, above), even if they do not agree on what to do about such calls for action. However, 4 out of the 5 members of the current City Council will leave office at the end of 2022.

A virtually brand new City Council will lead our City in 2023. The new Council will be tasked with learning a great deal about a great many policies and procedures right

out of the gate, and accordingly, they will be unable to come up the learning curve on the issue of Reach Codes at the pace that is needed by the climate crisis.

SMCAT’s requested ordinance has been sufficiently studied:

The model reach code for electrification of existing buildings was prepared by a team that included San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, Peninsula Clean Energy, Silicon Valley Clean Energy and East Bay Community Energy, as well as staff from many of the cities in the County.

The model code was fully vetted and reviewed. Why do we need more time or more consultants, organizations and staff to do more outreach and research? Policy

experts have already studied the funding from the IRA.

SMCAT’s requested ordinance has undergone a sufficient outreach process:

SMCAT went door to door on a recent weekend, asking residents about the climate. The responses were telling: almost all agree that the climate crisis is real, and that they are

looking for leadership to help all San Mateo residents and businesses to take full advantage of the Inflation Reduction Act that offers $25,000 for every San Mateo family to electrify.

Most readily signed our petition.

For the foregoing reasons, we believe that delaying adoption of SMCAT’s requested ordinance until 2023 is a disservice to our community and especially our youth, and is a

serious and unacceptable delay.

Over 30 community members addressed the City Council at the September 19 Study Session to speak in favor of the City taking urgent action this year on existing buildings.

Many were youth, who are themselves unable to vote and are thus pleading for their futures

with our City’s leaders who are in the positions of power. As with the community’s pleas at the April and July Sustainability & Infrastructure Commission meetings, and in the Petition for San Mateo Climate Action, now signed by more than 420 climate concerned members of the community, our pleas seem to be supported by City Council yet blocked by city staff from critically needed action on existing building this year.

But, it is not too late. We urge you to reconsider. For the sake of our community, our families, and especially our youth, please take critically needed action by adopting SMCAT’s requested ordinance this year.

574 of 676

Sincerely,
The San Mateo Climate Action Team

575 of 676

576 of 676

From: L. Eberhart
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Support for Reach Codes in existing buildings
Date: Monday, September 26, 2022 9:02:07 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, Thank you for taking up Reach Codes for existing buildings in 2022 at your recent Study Session on September 19, 2022. It was wonderful to hear so much support from you on the concept of an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. I am also heartened by the overwhelming support that other community members have expressed as we have gone door to door and engaged residents throughout San Mateo.

Sincerely,
Leane Eberhart,
San Mateo resident and Architect

577 of 676

From: Debbie Mytels
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Support our youth by setting a date to phase out use of fossil gas Date: Monday, September 26, 2022 1:39:04 PM
Dear Mayor Rick Bonilla, Members of City Council and City Manager Corbett, At the City’s Study Session on September 19, 2022 you heard the overwhelming support that members of the San Mateo community expressed about an Electrification Ordinance phasing out methane gas use in homes. Those of us working to protect Earth’s climate for future generations were also moved by the support we found among residents at door-to-door conversations.

Therefore, it’s very disappointing to learn that staff are recommending a further delay before the Council votes on this electrification ordinance.

In particular, I’m concerned about the message this delivers, not only to the 430 members of the public who expressesd support for this law, but most particularly I’m conerend about how such a delay will impact the students who are calling upon your — their community leaders — to take urgent action on climate. In essence, the Council is denying how essential climate protection is to the future of our youth. Do we want to send a message that their future is not imporant — that we are relegating them to a life of challenges from sea level rise, flooding, drought and crop failures? Delaying the electrification ordinance to next year as Staff requested is a failure of leadership and a disservice to our community and especially our youth.

Sincerely,
Debbie Mytels
Debbie Mytels
Methane (AKA “natural gas”) leaks occur at places all along its pressurized system - at the wellhead, in transmission and distribution lines and compressors, in supply lines, and in the appliance itself. That is because the MAIN PIPING SYSTEM for methane gas is pressurized up to 1400 pounds per square inch.

Methane/“natural” gas leaks are quite normal and cannot be fixed - that is a problem! Getting rid of methane is the solution. Go ELECTRIC!

578 of 676

From: Debbie Mytels
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett
Subject: Youth Mental Health Town Hall
Date: Monday, September 26, 2022 2:00:16 PM
Dear San Mateo City Council and City Manager Corbett -- As an addeddum to the note I just sent about the importance of climate protection ordinances, I encourage you to consider the impact of the climate threat upon today’s youth.

This program with mental health experts in San Mateo County may be of interest to you.

Our
actions will shape the lives of our youth. Are we thinking of their futures? — Debbie Mytels
Friends,
Those concerned about the recent increase in mental health crises among youth, you may be interested in the virtual Town Hall organized by state senator Josh Becker this Wednesday at noon in honor of mental health awareness month.

As you may remember the US Surgeon
General issued a public advisory in Dec 2021 concerning the growing mental health crisis among youth. Youth are the future, and many of them are struggling. See below for more information and to register.
* * *
Dear Friends,
I invite you to join me for a virtual Town Hall focused on adolescent mental health. I have invited a panel of experts to share how to help adolescents struggling with emerging mental illness get the diagnoses and treatments they need. Additionally, we will discuss how to identify and address common stressors in a young person's life so that they do not escalate into mental health crises.

I have assembled an expert panel for this vitally important discussion: Hon. Marico Sayoc, Executive Director of Counseling and Support Services for Youth (CASSY) and Former Mayor of Los Gatos;
Mary Cheryl B. Gloner, MBA, MPH, Chief Executive Officer of Project Safety Net; David J. Miklowitz, Ph.D., Director of the Max Gray Child and Adolescent Mood Disorders Program at UCLA's Semel Institute; and Chelsea Bonini, San Mateo County Board of Education Trustee and San Mateo County Behavioral Health Commissioner.

