Rincon Consultants, Inc.
66 Franklin Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94607
510-834-4455
w w w . r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
June 16, 2025
Andrea Chow, Sustainability Analyst
City of San Mateo
330 West 20th Avenue
San Mateo, California 94403
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Summary of Conducted Community Engagement for Electrify City of San Mateo A major component of the Electrify San Mateo: Sustainable Buildings Strategy is a robust community engagement process. This project aims to create an actionable roadmap with steps for City of San Mateo to electrify buildings based on effectiveness and equity criteria, cost-effectiveness, best available science and data, and community feedback. Community outreach and public input are fundamental to shaping effective, equitable, and successful decarbonization policies. This memorandum summarizes the engagement conducted by both City staff and Rincon Consultants between Spring 2023 and Spring 2025.
Executive Summary of all Outreach
Outreach has been conducted in two phases to understand community priorities, concerns, and needed support for successful policy implementation. During Phase I of engagement, the City presented at multiple meetings to gather feedback on the equity and effectiveness criteria and educate the community about costs and benefits of building electrification. This included a meeting with the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission, a City Council meeting, five General Plan Town Hall meetings, and an online survey. After Phase I of engagement, the initial suite of policy pathways was narrowed down to five policy pathways to advance existing building electrification within San Mateo.
Phase II of engagement aimed at further refining these priority policies for inclusion within the final Electrify San Mateo: Sustainable Buildings Strategy. During Phase II, the community engagement efforts included an in-person workshop and an additional virtual workshop for community members which focused on the five policy pathways, a virtual information session on Building Performance Standards for commercial building owners, presentations at City Commissions and community and stakeholder meetings, and an online survey.
Throughout the community engagement process, there have been polarized responses to building electrification. While most constituents care about addressing the climate crisis and agree that the City should pursue existing building electrification in some form, many residents also expressed concerns.
The primary constituent values identified during Phase I and Phase II engagement that are motivating building electrification included:
Urgent need to address the climate crisis is a priority issue Health and air quality benefits of building decarbonization Need for local action and the City to act now
Availability of electric equipment incentives and rebates to support property owners City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
2 The primary concerns identified during Phase I and Phase II engagement included:
Upfront costs of electric equipment
On-bill or operational costs of electric equipment
Installation and electrical infrastructure challenges
Grid reliability and resilience
Lack of education surrounding electrification
In general, the results of the community outreach conducted by the City point to a general desire to address climate change and decarbonize buildings tempered by concerns about cost and feasibility.
Based on these findings, a focus on policies that support decarbonization when cost effective and efficient while providing flexible alternatives for particularly challenging cases should be prioritized.
Below is a detailed summary of outcomes and themes from each engagement event. A record of public comments and photos is listed at the end of this memorandum.
Community Engagement Phase I: Community Concerns and
Values
During Phase I of engagement, the City held multiple events to gather feedback on the equity and effectiveness criteria and educate the community about costs and benefits of building electrification. The goal of this phase was to both provide information to the community on what building electrification is and why the City is pursuing it, as well as learn about the core values and concerns the community has around upgrading their homes and businesses. This included a meeting with the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission, a meeting with the Equity and Inclusion Task Force, a City Council meeting, five General Plan Town Hall meetings, and an online survey.
General Plan Town Hall Meetings
In Fall of 2023, five General Plan Town Hall meetings were held to solicit feedback on the City’s General Plan Update. The General Plan Town Hall events were in-person events located throughout the community, one event in each of San Mateo’s five districts. At each outreach event, doors opened at 5:30 pm to allow attendees to view poster boards (example at end of memorandum) on various topics (circulation, land use, safety, noise, etc.) with a formal presentation on the Draft General Plan at 7:00 pm.
An average of 60 community members attended each event.
The project team had a poster board summarizing the Sustainable Buildings Strategy project effort.
Community members were very engaged at the Sustainable Buildings Strategy poster board. Staff received a mix of both supportive feedback for working on electrification requirements as well as concerns about costs related to electrification.
