RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNICATIONS
SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY (MERA)
ALLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO EXTEND OF THE
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael (“City”) is the owner of certain property known as Mountain Park Reservation located on Dollar Hill (“City Property”); and WHEREAS, on February 5, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10764, which authorized execution of a Communications Site License Agreement permitting the Marin Emergency Radio Authority (MERA) to install its telecommunications facilities on the City Property, consistent with the approved Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED00-53) and Use Permit (UP00-43); and
WHEREAS, the City and MERA desire to modify Section 3 Terms and Conditions to extend the Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:
1. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a second amendment to the Communications Site License Agreement with MERA, allowing modifications to Section 3 Terms and Conditions to extend the Agreement, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference, subject to final approval as to form by the City Attorney.
2. The Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to take any and all such actions and make changes as may be necessary to accomplish the purpose of this resolution.
I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on Monday, the 18th day of May 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
___ __
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
12485-0001\3219064v1.doc
SECOND AMENDMENT TO COMMUNICATION SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO COMMUNICATION SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT (“Second Amendment”) is dated as of _______________, 2026 (the “Effective Date”), and is entered into by and between the CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, a municipal corporation (“Licensor”), and the MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY, a joint powers authority (“Licensee”).
R E C I T A L S
A. Licensor and Licensee entered into that certain Communications Site License Agreement dated February 5, 2001 (“License”) as amended by the First Amendment to Communication Site License Agreement dated April 29, 2020 (“First Amendment”), affecting a portion of the Property identified in Exhibit A of the License.
B. Licensor and Licensee now desire to amend the License to extend the term of the License.
A G R E E M E N T
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and the covenants and conditions contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Licensor and Licensee hereby agree as follows:
1. Amendment. Section 3 (Term and Option to Extend) of the License is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
A. Commencement Date and Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on February 5, 2001, and shall continue until February 1, 2031 (“Original Term”).
B. Extension of Agreement. Licensee shall have the right to extend the Original Term for four (4) additional five (5) year terms, subject to all of the provisions of the License, and all amendments to the License, provided Licensee is not in default of the License at the time it seeks to exercise the right to extend. Licensee shall notify Licensor in writing of its intention to exercise its extension rights at least sixty (60) days prior to expiration of the term.
2. Entire Agreement. This Second Amendment constitutes the entire agreement between Licensor and Licensee with respect to the subject matter hereof.
3. Conflict. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the terms and conditions of the License, the terms of the First Amendment, and the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment, the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment shall prevail and control.
4. Continuing Effect. Except as specifically modified hereby, the License and First Amendment shall remain unaffected and unchanged. The License and First Amendment is hereby ratified and affirmed by Licensor and Licensee and remains in full force and effect as modified hereby.
12485-0001\3219064v1.doc
5. Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which, taken together, shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument.
6. Authority. The person signing this Second Amendment on behalf of each party hereby represents and warrants that they are duly authorized to execute this Second Amendment on behalf of that party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Licensor and Licensee have executed this Second Amendment as of the date and year first above written.
LICENSOR: CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
By:
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
LICENSEE: MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO
AUTHORITY
By:
Heather Tannehill-Plamondon,
Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Trisha Ortiz, MERA General Counsel
EXHIBIT 1
FIRST AMENDMENT TO COMMUNICATIONS SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT /1, This irst Amendment to Communications Site License Agreement is entered into on thi~ day of ~~'..L.4-· _ _ , 2020, by and between the City of San Rafael (the "City" or "Licensor") and the Marin ergency Radio Authority ("MERA" or "Licensee").
WHEREAS, the City and MERA entered into that certain Communications Site License Agreement ("Agreement") to provide, in part, space for a communications site located on City-owned property described in Paragraph I of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to authorize Licensee to update its radio communication system as described below.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations, to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth as follows:
I. The first sentence of Paragraph 2 of the Agreement shall be amended to read as follows:
"The City grants to MERA, subject to the rights and privileges of current tenants and other grantees, the right and privilege to use the License Space for the sole purpose of constructing, maintaining, securing and operating a public safety, fire protection and emergency radio system, including, the transmission and reception of radio communication signals on various frequencies (between 769 MHz and 77S MHz and in the 6 GHz spectrum for microwave transmissions), in conformance with the approved site plans and related drawings on file with the City Community Development Department, and subject to the terms and conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. I 0763 approving Environmental and Design Review Permit ED00-53 and Use Permit UP00-43 (collectively the "MERA Communication Facilities")."