A Virtual Town Hall
"Mind Matters: Nurturing Mental Wellness in Adolescents"

579 of 676

Wednesday, September 28th
12:00 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.

Please click here to RSVP.

I also want to acknowledge that September is Suicide Prevention Awareness Month. Suicidal thoughts often are the result of untreated underlying mental illness. If you or a loved one is experiencing a mental health crisis, please seek immediate help: National Crisis and Suicide Prevention Lifeline: Dial 9-8-8
Hope to see you on the 28th.

Sincerely,
Josh Becker
State Senator, 13th District

580 of 676

From:

To: Andrea Chow
Cc: Marlene Coffino
Subject: RE: In response to your letter regarding fossil fuel cooking Date: Friday, October 14, 2022 9:50:34 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image008.png
image009.png
image010.png
image011.png
image012.png
image013.png
M Coffino Dual Fuel Stoves.pdf
Hi Andrea,
One more thing – attached is a copy of an ad that ran in the October 2022 Architectural Digest magazine. It’s for a Signature Dual Fuel stove. This is becoming a new design preference so the Council needs to take this seriously.

Thank you!
Marlene
Mikki (Marlene) Coffino
San Mateo, CA 94402
From: Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2022 11:06 AM
To:

Subject: FW: In response to your letter regarding fossil fuel cooking Hello Marlene Coffino,
Thank you for your email. Reach codes for new construction and home renovations were discussed at the September 19, 2022 City Council Study Session
. The City Council directed staff to develop
ordinances to require all-electric new construction, require enhanced EV infrastructure in new construction, and address electrification during remodels of existing buildings. The reach code ordinances will be brought forward at the October 17, 2022 City Council meeting and I will include your email as public comment for that item. The meeting agenda will be published on the City’s public meeting portal the week before the meeting. Instructions on how to participate are on the City’s public meeting portal.

Best,
Andrea
Andrea Chow
Sustainability Analyst | City Manager’s Office
330 W. 20th Ave. San Mateo, CA 94403
650-522-7007 | [email protected]

581 of 676

582 of 676

583 of 676

From: Rick Bonilla <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2022 12:21 PM
To:

Subject: In response to your letter regarding fossil fuel cooking https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/10/04/induction-cooktops-buying-using/ Dear Ms. Coffino,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I noticed that nowhere in your letter do you address the reason why we would be considering going all electric in our homes. That reason is important because climate change is a fact and it’s threatening us here, where we live, today and far into the future. It could be that you disagree with scientists on the threat posed by climate change. You may even disagree that climate change exists at all. If that is true then there is no point in continuing this discussion any further
?????????. If however you do believe that climate change is a threat then I would urge you to have a look at this four day old Washington Post article regarding cooking with an induction cooktop versus an electric resistance coil cooking system or natural (methane, fossil fuel) gas. The resistance coil is the old kind of electric cooking and there are problems with it. This article will show that many modern chefs have tried and find induction cooking to be a workable alternative to methane gas.

I hope you find this article helpful.

Rick Bonilla
Mayor, City of San Mateo
*
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information that is confidential and prohibited from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete this message along with any attachments from your computer. Thank you.

584 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Dual fuel ranges
Date: Sunday, October 9, 2022 9:15:43 AM

From:

Sent:

Saturday,

October

2022

11:32

AM
To:

City

Council

(San

Mateo)

<[email protected]>
Cc:

Subject:

Dual

fuel

ranges

Dear City Council Members,

I cook, a lot!! Gas cooktops provide the best in temperature control. I absolutely hate electric cooktops. I can accept electric ovens so I copied below what I think would be the best alternative to electric only cooking. Where is the City’s imagination?? Rethink your uninformed decision and let me keep my gas cooktop!!!

Best dual fuel ranges
Good cooks know that an oven or stovetop isn’t what makes a meal or baked dessert delicious, but having a quality range can make preparing meals easier. Uniform heating and responsive temperature controls allow for a headache-free cooking experience. A dual fuel range, with a stovetop
powered by gas and an oven powered by electricity, offers the best of both worlds for amateur home chefs and bakers.

Marlene Coffino

Mikki (Marlene) Coffino
San Mateo, CA 94402

585 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Requesting clarification of Gas Phaseout/Response (Oct6 Daily Journal Article) Date: Thursday, October 13, 2022 1:38:29 PM

From:

shawn

fahrenbruch.net

Sent:

Thursday,

October

13,

2022

12:39

PM
To:

City

Council

(San

Mateo)

<[email protected]>
Cc:

Subject:

Requesting

clarification

Gas

Phaseout/Response

(Oct6

Daily

Journal

Article)

Hello Mayor Bonilla, Councilmembers Diaz-Nash and Lee, and other Councilmembers (and candidates),

read

with

concern

the

October

6 Daily

Journal

Article,

"San

Mateo

still

pushing

gas
phaseout".

and

about

200

other

people

NextDoor

would

some

clarification.

Obviously,

the

article

sub-title

"Officials

looking

new

ordinances

remove

appliances
starting

2025"

eye-grabber.

For

starters,

aware

the

new

San

Mateo

proposed
Reach

goals

for

new

construction

and

for

remodels.

not

too

alarmed

that,

but

there
are

two

items

this

October

6 article

that

really

alarm

me.

will

most

likely

ask

these
questions

Monday,

October

17 at

the

upcoming

City

Council

meeting

this

issue

has

great
public

interest.

sending

this

advance

not

catch

you

off

guard.

The

first

item

that

would

fully

clarified

proposal

the

San

Mateo

Climate

Action
Team

volunteer

group)

that

all

REPLACEMENT

gas

equipment

homes

and

businesses
be

electric

zero

emissions

starting

2025.