Diversity Equity and Inclusion Task Force Presentation
On September 22, 2023, presented to the City’s Diversity Equity and Inclusion Task Force. Feedback from the Task Force included: the need to include education, data, and storytelling in outreach. The Task Force’s biggest concerns regarding electrification were related to the electric power outages and costs City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
3 to homeowners. The Task Force also helped identify follow up opportunities for partnerships and project outreach.
Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission Meeting
At the September 13, 2023 Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission meeting, staff and the consultant team presented the building inventory and market segmentation analysis as well as building electrification cost analysis. Over 120 written public comments were submitted for the item with the majority in support of decarbonization. 24 verbal comments were also provided at the meeting.
Proponents of decarbonization support electrification policy efforts to reduce gas use in the community to combat climate change, improve air quality, and improve health. Proponents also encouraged the leveraging of incentives and rebates for electrification. 1 For those opposed, the number one concern about electrification is the costs to the property owner. Other concerns include power outages, growth of the grid to accommodate future electric buildings, and passed on costs to renters.
Survey
The project team also launched an online survey to assess community priorities for building electrification that was open December 2023 through January 10, 2024. Results of the online survey were shared at the January 16, 2024 City Council Study Session. A summary of the survey results is included below. The survey had a total of 194 respondents from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds as shown in Error! Reference source not found. and Error! Reference source not found. . 1 San Mateo, City of. 2023. Public Comments Submitted for the August 9, 2023 SIC Meeting. Available:
https://sanmateo.primegov.com/Portal/viewer?id=9062&type=2.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
4 Figure 1 Household Income of Survey Respondents
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
5 Figure 1 Race of Survey Respondents
The Phase I survey primarily focused on what priorities and concerns the community had relating to buildings and building decarbonization. As shown in Error! Reference source not found., affordable energy costs was the highest-ranking quality for San Mateo Buildings, followed by a tie between Health and Safety and Resilience. Climate and sustainability ranked fourth followed by Modern Appliances and Functionality.
Respondents also provided feedback on their biggest concerns regarding building electrification in San Mateo. Error! Reference source not found. shows that increasing energy bills was the largest concern relating to building electrification. This concern was followed by concern over increased housing/rent costs as the second most common concern. Respondents also ranked difficulty in accessing rebates (3rd) and building electrification ignoring other more pressing building issues (4th) as primary issues that would need to be addressed.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
6 Figure 1 Survey Respondents Most Important Building Qualities
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
7 Figure 1 Concerns Relating to Building Electrification in San Mateo
These survey results highlighted major concerns of building electrification of both upfront and on-bill cost, reliability concerns, and challenges accessing the funding and financing opportunities meant to decrease the cost of electrification. These topics were carried through into Phase II of outreach as the project team worked to refine the policy options based on community feedback.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
8 City Council Meeting
In January of 2024, Rincon Consultants and City staff provided a presentation to City Council on the Phase I results. The presentation focused on the results of the building segmentation analysis, cost analysis, engagement to date, and initial policy recommendations. During this meeting five policy options were provided for City Council feedback including:
1. Continue adopted reach codes and focus on outreach and incentives (Business as Usual)
2. Explore and adopt new reach codes to encourage and require electrification
3. Require electric equipment upon replacement ahead of the Bay Area Air District’s Zero NO x requirements
4. Establish Building Performance Standards for commercial buildings
5. Adopt an electric-first policy for City facilities
City Council provided feedback which included direction for City Staff to continue exploring the feasibility, cost, and community support for each of the five options.
Community Engagement Phase II: Policy Pathways Feedback Following direction from City Council, City staff with support from Rincon Consultants, conducted additional outreach on the five policy strategies presented to City Council during Phase I. Phase II outreach events included an in-person community workshop, virtual community workshop, virtual meeting with commercial building owners, presentations to community and developer groups, and several upcoming Commission meetings. A second survey was also developed and distributed through these and other City channels. The second survey was developed to get more detailed information about support for/concern around the five policy pathways.
Each community meeting and survey was advertised to the community through multiple avenues including the City’s social media channels, e-newsletter, and at City events, and to individuals who attended prior events.