2. Paragraph 8 of the Agreement shall be amended to read as follows:
"All notices or demands are deemed to be given or made when delivered in person or delivered by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid United States mail, or by facsimile, and addressed to the respective parties as follows:
CITY:
MERA:
City Manager
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 9490 I
Fax:415-459-2242
Phone: 415-485-3070
And with respect to insurance issues:
City Risk Manager
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 9490 I
Fax:415-499-5296
Phone: 415-485-3069
Marin Emergency Radio Authority
c/o Town of Corte Madera
300 Tamalpais Drive
Corte Madera, CA 94925
Attention: Executive Officer
The address to which any notice or demand may be given to either party may be changed by written notice."
3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in effect.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.
LICENSOR:
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL APPROVED AS TO FORM:
L a M& ~, vn (lFC: City Attorney
Date: _ i ~ 7J_1-_ 2{) _ ?Q __
ATTEST:
City Clerk
LICENSEE:
MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CONTRACT ROUTING FORM
INSTRUCTIONS: Use this cover sheet to circulate all contracts for review and approval in the order shown below.
TO BE COMPLETED BY INITIATING DEPARTMENT PROJECT MANAGER:
Contracting Department: Public Works
Project Manager: Bill Guerin Extension: 3110
Contractor Name: Marin Emergency Radio Authority
Contractor's Contact: Contact's Email:
0 FPPC: Check if Contractor/Consultant must file Form 700 Step RESPONSIBLE DESCRIPTION COMPLETED REVIEWER
DEPARTMENT DATE Check/Initial
1 Project Manager a. Email PINS Introductory Notice to Contractor < 'li--:k !ic1c t" □ l.'!llCr cl doll\.'.
b. Email contract (in Word) and attachments to City 4/23/2020 Attorney c/o [email protected] jg! IK 2 City Attorney a. Review, revise, and comment on draft agreement Ii:!. !1' ~: l) and return to Project Manager ~ ;•,, ~'.llJ~-ll . 1
113- -- b. Confirm insurance requirements, create Job on PINS, send PINS insurance notice to contractor LI l ' I - ~ k &. ~ 3 Department Director Approval of final agreement form to send to ( I"- J l I' '·T (] -- contractor [!I Ll1 1
L'l cl
.Lit,
4 Project Manager Forward three (3) originals of final agreement to I k r· ,r: r □ contractor for their signature .:: 'l l -l I 3 t<::
s Project Manager When necessary, contractor-signed agreement □ N/A agendized for City Council approval •
*City Council approval required for Professional Services □ Agreements and purchases of goods and services that exceed Or $75,000; and for Public Works Contracts that exceed $175,000 l
Date of City Council approval • r J , Jr
PRINT CONTINUE ROUTING PROCESS WITH HARO COPY
6 Project Manager Forward signed original agreements to City Attorney with printed copy of this routing form
7 City Attorney Review and approve hard copy of signed
agreement ~-1i 1. t/ /QE, zo Q\- - 8 City Attorney Review and approve insurance in PINS, and bonds (for Public Works Contracts) L/ /2~ 111)20 ~#1/
9 City Manager/ Mayor Agreement executed by City Council authorized L{ /21/?AZU ~ - official - ---
o~'Jo~ !JW¼'-r 10 City Clerk Attest signatures, retains original agreement and ---- forwards copies to Project Manager u
I I
( (
COMMUNICATIONS SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT
This Communications Site License Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into the 5 th day of February, 2001 by and between the City of San Rafael, a municipal corporation ("the City " or "Licensor"), and the Marin Emergency Radio Authority ("MERA" or "Licensee").
WHEREAS, MERA is a joint exercise of powers authority duly organized and operating pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5, Division 7, Title 1 of the California Government Code, and pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement, dated February 28, 1998 by and among the members (the "JPA"); and WHEREAS, MERA's purpose is to plan, finance, implement, manage, own and operate a multi-jurisdictional and County-wide public safety and emergency radio system (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the City is a Member of the JP A; and
WHEREAS, the City and MERA desire to enter into a License Agreement to provide, in part, space for locating a communications site that will become a part of the Project and be located on City owned property described below; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City adopted Resolution No. 10763 on January 22, 2001, approving an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED00-53) and a Use Permit (UP00-43) for the MERA Communication Facilities described below.
NOW, THEREFORE the parties hereto agree, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations, to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth as follows:
1. Licensed Property.
The City is the owner of that certain real property located within the City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of California, commonly known as "Mountain Park Reservation", also identified as Assessor's Parcel No. 011-051-02, and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" hereto ("the Property"). The parties hereto acknowledge that other licenses, leases or easements for communication and other purposes may currently exist on the Property. The City hereby Licenses to MERA and MERA hereby Licenses from the City, space on that portion of the Property depicted in Exhibit "B", together with the easements described hereinafter in paragraph 5 (the "License Space"). The City and MERA hereby agree that the License Space may be surveyed by a licensed surveyor at the sole cost of MERA, and that such survey shall then supplement Exhibit B, and become a part hereof and shall control to describe the License Space in the event of any discrepancy between such survey and the description of the License Space as contained herein. The License granted herein is subject to the terms, covenants, and conditions ATTACHMENT "A"
1 OP
( (
hereinafter set forth, and Licensee covenants, as a material part of this license, to keep and perform each and every term, covenant and condition of this License Agreement.