From

the

article:

"At its Oct. 4 special meeting, the council reinforced its desire for city staff to examine the feasibility of a decarbonization plan suggested at a September council meeting by the San Mateo Climate Action Team, a volunteer group working to support climate change actions and solutions. The group asked the city to immediately pass a decarbonization ordinance to address existing buildings’ electric appliance replacement. The ordinance would go beyond the city’s current and upcoming reach codes, which govern new and used appliance replacement. It also includes a requirement that all replacement of

586 of 676

gas equipment in homes and businesses be electric or zero emissions starting in January 2025. Mayor Rick Bonilla and Councilmember Amourence Lee pushed for immediate action given the state of the climate and public support for stricter requirements."

The final sentence of this paragraph in the article which infers that Mayor Bonilla and Councilmember Lee would support this is concerning. On this first item, the article's language does not seem to be referring to remodels or new construction. It would appear to be referring to ANY event where a gas appliance has failed and needs to be replaced. If this language is accurate, this is very alarming. Replacing an appliance might $1000-$5000 (depending on what it is). But the bigger potential issue would be the change in infrastructure to support this. It could result in an unplanned electrical panel upgrade, running 220v wiring, changing kitchen cabinets/flooring/walls if new appliance cannot be found with a matching form factor. It could result in drywall repair and painting. The cost of this would be very difficult to forecast. Hence, I am asking for a clear unambiguous language that states whether you would push or reject any ordinance that would forbid people from replacing a failed natural gas unit with a similar gas unit.

The second item below in the October 6 article that caused me alarm was the sentence:

"The reach codes and decarbonization efforts are part of city goals to decarbonize EXISTING buildings and infrastructure and eliminate methane gas use by 2030." It is unclear to me if this is a Reach goal that has already been agreed upon. But, from this language, this sentence does NOT seem to be referring to new construction or remodels. It seems to infer that ALL gas appliances in ALL buildings need to be removed by 2030. I am hoping that this is just a poor choice of words by the article's author. But, please confirm if this is something that is being considered (or already in place). For this second question, I am specifically asking if you would push or reject an ordinance that demands replacement of gas appliances by 2030.

As a District 1 resident, I am also asking Councilmember Diaz-Nash to be clarify your answers on these two questions. I listened to the Zoom session on October 10 (Transportation and climate) and paid close attention when you were asked this question. Strictly speaking, you did not answer these two questions forcefully enough. Please clarify your answer.

Again, here are the two specific questions that I would like to hear from you as sitting Council

587 of 676

Members (other Council Members or Candidates may also reply if they see fit):

1.) I am asking for a clear unambiguous answer that states whether you would push or reject an ordinance that would forbid people from replacing a failed natural gas unit with a similar gas unit after 2025.

2.) I am specifically asking if you would push or reject an ordinance that demands replacement of gas appliances by 2030 for existing buildings.

There is quite a lot of fear and confusion as can be seen by the replies on NextDoor (about 200 people in the chat) on this topic. Your answers will be shared so as to clear up the confusion.

Personally, I am very concerned about this. While funding/rebates may exist, I find it hard to believe it would be anywhere near the amount totally required to retrofit everyone's wiring infrastructure and/or new appliances. But, maybe as an add-on 3rd question, you could elaborate what pools of funding exist and what the qualifications (income/assets) would be to qualify.

Kind Regards,
Shawn Fahrenbruch
District 1 Resident

588 of 676

POST-PACKET PUBLIC COMMENTS

THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED

AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE AGENDA PACKET AND
PUBLISHED AT 4PM ON THE DAY OF THE COUNCIL

MEETING

589 of 676

From: Robert Whitehair
To: Rick Bonilla; Joe Goethals; Diane Papan; Eric Rodriguez; Amourence Lee; Drew Corbett; Kathy Kleinbaum; Andrea Chow; Sustainability & Infrastructure Commission; Clerk Cc: Michelle Hudson; Robert Whitehair
Subject: Agenda Item 24, October 17 City Council Meeting - Reach Codes for Existing Residential Building Remodels Date: Friday, October 14, 2022 5:24:29 PM
Attachments: Copy of BayREN Policy Calculator-V1.3 locked.xlsx Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,
The San Mateo Climate Action Team appreciates the efforts over several years of the City Council, City Staff, and the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commissioners to discuss and act on Reach Codes. We support Staff’s excellent proposal on the October 17th Council agenda, for all-electric new construction, as well as the five considerations for remodels of existing residential buildings.

However, the current proposal could be strengthened to include important provisions for remodels that avoid perpetuating gas use. Specifically, we request a discussion of these items for consideration in the current Reach Code:

1. Existing Building Reach Code - Add Remodel Trigger for Installation of Heat Pumps for Heating and Cooling. Under the current proposal, heat pump water heaters
In single family homes and duplexes would be required during addition and alteration projects that include
water heater replacement. This is a very important provision. However, the other large gas appliances - furnaces - must also be included, because alongside gas water heaters, these two appliances comprise 85% of residential gas use.

We respectfully request adding heat pump HVAC to the proposed requirement for heat pump water heaters for all additions and remodels. Adding heat pump HVAC for remodels would be a single line in the ordinance, and a very easy item that would not require additional outreach or vetting.

Utilizing BayREN’s policy calculator (attached), it is clear that the City of San Mateo cannot come close to making its 2030 gas phaseout goal for buildings without earlier actions. The current Reach Code helps achieve 2% of that goal.

A replace on burnout ordinance that goes into effect in 2025 will get 20% of the way there. Electric replacements for all remodels will achieve more that 50% of progress towards a 2030 gas phase out. Expediting an End of Gas ordinance

sooner rather than later, would achieve the City’s 2030 goal but would be extremely challenging without earlier requirements that guide home- and building owners away from gas.

This is a very moderate and reasonable step, given the significant funding from the Inflation Reduction Act,
the new PCE rebates ($3500) expected to start
this month, and the state’s recent TECH rebate renewal ($3,000). For low- to moderate income families, the cost difference between a heat pump and a gas

590 of 676

furnace is erased. For the highest income bracket, it’s fairly close to parity with $6500 in rebates & $2000 in tax credits.