The following sections detail the feedback received from the community during each engagement opportunity.
In-Person Community Feedback Meeting
Feedback Meeting Summary
The in-person community feedback meeting was advertised to the community through multiple avenues including the City’s social media channels, City e-newsletter, and direct emails. There were 20 attendees.
The in-person community feedback meeting took place on March 5 th, 2025 from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the San Mateo Public Library. The goals of the meeting were for participants to:
1) Understand the definition and importance of existing building electrification in the context of climate change and the City of San Mateo’s climate goals
2) Note an overview and timeline of the City of San Mateo Sustainable Buildings Strategy 3) Recognize previously shared concerns and solutions about existing building electrification City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
9 4) Be introduced to the five policy options and how each would impact the community 5) Share community feedback on the policy options through an interactive “Sailboat” Activity and Voting Activity
A total of 25 community members attended the feedback meeting. City of San Mateo Sustainability Analyst, Andrea Chow, began the meeting and introduced Ryan Gardener, Director of Climate Action and Adaptation at Rincon Consultants, who gave a 25-minute presentation on goals one through four described above. Community members had the opportunity to ask questions a various points during the presentation.
After the presentation, community members were split into three groups to participate in the Sailboat Activity facilitated by a City or Rincon staff member. Each group contained a variety of members including industry professionals like contractors, climate activists, students, and renters and homeowners who have electrified portions of their own homes. The Sailboat Activity helped community members brainstorm electrification challenges and support solutions to help the City achieve its decarbonization goals. The activity featured a poster board with a sailboat heading for an island while being supported by wind and held back by an anchor. The island represents the City’s decarbonization goals, the anchor represents barriers and challenges keeping the City from achieving its goals, and the wind represents various policy and support solutions to help the City reach its goals. Using post-it notes, participants were asked to first brainstorm various “anchors” or barriers to success. Then, participants were asked to brainstorm various solutions, or “wind”, to overcome such “anchors”. The activity lasted approximately 25 minutes.
After the Sailboat Activity, community members were asked to participate in a final Voting Activity where they used post-its on a large posterboard to vote for as many of the five policy options that they would support the City adopt. There was also a “do nothing” option where participants could show that they did not support any electrification policy. Any community member who voted and left their email on a post-it was entered into a raffle for the chance to win one $50 visa gift card.
Key results from each activity are included below, and a full record of all activity responses and photos are included in the Appendix.
Sailboat Activity Themes
Between the three groups, participants shared 30 “anchor” comments and 41 “wind” comments. Overall, the main concerns in the “anchor” category included costs, lack of education, grid reliability, equity, supply issues, and resistant social factors. The main support requested in the “wind” category included cost savings, education and outreach, grid reliability, equity programs, adequate supply, and a changing market. Below is a summary of comments in each section.
Anchor Comments
1) Cost
a. Unexpected upgrades
b. Expensive quotes
c. Speed of installation
d. $52,000 to fully electrify and $30k to $40k in rebates City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
10 e. Uncertainty of federal incentives
2) Lack of Education
f. Complicated topic
g. Confusing software
h. Confusing permitting process
i. Lack of communication between City departments
3) Grid Reliability
j. Unexpected utility shut offs
k. Demand response software
l. Emergencies
4) Equity
m. Unclear how renters fit into electrification
n. Concerns with mandates
5) Supply issues
o. Equipment availability
p. Contractor availability
6) Social factors: people and industries are resistant/ have a fear of change q. Loss of aesthetics (fireplaces, etc.)