2. Use.
The City grants to MERA, subject to the rights and privileges of current tenants and other grantees, the right and privilege to use the License Space for the sole purpose of constructing, maintaining, securing and operating a public safety, fire protection and emergency radio system, including, the transmission and reception of radio communication signals on various frequencies (between 482.3500 MHz and 488.7000 MHz and in the 11.2 GHz spectrum for microwave transmissions), in conformance with the approved site plans and related drawings on file with the City Community Development Department, and subject to the terms and conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 10763 approving Environmental and Design Review Permit ED00-53 and Use Permit UP00-43 (collectively the "MERA Communication Facilities"). The City further agrees not to hereafter grant a right to any other party for use of the Property or permit any other party to use the Property if such use would in any way adversely affect or interfere with MERA's use of the License Space, or adversely interfere with the MERA Communication Facilities, except for any uses by City or other parties now existing on the Property. This License Agreement is subject to Licensee obtaining all governmental licenses, permits and approvals required by federal, state or local governmental agencies, enabling MERA to construct and operate the MERA Communication Facilities in the License Space as described herein. The City agrees to cooperate with MERA, at MERA's expense, in making application for and obtaining all licenses, permits and any and all other necessary approvals that may be required for MERA's intended use of the License Space. The MERA Communication Facilities may be modified only upon written approval of the City, and obtaining any necessary City and other governmental permits. Construction, operation, and maintenance of the MERA Communication Facilities shall be at MERA's sole expense. MERA shall keep the License Space free from hazards or risk to public health, safety or welfare.
3. Term and Option to Extend.
A. Commencement Date and Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the day first hereinabove written and shall continue for a period of five (5) years thereafter.
B. Extension of Agreement. MERA shall have the right to extend the term hereof for four (4) additional five (5) year periods, subject to all of the provisions of this Agreement, provided MERA is not in default hereunder at the time it seeks to exercise the right to extend. MERA shall notify City in writing of its intention to exercise extension rights at least sixty (60) days prior to expiration of the term. 2 ( (
4. License Fee Payments.
Based upon (i) MERA's status as a Jomt powers authority dedicated to the furtherance and enhancement of the public safety communications system in Marin County, (ii) the City's status as a member of the IPA, and (iii) use of the MERA Communications Facilities for those same public safety purposes, the City has agreed to waive the license fees (normally required for any License Space) under this Agreement.
If at any time hereafter, the City ceases to be a member of the JPA, MERA agrees to pay to the City a market rate License fee which shall be agreed to by the parties, in the absence of which agreement the License fee shall be determined by an appraiser mutually agreeable to the parties.
5. Access and Utility Easements.
A. MERA is hereby given a right-of-way, subject to the limitations, restrictions, covenants, conditions, leases, licenses and easements of record, for ingress and egress to the License Space over, upon, and across the existing unimproved roadway known as Robert Dollar Drive located on the Property and the City's adjacent Boyd Park Property, from the gate adjacent to the improved public roadway known as Robert Dollar Drive, for the erection, installation, maintenance, replacement and removal of MERA's Facilities (the "Access Easement"). MERA also shall have a temporary right of access to the License Space over the existing paved portion of the roadway know as Robert Dollar Drive located on the Property, from the gate adjacent to Chula Vista Drive, when the access across the unimproved portion of Robert Dollar Drive connected to the public roadway known as Robert Dollar Drive is impassable as provided in the Second Addendum attached as Exhibit 2-A to Resolution No. 10763. MERA shall have the right to improve the Access Easement where necessary for its required uses upon written approval of the City, and obtaining any necessary City permits or other governmental approvals.
B. MERA shall have the right to enter the Property for the purpose of making necessary inspections and engineering surveys, and other tests reasonably necessary to determine the suitability of the License Space for MERA's Communication Facilities and for the purposes of preparing for the construction of the MERA Communication Facilities. MERA shall repair any damage to the Property caused by any tests performed and shall return the Property to the condition that existed prior to any tests.
C. MERA shall have access 24-hour\seven days-a-week to the Property for construction, installation, maintenance and repair of the License Space. MERA shall cooperate with, and adhere to, the City's access and security rules designed to promote the security and integrity of the Property wherein the License Space is located; however, the City agrees not to unreasonably restrict entry to the License Space by authorized MERA employees, agents, contractors and sub-contractors.
D. In the event of an emergency that requires the City to conduct emergency repair work within, at, or near the License Space or MERA's antennas, the City agrees to 3 {
notify MERA immediately and engage MERA personnel in support of the emergency effort.