2. Existing Building Reach Code - Resolve Some Possible Confusion About When to Replace an Existing Furnace and Air
Conditioning. Measure #3 of the proposed Reach Code for Existing Building Remodels is described as: “Requires installation of heat pump air conditioning when new air conditioning is installed or replaced, in conjunction with

furnace replacement (emphasis added),”
As written, this proposed measure would only require the installation of a heat pump when a homeowner intends to install new or replacement air conditioning AND
a new furnace at the same time. This requirement would
rarely, if ever, get triggered.

As written, we could see situations arise where a new gas furnace would be allowed to be installed when a simple air conditioning unit is newly installed or replaced. This should not be allowed because a heat pump is simply air conditioning that works in reverse.

Accordingly, we respectfully request that this measure be revised to eliminate possible confusion so that the installation of a heat pump for heating and cooling is required at any time when new air conditioning is newly installed or replaced.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives.

As relevant to Objective #27 of the City Objectives, the City Council directed Staff at the City Council study session on Reach Codes on September 19, 2022 to study and develop, over the course of 3-6 months, a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance to take effect on January 1, 2025. The Status Update for Item #27 of the City Objectives states as follows: “Staff is working on updates to the 2023 Building Code and will be bringing policy options to City Council for review in September for an effective date of January 2023.

Following the completion of the code updates, staff will work on a decarbonization plan evaluating how to achieve the 2030 goal.” We respectfully request that the Status Update be revised to reflect that the Council has directed Staff to study and develop over the course of 3-6 months,

a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance that would take effect on January 1, 2025.

Adopting
an End of Flow Gas ordinance, sooner, rather than later, would be in everyone's best interest and would be much easier to achieve with a full Reach Code for existing buildings.

On behalf of the 440 community members who signed the San Mateo Climate Action Team’s Petition for San Mateo Climate Action, we urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed

Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into the Reach Codes.

591 of 676

Additionally, we respectfully request that the current Council members and Staff do everything necessary to meet the commitments made to the community to adopt the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s full model code for existing buildings in 3-6 months from 9/19/22, and for that ordinance to take effect on January 1, 2025.

Lastly, we note that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates, now make it more affordable for low and fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail than to buy new gas appliances. However, many members of the community, and some candidates for local offices, are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised. We ask that our current City Council members - who have pledged their enthusiasm for electrifying our City's building stock - help spread the word that new funding has leveled the playing field in terms of the cost of going electric versus sticking with gas at the October 17 City Council meeting when Reach Codes are considered. In addition, we ask that Sustainability staff likewise spread the word in all future presentations on building electrification, and on the sustainability portal of the City's website.

(Please Note: if cost is a concern with respect to an ordinance applicable to existing buildings, the City of Denver has excellent language concerning cost in their electrification ordinance: The electrification ordinance adopted by Denver mandates (with a permit) that a Heat Pump be Required upon Replacement when cost-effective .

This “cost-effective” provision limits the cost to “Near Cost Parity”, meaning that “the cost of a replacement of a natural gas space or water heating system to a partially electric heat pump system, including all incentives, that is within 5-15% of a like-for- like natural gas system replacement, including the social cost of carbon dioxide of the gas system over its
lifetime)
Sincerely,
The San Mateo Climate Action Team

592 of 676

From: Thomas Morgan II
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Agenda item 24
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 9:26:47 AM
Dear Mayor and Council

I have rewatched the July SIC and September Study Session and read respective staff reports. After doing so I have the following concerns:
- Impact on businesses

- Many businesses along Delaware and Amphlett had to deal with impacts related to the PG&E pipeline replacement in addition to the impact of shutdowns during Covid-19. I would be reluctant to move forward too aggressively as this could potentially make San Mateo a less competitive place and create difficulty attracting new business to our city. While forcing others to close up shop. Business owners will likely cut staffing levels to deal with any additional costs. It sounds like no other Peninsula City is implementing as many reach codes as being proposed in the staff report.

- If businesses close in San Mateo we will likely need to drive to neighboring Cities. We are potentially trading one type of pollution for another. It does not make sense to have the city with over 100K people driving to cities of 30K to 50K residents for goods and services versus the other way around. Perhaps a solution would have automatic trigger to implement/adopt the various measures (i.e. as Redwood City and Burlingame adopt, then San Mateo would also adopt) Early adoptions will likely move San Mateo businesses to neighboring city as they tend to work better with businesses.

- Seems from the Daily Journal that Belmont may have passed an ambitious set of reach codes. Perhaps we can attract their businesses to open locations in San Mateo or move their businesses to San Mateo.

- May result in a decrease in City revenues through the loss of sales and business taxes.

- Housing affordability

- Measures seem to apply to Single Family homes and duplexes, not sure if this was intentional. Seems to be disproportionately burdening these homeowners and housing providers who provide the most affordable rents often lower than affordable housing rates in new developments. When I look on Zumper apartments seem extremely high $3k-8K, however when I look at Zillow a single-family home seems to max out $4.5K to 5.5K. Not sure why there is such a large difference but would seem we would want to save this type of housing versus vilifying them.

- If condos and townhomes are not included and keep natural gas the fixed infrastructure cost will be shed over fewer users and cost will go up. In the initial roll out of solar it seems we let the users of solar to get out of paying for their full impact on the grid. I would not want to repeat a similar mistake.

- If condos and townhomes are excluded, I would anticipate this would make this type of entry level housing more expensive and further out of reach for those starting out. Especially if electricity rates are higher than projected.

- Higher food prices and food scarcity natural gas is also used to create fertilizers, do these changes consider a replacement source for existing fertilizers, or consider the supply will be shifted to more fertilizer production and encourage additional usage by that industry group? It is my understanding that we already use too much fertilizer, and a gas is created that hangs around the atmosphere. Again, here it seems like we might be trading one pollution for another.

- I am at odds with option 4b on the one hand it might be good, but it feels like the City is attempting to takeaway a property right which I am strongly opposed to.