r. Perception of convenience/ procrastination
s. Too many setup variations (space, house layout)
Wind Comments
1) Cost Savings
a. We need incentives – Credits & Rebates, lower interest loans and On bill loans (PG&E) b. We need to waive city building permit fees for electric upgrades c. Operation Cost – Gas, Water, Heater is more expensive d. Cost of Rebuilding after disaster is way more
e. Solar + Batteries + All Electric = Lower energy costs f. Better health – Lower medical bills
2) Education/ Outreach Programs
g. Home Tours – Peer to Peer Education (led by non-profits) h. Collaborate and share solutions with other jurisdiction (like Cupertino or San Carlos) i. Need a “Vision” to strive for and rally behind
j. Volunteer Advisor Program
k. Residential education on AC & Heat Pumps
l. Collaboration between contractors, City, residents, and non-profits City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
11 m. Targeted marketing to those who already have solar/ those who installed an appliance 10 years back
n. Contractor training
o. Communications tool to consider upgrade costs specific to home insulation, wiring return flow ducts
p. Education about climate benefits, health benefits, safety benefits q. Electrification Starter Pack
r. Peninsula Clean Energy Help Desk
s. Advertising/ signage for electrified homes with QR code to more resources t. Need data about what works and what hasn’t
3) Grid reliability
u. Solar + Batteries + All Electric = Resiliency
4) Equity Programs
v. Support for renters
w. Credits people of color
x. 0% interest rate or community fund for people with low income 5) Supply chain
y. Need guaranteed supply of the incentivized electrified appliances z. Need service availability
6) Social factors: changing market
aa. When the electric appliances perform better, they will be more attractive than gas bb. Gas exposure causes health problems
cc. Green homes
Voting Activity Results
There was support for the following policy options:
1) Business as Usual: 0 supporters
2) Reach Codes for Renovations: 9 supporters
3) Zero NOx Equipment: 14 supporters
4) Commercial Building Performance Standard: 11 supporters 5) Municipal Electric First Policy: 11 supporters
6) Do Nothing: 0 supporters
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
12 Virtual Community Feedback Meeting
Feedback Meeting Summary
The virtual community feedback meeting took place on March 13th, 2025 from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. via Zoom to provide an alternative time to the in-person meeting for community members to actively engage with the policy feedback process. The goals and meeting format were the same as the in-person event. 11community members participated in the virtual feedback meeting.
Andrea Chow and Ryan Gardner facilitated the meeting. After the 25-minute presentation, community members participated in the same Sailboat Activity as the in-person meeting but in a virtual format.
Participants remained in one large group using the engagement software Mural. Community members could enter comments into the Mural board themselves or leave comments in the chat or unmute themselves and leave verbal comments for Rincon staff to add onto the Mural board on their behalf.
After the Sailboat Activity, community members were asked to take an exit poll to vote for as many of the five policy options that they would support the City adopt. There was also a “do nothing” option where participants could show that they did not support any electrification policy. Any community member who voted was entered into a raffle for the chance to win one $50 visa gift card.
Key results from the virtual Sailboat Activity and exit poll are included below, and a full record of all activity responses, meeting chat, and photos are included in the Appendix.
Sailboat Activity Themes
Participants shared 9 “anchor” comments and 12 “wind” comments. Overall, the main concerns in the “anchor” category included costs, lack of education, grid reliability, technology and engineering challenges, equity, and legislative red tape. The main support requested in the “wind” category included: cost savings, education, equity, and technology solutions. Below is a summary of comments in each section.