E. MERA shall pay one-half of the City's initial costs for improving the access to the License Space across the unimproved portion of the roadway known as Robert Dollar Drive, and shall annually thereafter pay one half of the City's annual costs for maintaining, repairing, restoring and improving the roadway access to the License Space. MERA shall pay the City within 60 days of the City's billing for such costs.
6. Utilities at MERA's Cost.
MERA shall be solely responsible for and promptly pay all charges for propane, gas, electricity, telephone service, or any other utility used or consumed by MERA on the License Space. MERA shall have an electrical current meter installed on the Property to service the License Space and the cost of such meter and of such installation, maintenance, and repair shall be paid for by MERA.
7. Holding Over.
Should MERA, with the City's written consent, continue to utilize the License Space or any portion thereof after the expiration of the last five (5) year term, MERA shall continue to do so subject to all terms and conditions of this Agreement.
8. Notice.
All notices or demands are deemed to be given or made when delivered in person or delivered by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid United States mail, or by facsimile, and addressed to the respective parties as follows:
CITY: City Manager
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Avenue
P.O. Box 151560
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Fax: 415-459-2242
Phone: 415-485-3070
And with respect to insurance issues:
City Risk Manager
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth A venue
P.O. Box 151560
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Fax: 415-499-5296
Phone: 415-485-3069
4 MERA:
(
Marin Emergency Radio Authority
c/o Marin County Department of Public Works
P.O. Box 4186
San Rafael, CA 94913-4186
Attention: Executive Officer
Fax: 415-499-3799
Phone: 415-499-6570
(
The address to which any notice or demand may be given to either party may be changed by written notice.
9. Indemnification.
With respect to the Property and except for the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its agents, employees or contractors, MERA shall defend, indemnify, release, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, from any and all claims, obligations, liabilities, costs, demands, damages, expenses, suits or causes of action, judgments, or losses, including costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, which may arise out of the access, use, or occupancy of the Property by MERA, or MERA's officers, contractors, licensees, agents, employees, guests, invitees, or visitors in or about the License Space. The City shall not be liable for any loss or damage to persons or property sustained by MERA or other persons, which may be caused by theft, or by any act or neglect of any other licensee, tenant or occupant of the Property, or by any Third Parties. The indemnity obligations hereunder survive the termination of this Agreement.
MERA shall defend, indemnify, release, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, from any loss, liability or damage arising from any claim, action or proceeding seeking to attack, set aside, void or annul the City's approval of MERA's use of the Property pursuant to this License Agreement and any other City permits or approvals related thereto, including the City's adoption of Resolution No. 10763, and the approval ofED00-53 and UP00-53.
10. Possessory Interest; Taxes.
MERA shall pay all personal property taxes, real property taxes, fees and assessments which may at any time be imposed or levied by any public entity and attributable to MERA's use of the License Space as authorized herein. City hereby gives notice to MERA, pursuant to Revenue and Tax Code Section 107 .6, that this License Agreement may create a possessory interest which is the subject of property taxes levied on such interest, the payment of which taxes shall be the sole obligation of MERA. 5 ( (
11. MERA's Right to Terminate.
MERA shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
A. Upon providing the City six (6) months advance written notice.
B. Upon revocation, expiration or termination of necessary approvals of any agency, board, court or other governmental authority or third party for the construction and/or operation of the facilities or access thereto or if MERA reasonably determines the cost of obtaining such approval is unfeasible.
C. If MERA reasonably determines that the License Space is not appropriate under MERA's design or engineering specifications for its operation or that of the public safety and emergency radio system to which the facility belongs.
12. City's Right to Terminate.
City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon the occurrence of any of the following:
A. Failure by MERA to comply with any material term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, if such failure is not cured to the reasonable satisfaction of City thirty (30) days after written notice thereof to MERA.
B. Upon providing MERA twenty four (24) months advance written notice.
13. Insurance.
A. During the term of this Agreement, MERA shall maintain, at no expense to City, the following insurance policies:
1. A comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million ($1,000,000) dollars per occurrence for death, bodily injury, personal injury, or property damage.
2. An automobile liability (owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles) msurance policy m the minimum amount of one million ($1,000,000) dollars per occurrence.
B. The insurance coverage required of MERA by Paragraph 13. A., shall also meet the following requirements:
1. The insurance shall be primary with respect to any insurance or coverage maintained by City and shall not call upon City insurance or coverage for any contribution.
6 ( (
2. The insurance policies shall be endorsed for contractual liability and personal injury.
3. The insurance policies shall be specifically endorsed to include the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, as additionally named insureds under the policies.
4. MERA shall provide to City's Risk Manager, (a) Certificates of Insurance evidencing the insurance coverage required herein, and (b) specific endorsements naming City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, as additional named insureds under the policies.
5. The insurance policies shall provide that the insurance carrier shall not cancel, terminate or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of said insurance policies except upon thirty (30) days written notice to City's Risk Manager.