- Miscellaneous

593 of 676

- At numerous planning committee meetings, it seems developers were given higher score for installing solar water heaters versus actual solar. I hope this mistake is cleared up in the current code. I Did not hear this discussed in meetings but would be a tremendous failure of oversight if this continues to persist.
- Seems a shutoff date should consider the CAP Ex schedule of PG&E. If we are planning a shutoff date, and PG&E would be in a situation where they simply retire capex versus making
the capex investment to bridge a short period needed to make it to the shut off date.

- Questions

- If San Mateo sets a shut off date does this mean the main pipeline running through San Mateo will be deactivated at the same time?

- If we adopt measures from PCE and/or the Bay Area Reach codes group does this impact tax measures such as Measure S or Measure CC’s must be spent in San Mateo (seems to benefit/ have indirect influence of a regional group).

- Are there any conflicts of interest with PCE the Bay Area Reach Codes Group?

- Over the various Climate actions plans existing building seem to have a larger impact than previous versions, curious as to the methodology for increased reductions in Greenhouse gasses?

594 of 676

From:

To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Agenda Item 24; Amendments to 2022 California Building Standards Code Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 11:11:21 AM

Honorable Council Members,
In my opinion, limiting the use of natural gas is not wise. Affordable and adequate supply of energy is critical to our economy and our quality of life.

When the electricity goes out – it is comforting to have gas for cooking, showers, and heat.

I urge you not to approve anything that limits natural gas and increases housing costs. Give the consumer a choice.

Tom
Thomas Weissmiller (Weiβmϋller)
San Mateo, CA | Cell
Reply to

595 of 676

From: Carolyn Healy
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: All electric existing homeowners
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 1:25:40 PM
Dear City Council,
I am concerned and against any decision requiring existing homeowners to convert all their appliances to electric. Why don't you start with no more gas fireplaces which is a completely optional feature to their home? The local fireplace companies are still installing gas fireplaces. With all the new multi-unit construction, I think that should be the focus, not existing homeowners who own single family homes. One home conversion costs almost $100,000 for one, two or three people living in it.

How does that make a statistical difference compared to multi-units which have hundreds of people living in them? Why don't you have the wealthy existing multi- unit landlords
update their properties first? Aren't some of those city council members or have businesses related to property management? Not sure why this isn't on the front page in bold in the Journal.

Carolyn Healy

596 of 676

From: Dennis Murphy
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: All Electric Reach Code
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:54:03 AM
Council, I implore you to make sure that any reach codes set should allow for a choice for residents in existing homes. The potential financial burden for residents to replace gas appliances with all electric could cost the average resident over $17,000. This isn't right, and you need to do the right thing and allow that to be a choice for residents to make.

Sincerely,
Dennis Murphy
President, San Mateo Glendale Village Neighborhood Association

597 of 676

From: Jen Sprowls
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: All electric requirement
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:44:59 AM
Hi,
Please vote No to require existing homes to convert to all electric. I did an extensive remodel three years ago and would not be able to afford replacing my stove, oven, water heater and gas fireplace to meet this requirement.

San Mateo is already an expensive place to live with cost of housing, taxes, and everyday expensive. Please do not crush the middle class with this mandate.

We would seriously need to think about relocating as it would be such a financial burden.

Please vote NO!
Jen

598 of 676

599 of 676

600 of 676

From: Angie Fuqua
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Council Meeting 10.17.22 - Reach Codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:58:06 AM
We are writing to you about reach codes for new and existing homes. We feel strongly that any reach codes set should allow for choice for residents in existing homes.

Thank you.

Mark & Fuqua

601 of 676

From: Gary Germano
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Electric Appliance Mandates
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 12:23:28 PM
Dear San Mateo City Council Members,
It has been brought to our attention today that you will be discussing "Reach Codes", regarding mandated use of electric appliances.

We wish to advise you that we are totally opposed to MANDATES forcing electric appliances to be the only choice in homes and living units, and ESPECIALLY in already existing and older homes, regardless of age.

We urge you to please reject imposing any such mandate.

Sincerely,
Gary and Janet Germano

602 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers; Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: All electric requirement
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:50:52 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Jen Sprowls < >
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:45 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Subject: All electric requirement
Hi,
Please vote No to require existing homes to convert to all electric. I did an extensive remodel three years ago and would not be able to afford replacing my stove, oven, water heater and gas fireplace to meet this requirement.

San Mateo is already an expensive place to live with cost of housing, taxes, and everyday expensive. Please do not crush the middle class with this mandate.

We would seriously need to think about relocating as it would be such a financial burden.

Please vote NO!
Jen

603 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting to look at ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions inside the home! Date: Sunday, October 16, 2022 10:58:19 AM

From: Craig O < >
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2022 10:36 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Subject: City Council Meeting to look at ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions inside the home!

Hello,

I am writing to express my very strong support for the proposal to enact laws to mandate electrification of new homes and remodels!

Please consider this a vote from my family to try to address the climate crisis one step at a time!

Cheers,
Craig Husfeld

604 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow; Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Gas appliances
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 10:11:59 AM

From: Lisa Taner
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 10:10 AM
To:

Cc: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Gas appliances

Love it!

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:00 AM Anna Kuhre wrote:

Dear Council Members,
The logistics of forcing citizens to remove existing gas appliances is the most ridiculous, poorly thought out plan ever conceived by this Commission and this Council.

Stupid ideas like this will surely get you all bounced out of City Hall.

Get some commissioners who can relate to the citizens.

Sincerely,
Anna Kuhre

605 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Input for SMCity Council meeting 10/17/22 item #24 Green Energy Reach Codes Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:51:29 AM

From: Gary Trott 2
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:39 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Drew Corbett <[email protected]>; Kathy Kleinbaum <[email protected]>; Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Gary Trott 2'
Subject: Input for SMCity Council meeting 10/17/22 item #24 Green Energy Reach Codes

Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,

I appreciate the efforts of the City Council, City Staff, and the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commissioners to discuss and act on Reach Codes. I support Staff’s proposal for all-electric new construction, as well as their proposed five measures for remodels of existing residential buildings.