Anchor Comments
1) Cost
a. Large percentage of buildings that cannot replace at end of life at a reasonable cost 2) Lack of education
b. Lack of information and support for implementation
c. Lack of cohesive city support for resident transitions 3) Grid reliability
d. power outages/ need grid resiliency
4) Technology and engineering challenges
e.lack of drop-in products (40G small diameter water heater will not be available for another few years)
f. difficult targets are multifamily homes in City of San Mateo are not well suited for heat pump upgrades. Electrical power is an issue, as requirements for engineered solutions City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
13 5) Equity
g. Rent increases in multifamily
6) Legislative red tape
h. PG&E policies against solar
Wind Comments
1) Cost savings
a. Start with low hanging fruit
b. must identify easy targets where building envelope is more important than heat pumps 2) Education
c. Peer coaching
d. Collaboration with San Mateo County Heat Pump Advocates e. Need info on total GHG reductions for each option
f. Work together with manufacturers of electric equipment g. Watt diets
h. Learn form other Bay Area cities
3) Equity
i. Tie incentives to renter protections
j. exemptions for difficult cases
4) Technology solutions
k. Saddle mounts and "copper" battery powered stoves
Exit Poll Results
Of the five people voted and entered their emails, there was support for the following policy options:
1) Business as Usual: 2 supporters
2) Reach Codes for Renovations: 3 supporters
3) Zero NOx Equipment: 0 supporters
4) Commercial Building Performance Standard: 2 supporters 5) Municipal Electric First Policy: 1 supporters
6) Do Nothing: 1 supporters
San Mateo United Homeowners Association Feedback Meeting Feedback Meeting Summary
The San Mateo United Homeowners Association (SMUHA) meets regularly to coordinate efforts between neighborhood and homeowner associations. The project team presented at the March 20 th meeting at 7pm. There were 10 attendees.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
14 Results and Themes
Similar to other feedback, most attendees voiced concern about the potential costs to property owners and the potential for costs to be passed on to renters. There was discussion of grid resilience and PG&E power safety shut offs. Most attendees were opposed to the City moving too quickly on building electrification policy.
Commercial Building Performance Standard Information Session Feedback Meeting Summary
The virtual Commercial BPS Information Session was advertised to building owners with buildings above 50,000 square feet through email. City staff spoke at the Chamber of Commerce Public Policy Group and Chamber of Commerce Developers Roundtable to promote this event. The City and Rincon Consultants created a BPS 1-pager explaining the relevance of the policy to distribute to building owners (available at end of this memorandum).
The virtual Commercial BPS Information Session took place on April 10 th, 2025 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. over zoom. The goals of the meeting were for participants to:
1) Learn about the importance of a Building Performance Standard in the context of the City’s climate goals and legislation advancing a BPS across the state
2) Note an overview and timeline of the City of San Mateo Sustainable Buildings Strategy 3) Learn about the phased implementation process of a Building Performance Standard 4) Share feedback, concerns, and ask questions about the policy A total of six building owners attended the information session. City of San Mateo Sustainability Analyst, Andrea Chow, began the meeting and introduced Ryan Gardener, Director of Climate Action and Adaptation at Rincon Consultants, who gave a 25-minute presentation on goals one through three described above. After the presentation, building owners had the opportunity to share feedback, concerns, and ask questions about a potential BPS.
Key results from the discussion are included below, and a full record of all activity responses and photos are included in the Appendix.
Results and Themes
Overall participants were thankful for the event as they were able to learn valuable information and share their feedback and desires for implementation of the policy. Several building owners from both retail and multi-family backgrounds shared insights as to how a BPS might affect them and the ways in which the policy thresholds could be structured to make implementation more successful. The main comments included:
1) Setting a threshold based on an average of all commercial buildings (comparing old buildings to all- electric, new construction) could skew the threshold to require old buildings to convert to all-electric which could be financially infeasible. One idea provided by an attendee was to set an individual threshold where buildings must reduce their emissions compared to their own historical emissions rather than meet a City or building type average.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
15 2) Converting to electric appliances also creates a possible space issue as electric rooms are increasingly taking up more space and old buildings may not have room for it. Relocating equipment due to space limitations poses increased engineering and financial burdens. 3) For new construction that must meet the recent Title 24 requirements, can there be a vintage threshold to avoid unnecessary financial and time burden for buildings that are already well- performing.
4) For landlords with complicated tenant and lease structures, landlords would need City support to navigate conversations with tenants and financial responsibility.
Survey
Survey Summary
An online survey was created to collect community feedback from those who were unable to participate in any of the other engagement events. It was shared broadly through City email listservs, social media, and during City events including the State of the City event. The survey was also advertised at the end of every engagement meeting so participants could share it with their networks.
The Phase II survey aimed to gauge support for the five policy pathways while being brief and accessible.
The survey provided a background on the project and its importance, defined the five policy options, and asked community members which of the policies they would support. Respondents could choose options “Do not support”, “Neutral”, “Support”, or “Not sure.” Respondents also had the opportunity to leave other feedback in a comment box.