6. If the insurance is written on a Claims Made Form, then, following termination of this Agreement, said insurance coverage shall survive for a period of not less than five years.
7. The insurance policies shall provide for a retroactive date of placement coinciding with the effective date of this Agreement.
8. The insurance shall be approved as to form and sufficiency by the City's Risk Manager and the City Attorney.
C. If it employs any person, MERA shall maintain worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance, as required by the State Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations, and as necessary to protect both Licensee and City against all liability for injuries to MERA's officers and employees.
D. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions in MERA's insurance policies must be declared to and approved by the City's Risk Manager and the City Attorney. At City's option, the deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to City shall be reduced or eliminated to City's satisfaction, or MERA shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration, attorney's fees and defense expenses.
14. Fixtures.
The City agrees that no part of the improvements constructed, erected or placed by MERA on the License Space shall be considered as being fixed to or a part of the City's real property, it being the specific intention of the City to agree that the MERA Communications Facilities erected or placed by MERA on the License Space shall be and remain the property of MERA. At the expiration or termination of this Agreement, 7 ( (
MERA shall remove, at its sole expense, from the License Space any and all fixtures and improvements of every kind constructed and erected thereon.
15. Assignment.
MERA shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, license, or otherwise transfer or encumber all or any part of its interest in this Agreement without the City's prior written consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, MERA shall have the right to assign this Agreement, or license the License Space to any governmental entity that it controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with MERA, or to any governmental entity resulting from merger or consolidation with MERA, provided that such assignee assumes in full all ofMERA's obligations under the Agreement and City is a full member of such assigned governmental entity.
16. Hazardous Materials.
MERA understands that the City has undertaken no internal investigation of its files, examination of its employees or testing of the License Space with respect to whether or not the License Space has been used for the generation, storage, treatment or disposal of hazardous materials ( as defined in "16 A through 16 E" below) and with the qualification the City represents that it has no present knowledge that the License Space has been so used in connection with hazardous materials.
MERA shall not use, store, or bring onto the Property or License Space, any hazardous materials except in accordance with all federal, state and local laws and regulations. In the event of leakage or spillage from any of MERA's equipment or any vehicle under the control or custody of MERA or any contractor or agent for MERA, MERA shall at its own expense promptly clean the City's Property and License Space to the reasonable satisfaction of the City, the Environmental Protection Agency and any public body having jurisdiction in the matter. Any expense of required compliance with federal, state or local environmental regulations incurred by the City or MERA as a direct consequence of MERA's use of the Property or the License Space shall be borne by MERA, including any fines and judgments levied against the City. MERA agrees that in the event the MERA uses, stores, or brings onto the Property or License Space, any hazardous materials and such act(s) result(s) in damage or injury to the Property or License Space, or to the City, the City's employees, agents, or contractors, MERA shall at its own expense, indemnify and hold City, or any of City's employees, agents, or contractors harmless as a result of the damage or injury, including without limitation, to promptly clean City's Property to the reasonable satisfaction of City, the Environmental Protection Agency and any public body having jurisdiction in the matter. Any expense of required compliance with federal, state or local environmental regulations incurred as the result of the above mentioned acts by the MERA shall be borne by the MERA, including any fines and judgments levied against either party.
8 ( (
The City agrees that in the event the City uses, stores, or brings onto the Property or License Space, any hazardous materials and such act(s) result(s) in damage or injury to MERA, or any of MERA's employees, agents, or contractors, the City, shall at its own expense, indemnify and hold MERA, or any of MERA's employees, agents, or contractors harmless as a result of the damage or injury, including without limitation, to promptly clean MERA's License Space to the reasonable satisfaction of MERA, the Environmental Protection Agency and any public body having jurisdiction in the matter.
Any expense of required compliance with federal, state or local environmental regulations incurred as the result of the above mentioned acts by the City shall be borne by the City, including any fines and judgments levied against either party.
As used in this section, hazardous materials shall mean:
A. " Hazardous substances" and "pollutants and contaminants" as defined in CERCLA, 42 USC Sections 9601 (14) and (33) and regulations issued pursuant thereto, or their successors.
B. "Extremely hazardous substances, hazardous chemicals" and "toxic chemicals" as defined in the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, 42 USC Sections 11002 (a), 11021(e), and 11023 (c), and regulations issued pursuant thereto, or their successors.
C. "Hazardous chemicals" within the meaning of OSHA's Hazard Communication Rules, 29 CFR Section 1910. 1200, or their successors.
D. Any such materials regulated under state or local environmental laws and regulations similar to the foregoing federal authorities listed in A-C above, or their successors.
E. Any materials not covered by, or exempted from, the sources listed in paragraphs A-D above or their successors, that may nevertheless pose a threat to the City's function as a public agency or to human health or welfare or to the environment including, without limitation, petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof, and radon.