However, I request that the current proposal for existing buildings be strengthened to include The San Mateo Climate Action Team’s suggested revisions to the remodel measures, including the following:

1. Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

2. Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives.

Please revise the status update to reflect that the Council has directed Staff to study and develop over the course of 3-6 months, a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance that would take effect on January 1, 2025.

I urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach Codes.

Additionally, I respectfully request that the current Council members and Staff do everything necessary to meet the commitments made to the community to adopt the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s full model code for existing buildings in 3-6 months

606 of 676

from 9/19/22, and for said ordinance to take effect on January 1, 2025. è I believe it is imperative that San Mateo City begin the transition process to eliminate natural gas in existing building as soon as possible. There will be resistance and impediments to such a bold stance. However one has to begin somewhere. Plus, as there is no estimate from the staff as to how long the process will take, there are no milestones to even gauge progress. Meanwhile the climate hazardous will continue to increase in severity. It is a train wreck a long time coming with no effective actions to stop it. ç
Lastly, please take a leadership role in communicating to the community that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates, now makes it more affordable for low, fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised.

Sincerely,

Dr. Gary Trott
Climate concerned citizen of San Mateo

607 of 676

608 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Reach code vote
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 7:57:14 AM

From: Elaine Salinger
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2022 10:09 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Drew Corbett <[email protected]>; Kathy Kleinbaum <[email protected]>; Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Subject: Reach code vote

Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,
I am writing for myself, for the almost 1000 CCL members of SMC, and 200 members of the City of San Mateo.

1. Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

2. Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives .

609 of 676

I urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach Codes.

Lastly, please take a leadership role in communicating to the community that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates, now makes it more affordable for low, fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community, and some candidates for local offices, are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised.

Sincerely,

Elaine Salinger, Group Co-Leader and San Mateo resident San Mateo County Chapter

610 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers; Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Reach Codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:51:52 AM

From: Kitty Van Beckum
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:38 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Subject: Reach Codes

Please vote for codes set that allow for a choice for San Mateo residents in existing homes. The expense of changing from gas to electric can be a burden to those of us on a fixed income.

Sincerely,
Katherine Van Beckum

611 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow; Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Reach Codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 10:03:57 AM

From: Steve Zakula <stevezakula@gmail com>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 9 02 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <CityCouncil@cityofsanmateo org> Subject: Reach Codes

Please do not mandate that existing gas appliances must be replaced with electric when those appliances reach the end of their useful lifes The cost is to do so is an extreme financial burden Owners should have the option to replace gas with gas
Respectfully submitted,

Steve Zakula
Steven Zakula

612 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Reach Codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 1:27:25 PM

From: Kathy Battat
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 11:56 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Drew Corbett <[email protected]>; Kathy Kleinbaum <[email protected]>; Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Subject: Reach Codes

Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,

Thank you to the leadership of the City Council, City Staff, and the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commissioners on strong Reach Codes for the City San Mateo. I support the proposal for all-electric new construction, as well as the proposed five measures for remodels of existing residential buildings.

I request that the current proposal for existing buildings be strengthened to include The San Mateo Climate Action Team’s suggested revisions to the remodel measures, including the following:

1. Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

2. Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives. Please revise the status update to reflect that the Council has directed Staff to study and develop over the course of 3-6 months, a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance that would take effect on January 1, 2025.

I urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach

613 of 676

Codes.

Additionally, I encourage Council members and Staff do everything necessary to meet the commitments made to the community to adopt the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s full model code for existing buildings in 3-6 months from 9/19/22, and for said ordinance to take effect on January 1, 2025.

Please also communicate to constituents the benefits of taking full advantage of the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community, and some candidates for local offices, are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised.

Sincerely,
Kathy Battat
Sierra Club, Loma Prieta Chapter Environmental Legislative Action committee member

614 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers; Andrea Chow
Subject: FW: Reach Codes/Allow for Choice
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:51:11 AM

From: Lisa Taner
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:44 AM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Cc: Patrice Olds <[email protected]>
Subject: Reach Codes/Allow for Choice

Dear Council.

As you discuss reach Codes this evening for existing homes, I send a second letter supporting CHOICE for your constituents to avoid a heavy financial burden as rebates to convert to all electric are few,
and if you don't use much gas (Ex: one elderly person living alone or even a household of two) the gas draw won't be enough for those issuing rebates to consider you. THIS HAS HAPPENED to a resident right here in San Mateo. They deem a low draw unworthy of 'incentivizing' change.

Your constituents may yet be unaware of what a removal of choice could mean for them. I ask that you point your green efforts to new construction and allow those in existing homes the choice to convert if and when they can afford to do so.

So many, like myself, have gone that route as they can
with solar panels, electric cars, etc. Please do not place undue hardship on residents, not to mention our terrible electric grid.

Thank you,

Lisa Taner

615 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Andrea Chow; Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: require EXISTING homes having to go ALL ELECTRIC Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 7:59:38 AM

From:

Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2022 6:22 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: require EXISTING homes having to go ALL ELECTRIC

Council Members,

In regards to mandatory replacement of all gas appliances, we have the following comments:

1. Too authoritarian

2. This is a misguided attempt to put “all eggs in one basket”

3. What happens during a power outage?

4. What about residents that have spent their life savings in gas appliances?

5. Why do governmental agencies feel that they have the authority to DICTATE appliances we have used all our lives?

6. The stated goals may be well meaning, but highly misdirected.

7. If we experience a power outage, how are people going to use their natural gas generators that they have spent THOUSANDS of dollars purchasing?

8. Is the City of San Mateo going to reimburse any homeowner/apartment building owner/restaurant owner that has to replace all appliances?

We believe a more acceptable approach to residents would be to require any REPLACED appliances should be electric.

AND
Any new construction would require all electric appliances.