Results and Themes
The survey had a total of 217 respondents from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds as shown in Error! Reference source not found.and Error! Reference source not found..
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
16 Figure 1 Household Income of Survey Respondents
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
17 Figure 1 Race of Survey Respondents
Of the five policy pathways, support for each policy was polarized with large percentages of constituents supporting and opposing each policy. The results of each policy are seen in Error! Reference source not found. through Error! Reference source not found. below. Although answers were polarized, a majority of constituents supported policy options 1, 2, 4, and 5. Policy option 3 was the only policy that had a majority “do not support” vote at 47.47% versus a 43.78% support vote.
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
18 Figure 1 Policy Option 1 Survey Results
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
19 Figure 1 Policy Option 2 Survey Results
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
20 Figure 1 Policy Option 3 Survey Results
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
21 Figure 1 Policy Option 4 Survey Results
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
22 Figure 1 Policy Option 5 Survey Results
Senior Advisory Commission
Feedback Meeting Summary
The project team presented to the Senior Advisory Commission on May 12, 2025. The Commissioners did not provide a formal policy recommendation and provided general feedback on the policy pathways.
In general, the Commissioners agreed with the need to address climate through building decarbonization and electrification, but had reservations around requirements which could result in high upfront costs (specifically Policy Option 3) for those on fixed incomes.
Results and Themes
Most commissioners not supportive of Policy Option 3 due to the potentially high upfront costs Lots of discussion about upfront costs and concern for community members on a fixed income General understanding and support of project goal and need to electrify Some interest and discussion in Policy Option 4, one commissioner pointed out how this was adopted in a lot of other cities
Support of pursuing policy options along with providing resources and programs to help homeowners transition
Noted need for technical support especially for older folks with less understanding of new technologies
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
23 Commissioners were happy to see support options from Peninsula Clean Energy Two commissioners voiced support for Policy Option 1, 2, and 5 Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission
Feedback Meeting Summary
The project team presented to the Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission on May 14, 2025. The Commission’s policy recommendation supported Policy Options 1, 2, 4, and 5 with consideration of additional engagement and/or hardship exemptions where needed.
Results and Themes
Discussion of greenhouse gas emission impact of different measures Discussion of City funds and other programs/resources to support homeowners in electrification transition noted support for other programs like sewer lateral replacements Need for programs like PCE concierge services to support transition Some interest in Policy Option 3 but worried about compliance and concern for timeline Concerns over Policy 2 and 3 were primarily tied to potential for high costs in edge cases. Interest in hardship exemption language in future ordinances to help with cases that are hard-to- electrify
Some commissioners noted the need to phase in Policy 4 to ensure the City understands the costs/feasibility of commercial electrification
Discussion of compliance challenges
Community Relations Commission
Feedback Meeting Summary
The project team presented to the Community Relations Commission on May 21 that included five Commissioners. The Commissioners made a unanimous motion to support all five policy pathways.
Results and Themes
Commissioner discussion of engagement and messaging about current resources, programs, and rebates. Pointed out how some community members do not access information online resources and the need for in-person presentations and other channels Commissioner discussion of language access to resources and programs and the need for different programs based on income-level
Discussion of contractor workforce transition
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
24 All commissioners supportive of the need for existing building decarbonization policies and commissioners made a motion to support all five policy pathways Attachments
Attachment 1 General Plan Town Hall Meetings Poster Board Attachment 2 In-person Feedback Meeting photos, comments, and voting board Attachment 3 Virtual Feedback Meeting Mural Board
Attachment 4 Building Performance Standard Marketing One Pager Attachment 1
General Plan Town Hall Meetings Poster Board
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
1-1
Attachment 2
In-person Feedback Meeting photos, comments, and voting board City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
2-1
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
2-2
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
2-3
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
2-4
Attachment 3
Virtual Feedback Meeting Mural Board, exit poll, and comments
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
3-1
Attachment 4
Building Performance Standard Marketing One Pager
City of San Mateo
Summary of Conducted Community Engagement
4-1