17. Interference.
MERA shall operate the MERA Communication Facilities in a manner that will not cause radio interference to any and all of the City's current or equivalent replacement communications and related equipment on the Property or to the current or equivalent replacement communications and related equipment on the Property owned and operated by other City lessees, licensees, tenants, or invitees currently on the Property, provided that for such other lessees, licensees, tenants, or invitees their installations predate that of the MERA Communications Facilities. In the event of any such interference, MERA shall correct said interference to the satisfaction of City, within twelve (12) hours of City's written or telephonic notice to MERA. In the event that MERA is unable to 9 ( (
correct such interference to City's satisfaction within such time period, MERA shall cease its operation of the MERA Communication Facilities at the end of such time period until the cause of such interference is corrected to City's satisfaction. In addition, prior to making any equipment or frequency changes, MERA shall submit plans for said changes to City for its review and approval. MERA agrees to fund any studies required to ensure that any contemplated changes will be compatible with the City's telecommunications facilities.
All operations by MERA, the City and other lessees, licensees, tenants and invitees shall be in compliance with all Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") requirements. Subsequent to the installation of the MERA Communication Facilities, the City shall not grant further permits or other approvals to other third parties to install new equipment on the Property if such equipment is likely to cause interference with MERA's operations. To insure that said future equipment does not cause interference, the City shall provide MERA with notice of any proposed installation of communication antennas on the Property. Such notice shall include technical information from the party proposing such installation sufficient for MERA to determine whether the installation will interfere with MERA's operation. MERA shall advise the City within ten (10) business days of receipt of such notice whether, in MERA's reasonable determination, the proposed use will cause any interference with the MERA Communication Facilities. In the event interference from any such new installation occurs, the City agrees to take reasonable steps to eliminate such interference in a reasonable time period.
18. Damage or Destruction.
If during the term hereof, the License Space or any part thereof or any improvement constructed by MERA on the License Space shall be damaged or destroyed from any cause whatsoever, other than the City's negligence or willful misconduct, MERA shall, at its sole cost and expense, repair, restore or rebuild the same in accordance with its condition prior to such damage or destruction or in accordance with any plans and specifications first approved in writing by the City after receiving all necessary third party approvals. In the event MERA determines it is commercially infeasible to repair the MERA Communications Facilities, it may elect to terminate this Agreement upon providing the City thirty (30) days advance written notice of its intention to do so.
In the event MERA elects to repair such damage or destruction, MERA shall take all reasonable steps to obtain necessary permits and approvals within a reasonable time.
Work shall commence within thirty (30) days after all permits and approvals are obtained and shall be completed with due diligence. All insurance proceeds collected for such damage or destruction shall be applied to the costs of such repairs and if such insurance proceeds shall be insufficient for such purposes, MERA shall make up the deficiency out of its funds. The failure or refusal of MERA to make the repairs or provide notice of its intention to terminate this Agreement as provided for herein shall constitute a default under the covenants and conditions of this Agreement and the City may at its option terminate this Agreement. In the event of any damage or destruction from any cause other ( (
than the City's negligence or willful misconduct, MERA shall not be entitled to compensation, damages or rebate in rent for loss of use of the MERA Communications Facilities.
19. Merger.
This Agreement contains all the agreements of the parties hereto and no prior agreements or understandings shall be effective or binding for any purpose.
20. Amendment or Modification.
This Agreement may be amended or modified only by the mutual written consent of both parties hereto.
21. Time is of the Essence.
Time is of the essence with respect to the performance of every provision of this Agreement in which time or performance is a factor.
22. Mediation.
Any dispute or claim in law or equity between the City and MERA arising out of this agreement, if not resolved by informal negotiation between the parties, shall be mediated by referring it to the Superior Court of California, County of Marin, for assignment by the Presiding Judge for mediation. Mediation shall consist of an informal, non-binding conference or conferences between the parties and the judge-mediator jointly, then in separate caucuses wherein the judge will seek to guide the parties to a resolution of the case. The mediation process shall continue until the case is resolved or until such time as the mediator makes a finding that there is no possibility ofresolution.
23. Removal of Improvements Upon Expiration of Term or Termination of Agreement.
Upon the expiration of the term of this Agreement or its termination as provided for herein by either party, MERA shall remove all improvements constructed, erected or placed by MERA on the License Space at its sole cost and restore the License Space and the Property to its original condition existing as of the Commencement Date save and except normal wear and tear.
24. Condemnation.
If a condemning authority takes all of the City's property or a portion sufficient to render the License Space unsuitable for MERA's use, MERA may terminate the License as of the date when possession is delivered to the condemning authority. In any condemnation proceeding MERA shall be entitled to make a claim against the 11 ( (
condemning authority for just compensation including the value of MERA's Communications Facility if not removed, moving expenses, prepaid rent, business dislocation expenses, bonus value of this Agreement and any other amounts recoverable under condemnation law. Sale of all or a portion of the License Space to a purchaser with the power of eminent domain in the face of the exercise of its power of eminent domain shall be treated as a taking by a condemning authority.