Sincerely TWO VERY CONCERNED 33 year residents!
Valerie and Brent Harnish

616 of 676

From: Patrice Olds
To: Martin McTaggart; Erin Fellers
Subject: FW: Support for all-electric reach codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 7:57:39 AM

From:

Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2022 9:47 PM
To: City Council (San Mateo) <[email protected]>; Drew Corbett <[email protected]>; Kathy Kleinbaum <[email protected]>; Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for all-electric reach codes

Dear Mayor Bonilla, esteemed Members of City Council, City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Sustainability Staff:

I'm writing to say thank you to the City Council, City Staff, and the Sustainability & Infrastructure Commissioners for proposing real progress in our city's Reach Codes. I support Staff’s proposal for all-electric new construction, as well as their proposed five measures for remodels of existing residential buildings.

Because I feel strongly that we must address the climate crisis swiftly and by putting a wide variety of actions into play, I request that the current proposal for existing buildings be strengthened to include The San Mateo Climate Action Team’s suggested revisions to the remodel measures, including the following:

Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives. Please revise the status update to reflect that the Council has directed Staff to study and develop over the course of 3-6 months, a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance that would take effect on January 1, 2025.

In summary, I urge you to please adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach Codes.

617 of 676

It is also my hope that City Staff and the City Council will take a leadership role in communicating to the community that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates, now makes it more affordable for low, fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this recent development lowering electrification costs.

Thank you for being good stewards of the only planet that we can call home. Thank you for giving so much of your time and expertise to serve as thoughtful leaders of this unique community.

Sincerely,
Wendy Chou
Resident of San Mateo

618 of 676

From: Robert Whitehair
To: City Council (San Mateo); Clerk; Sustainability & Infrastructure Commission; Kathy Kleinbaum; Andrea Chow; Drew Corbett Cc: Michelle Hudson; diane@menlospark org
Subject: Great news from PCE today - rebates and Zero interest loans for replacements of gas water heaters and gas furnaces Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 11:22:37 AM
Dear All
You may have already received this notice from PCE, but this is great news for those San Mateo residents wanting to replace with electric, their gas water heater or furnace, either because the units have failed or because of a remodel.

Announced TODAY, significant new funding is now available from Peninsula Clean Energy, with an extra boost for low income customers. This is in addition to other significant funding from the Inflation Reduction Act.

Replacing gas units with electric models is at parity, and for some, it is now even LESS expensive to replace with electric, compared to gas. I know that because had the IRA and PCE funding been available when I completely electrified my home this year, our family's costs would have been reduced, to ZERO out of pocket for the heat pump water heater, and to less than the gas replacement cost for heating and cooling.

Thank you for all you do for San Mateo residents!
Robert Whitehair
co lead
San Mateo Climate Action Team
Peninsula Clean Energy Offers New Zero-Percent Loans,
Rebates For Electric Home Upgrades

Interest-free loans and expanded rebates target electric appliances

619 of 676

Peninsula Clean Energy
Rebate
BayREN Rebate Total
Heat pump water heater $3,000 $1,000 $4,000
Heat pump HVAC system $3,500 $0-1,000 $3,500-4,500
Electrical panel upgrade $1,500 $0 $1,500
Additional rebate for CARE/FERA
customers
$1,000 $0 $1,000
REDWOOD CITY, CA – Oct. 17, 2022 – Peninsula Clean Energy is providing homeowners in San Mateo County and the City of Los Banos interest-free financing and new rebates to install electric appliances and make other energy-efficiency upgrades.

The agency’s new Zero Percent Loan program will provide interest-free financing for up to $10,000 per home for projects that include installation of electric heat pump equipment, including water heaters and HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) units. Gas-powered equipment will not be eligible for the financing.

The loans will range from two to 10 years and be repaid on monthly electric bills. They do not require a credit check but do require the customer to have a zero past-due balance on their previous three PG&E billing statements.

Peninsula Clean Energy is also offering all of its customers in San Mateo County and the City of Los Banos a new rebate of up to $3,500 for installing an
electric heat pump HVAC unit and is increasing an
existing rebate to $3,000 for installing a heat pump water heater. Additional rebates of up to $1,000 are available from BayREN for San Mateo County residents, with certain restrictions, and may be layered on top of the Peninsula Clean Energy rebates.

[For details and eligibility see the Peninsula Clean Energy webpages about water heaters and heating and air conditioning.] An additional $1,500 rebate is available for Peninsula Clean Energy customers in both San Mateo County and the City of Los Banos to upgrade their electrical panel, if that is needed.

Income-qualified residents under the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) and Family Electric Rate Assistance (FERA) programs in all of Peninsula Clean Energy’s service territory can receive an additional $1,000 rebate for installing an electric heat pump HVAC or water heater.

Nearly 60 percent of the methane gas, an unhealthy and potentially hazardous pollutant, used by homes is for heating water. Space heating is the second-largest residential use for methane gas. Heat pump HVAC designs can provide heat for less than one third the energy of a gas furnace and also keep you cool in the summer.
“These rebates and zero-percent loans allow more customers to switch from combusting methane gas to more-efficient electric appliances, powered by the 100 percent clean electricity delivered by Peninsula Clean Energy,”
Peninsula Clean Energy CEO Jan Pepper said.

“Making the switch from methane helps all our communities and region address some of the fastest growing sources of heat-trapping pollutants responsible for our changing climate,” San Mateo County
Supervisor and Peninsula Clean Energy Co-Founder Dave Pine said.

About Peninsula Clean Energy
Peninsula Clean Energy is a Community Choice Aggregation agency. It is the official electricity provider for San Mateo County and for the City of Los Banos. Founded in 2016 with a mission to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the agency serves a population of 810,000 by providing more than 3,600 gigawatt hours annually of electricity that is 50 percent renewable, 100 percent clean and at lower cost than PG&E. As a community-led, not-for-profit agency, Peninsula Clean Energy makes significant investments in its communities to expand access to sustainable and affordable energy solutions.

Peninsula Clean Energy is on track to deliver electricity that is 100 percent renewable by 2025. The agency has earned investment grade credit ratings from Moody’s and Fitch. Follow us at
PenCleanEnergy.com, Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.