25. Construction.
Neither initial nor subsequent construction shall commence on the site until the City approves the construction plans and specifications. Construction shall be defined as any work that visibly changes the License Space.
The construction process shall be as follows:
• MERA shall submit five (5) sets of plans and construction specifications to the City.
• The City will review and provide revision "markup" when required twenty (20) business days of submittal of the plans.
• MERA shall resubmit five (5) sets of the revised plans and specifications to the City. If acceptable, the City will mark two sets as approved and return them to the MERA within fifteen (15) business days ofre-submittal. • MERA shall notify the City five (5) business days prior to commencing any construction to the site.
• All construction will be subject to reasonable inspection by the City.
26. Applicable Law.
This Agreement which is governed by the laws of the State of California applies to and binds the successors, and assigns of the parties.
27. Inspection.
City shall be entitled to enter the License Space at any time to inspect the MERA Communication Facilities for compliance with the terms of this Agreement, and with all applicable Federal, state, and local governmental regulations.
28. City Retention of Rights.
City retains the right to use the License Space during the term of this Agreement for any purpose that does not interfere with MERA's use of the License Space as provided herein.
12 ( (
29. Acceptance of Condition of License Space.
MERA shall accept use of the License Space in an "as is" condition, with no warranty, express or implied, as to the condition of the License Space, including its suitability for the use intended by MERA.
30. Co-Location.
Should the City or any other parties with existing communication and related equipment on the Property seek to relocate such equipment on the Property, MERA shall facilitate the reasonable co-location of such equipment (or equivalent replacement equipment) on the Communication Facilities located in the License Space, including the co-location of antennas on MERA's tower, subject to the City or the other parties obtaining any City or other governmental permits or approvals as may be necessary for such relocation. In the event of the co-location of such existing (or replacement) equipment, the provisions of Paragraph 17 shall continue to apply. Such co-location shall not require any payment to MERA. MERA shall have no obligation for maintenance of any co-located equipment, but shall permit access to such equipment at all times for maintenance by the party owning such equipment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.
LICENSOR:
THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL,
ROD GOULD
City Manager
Date: __ 2__,_/_6__,_/_0_l_______ _
13 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
GARY T. RAGGHIANTI
City Attorney
ATTEST:
J~r::tE~A~
City Clerk
(
LICENSEE:
MARIN EMERGENCY
RADIO AUTHORITY
BROCKARNER
Executive Officer
Date: J - 7 - Q /
•
14 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAVID J. BYERS
MERA Counsel
(
LICENSEE:
MARIN EMERGENCY
RADIO AUTHORITY
BROCKARNER
Executive Officer
Date: ___________ _
14 (
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
1Ja.J.J.":i]tf'.v s)H-/o I
DAVID J. BYERS
MERA Counsel
(
All that certain real property situate in the City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of California, described as follows:
COMMENCING at a post referred to In that certain Deed from Alexander Forbes to William T. Coleman, recorded October 6, 1871 In Book • J" of Deeds at Page 306, Marin County Records, as marked •c42" thence North sixty four and a half degrees West one chain to a post marked "P.R.2• in a stone mound, thence North thirty-two and a haJf degrees West one and a half chains to a post In a stone mound marked "P.R.3" thence North thirty degrees West four and ten hundredths chains to a post In a stone mound marked "P.R.4", thence North three and a half degrees East three chains to a post In a stone mound marked "P.R.5", thence North twenty one and a quarter degrees West five chains to a post in a stone mound marked "P.R.6" thence North one and a half degrees East two and a half chains to a post in a stone mound marked "P.R.7", thence North forty one and a half degrees West six chains to e post In a stone mound marked '"P.R.8" thence North twenty eight degrees West ten end ten hundredths chains to a post in a stone mound marked "P.R.9" at a point in the exterior boundary line of the land as described in that certain Deed from Alexander Forbes to William T. Coleman, recorded October 6, 1871 in Book "J" of Deeds at Page 306, Marin County Records, distant South eighty seven degrees East three and thirty hundredths chains from the Madrona tree at the North East corner of lands of Adolph Mailliard, thence from post "P.R.9" North seventy five and a half degrees East one chain to a post in a stone mound marked "P .R.1 O", thence South thirty-three degrees East ten chains to a point, thence South thirty nine and a half degrees East six and sixty hundredths chains ~o a post in a stone mound marked "P .R.11" thence South sixteen and three quarter degrees West two and twenty hundredths chains to a post in a stone mound marked "P.R.12" thence South eighteen and a quarter degrees East five chains to a post in a stone mound marked "P .R.13" thence South sixteen and 8 quarter degrees East four and a half chains to post in a stone mound marked "P.R.14" thence South twenty seven and three-quarters degrees East three and sixty hundredths chains to a post in a ~tone mound marked "P.R.15" thence South nineteen end a quarter degrees West one chain to the pomt of beginning.