620 of 676

Media Contact
Darren Goode
Peninsula Clean Energy
[email protected]

This email was sent to [email protected]
Peninsula Clean Energy, 2075 Woodside Rd, Redwood City, CA 94061, United States Unsubscribe

621 of 676

From: Gary Trott 2
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett; Kathy Kleinbaum; Andrea Chow Cc: "Gary Trott 2"
Subject: Input for SMCity Council meeting 10/17/22 item #24 Green Energy Reach Codes Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:39:23 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,

1. Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

2. Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives.

I urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach Codes.

è I believe it is imperative that San Mateo City begin the transition process to eliminate natural gas in existing building as soon as possible. There will be resistance and impediments to such a bold stance. However one has to begin somewhere. Plus, as there is no estimate from the staff as to how long the process will take, there are no milestones to even gauge progress. Meanwhile the climate hazardous will continue to increase in severity. It is a train wreck a long time coming with no effective actions to stop it. ç

622 of 676

Lastly, please take a leadership role in communicating to the community that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as local rebates, now makes it more affordable for low, fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised.

Sincerely,

Dr. Gary Trott
Climate concerned citizen of San Mateo

623 of 676

From: Linda Tolosano
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: October 17th City Council Meeting "Reach Codes" Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 12:27:55 PM
We have been hearing about the possibility of the City of San Mateo instituting mandatory compliance for replacement of gas appliances/HVAC when new equipment is necessary. This places a huge cost burden on current homeowners who now have gas in their homes. Unless the City of San Mateo is willing to somehow subsidize the costs involved, many people will not be able to afford such a mandate. The City has already burdened homeowners with paying for sewer connections and other City services that have slowly dwindled over the years.

We are in favor of requiring new development to be 100% electric. Putting the burden of installing electric for gas replacement is unfair and an undue burden on homeowners.

Time to
think about your neighbors and what you are asking them to do and how it will effect their ability to stay in their homes.

Linda Tolosano

624 of 676

625 of 676

From: Michelle Hudson
To: City Council (San Mateo); Drew Corbett; Kathy Kleinbaum; Andrea Chow Subject: Please Support Electrification Measures (and Combat the Misinformation) - Comment on Item #24 on 10/17 City Council Agenda
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 10:29:22 AM
Dear Mayor Bonilla, City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager and Sustainability Staff,
I appreciate the efforts of the City Council, City Staff, and the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commissioners to discuss and act on Reach Codes. I support Staff’s proposal for all-electric new construction, as well as their proposed five measures for remodels of existing residential buildings.

1. Existing Building Reach Code. Please add a remodel trigger for installation of heat pump HVAC for heating and cooling.

2. Existing Building Reach Code. Please clarify that new or replacement air conditioning is a sufficient trigger for the requirement of installation of heat pump HVAC.

3. Revision to Status Update to Staff’s Work plan for #27 of City Objectives . Please
revise the status update to reflect that the Council has directed Staff to study and develop over the course of 3-6 months, a full Reach Code for existing buildings based on the Bay Area Reach Codes Group’s model ordinance that would take effect on January 1, 2025.

I urge you to adopt Staff’s proposed Reach Codes for new construction and existing buildings this fall, and that the above minor revisions be incorporated into said Reach Codes.

Beyond the above, I wish to address the misinformation that is circulating in the community with respect to the current Reach Code proposal, as well as electrification in general. Much of the misinformation seems politically motivated to hurt or help certain City Council candidates. I urge you to see the negative comments regarding the current Reach Code proposal for what they are - at best, they are the result of a misunderstanding of the current proposal owing to the misinformation campaign, and at worst, they are politically motivated. Please educate those who are misinformed about the

626 of 676

current proposal, which is very limited in scope and applicable to new construction and remodels only.

For the sake of all of our futures, I do hope there will be a time in the near future when the City does consider a stronger electrification ordinance, as the current Council has assured us will happen. I remind you that 440 community members have signed a Petition asking for this.

To lay the groundwork for much-needed broad electrification, please take a leadership role in communicating to the community that funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as increased local rebates, now makes it more affordable for low, fixed and middle income households to go electric when appliances fail, as compared to the cost of buying new gas appliances. Many members of the community are either not aware of this and/or are declining to acknowledge this when electrification cost concerns get raised. There also seems to be much unfounded concern regarding grid

capacity, and the need for panel upgrades, in connection with electrification. Again, your leadership role in educating the community on these issues is much needed and would be greatly appreciated by those of us who support electrification as a climate solution for no reason other than we want a livable planet.

Sincerely,
Michelle Hudson,
Resident of San Mateo
Mother of two

627 of 676

628 of 676

From: Barbara Denny
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Re: Reach codes
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 10:01:16 AM
Sorry for the incomplete message. I was forced to use my cell phone to make sure you received my thoughts in a timely manner. I accidentally hit the send button as a result.

I believe that plans for existing homes should allow the home owner to have a choice in whether they convert to something electric. This is because the cost for what is needed can escalate the cost of the project by a large amount and the work involved could exceed just that one work item.

I realize reducing the use of fossil fuels is
important in the fight against rising temperatures but I think people's ability to control their financial expenditures and well being could be at stake given the potential cost.

Beside the financial issue, I think making electric requirements could also potentially impact people's ability to address their needs because of the additional time needed to do the work. Some employees do not have much flexibility in when and how much time they can take off to be present in their home for such tasks.

Thanks for your time and hard work,

Barbara Denny
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 09:47:20 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <[email protected]> wrote:

I believe that plans for existing homes should allow the home owner have a choice in whether they convert to something to electric. This is because the cost for what is needed can escalate the cost of the project by a large amount and the work involved could exceed just that one work item.

I realize reducing the use of fossil fuels is
important in the fight against rising temperatures but people's

629 of 676

From: [email protected]
To: City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Re: require EXISTING homes having to go ALL ELECTRIC Date: Sunday, October 16, 2022 6:21:40 PM
Council Members,