EXHIBIT "A"
( (
EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion which may lie within the boundaries of those certain parcels of land as described in the following instruments of record:
A.)Deed from Bourghton Horne, Inc., to Harold L. Hadlay, et ux, recorded August 28, 1973 in Book 2721 of Official Records, at Page 93, Marin County Records.
S.)Order Confirming Sale issued by the Superior Court of the State of California in and.for the County of Nevada, entitled, "In the Matter of the Estate of Arthur Deluca, Deceased", Case No. 6184, recorded December 2, 1964 in Book 1888 of Official Records, at Page 539, Marin County Records.
Being Parcels A and B, as shown upon that certain survey map entitled, "Record of Survey of the Division of the Jenkins Property", filed for record March 15, 1966 in Volume 5 of Surveys, at Page 9, Marin County Records.
C.)Deed from California Land Title Company to Edward G. Kaufhold, et al, recorded November 17, 1975 in Book 2963 of Official Records, at Page 165, Marin County Records.
D.)Deed from Wallace W. Knox to the City of San Rafael, recorded November 17, 1976 in Book 3114 of Official Records, at Page 588 and re-recorded February 7, 1978 in Book 3328 of Official Records, at Page 324, Marin County Records.
E.)Deed from Philip Lesh to Philip Lesh et ux, recorded Octobl!r 9, 1984 as Recorder's Serial No. 84- 047787, Marin County Records.
F.)Deed from Fred Charles Breismeister to Thomas H. Kirschner, et al, recorded June 21, 1985 as Recorder's Serial No. 85-026024, Marin County Records.
G.)Deed from Ernest T. Bock, et ux, to Marin Pacific Land Holding and Development, Ltd., recorded January 25, 1999 as Recorder's Serial No. 1999-0005739, Marin County Records.
H.)Deed from Jason E. Widmer, et al, as Trustees, to Jason E. Widmer, et ux, record~d August 31, 1999 as Recorder's Serial No. 1999-0065905, Marin County Records.
EXHIBIT "A" (co11ti11ued)
~
•,,:::.. .. ..,
i ·••1 11 ... 0 '
. -5 ~ \ • \ '~~u. . ~ \ / \ ~ lllftlP •a.- I
, . ' - ''J;!!all~'.'.\ \ ~
\_,,,-, \ ~---
--
-
~\
A P.N 11-051-23 ..... .._«~-...,. ....
"~¢,,. .,¾
~t
\1
I
I m: •ff:Dl'TJ
\
'
SITE PLAN - ICU: ;i.,. -
A.P.N. 11-084-42 ,_ .... _ ... ,,, ..
t,r.,. ~~r.na
lll.1" ,.a.
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
SAN + RAFilL
/ / --~~ . "-.... \\~"\ ~\\\\'\ \\\\\ \ / '. \ \' ' \'\ ...... .,,... .. \ \ \\ \\ \ /~, \ ,1>/\·\~~ \ , I "- i . • -.~ l ~>-_,\\1 • ... _ ...._\\\ \ ~
SITE DETAIL SALt: .. - .. ... .,._.
•' '·,' •• '. \ \
\_'.' '. \. \\
\ ', \ • .. \ \ \ \ I ·, . , '- \ \
/ "P- .• \\\\ ~ \ • .... \ \
~.. \\\\\\ \ OD • '-\•. \ \
g \ ~- \ '\\ \ \ _.. \ \ ' \ • ' '
\ ) \ \ . \ ~~-~ ~
(j
►
~ 0
ili
~12
~ z
21 iii D '• "~H: ~ t&;,,
w 1h·i
~ H!H
CIIHlllfffO/M.
=-==-~-~;;J..-=--:
--- - --
tJ
MERI COM CORPORATION
------- -- __ --.,....__,_ -u.- --"- , ....... - , .... - DOUAAHIU.
--,al.-- ---..
----
-
sm:l'UH ,,., sm: DOM.
A-1
...
~
t::
E9
~ ~
City of San Rafael
Proclamation in Celebration of
NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK 2026
May 17 - 23, 2026
WHEREAS, public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities, and services that are of vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities and to public health, high quality of life, and well-being of the people of the City of San Rafael; and
WHEREAS, these infrastructure, facilities, and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals, who are engineers, managers, and employees at all levels of government and the private sector, who are responsible for rebuilding, improving, and protecting our nation’s transportation, water supply, water treatment and solid waste systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities essential for our residents; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the residents, civic leaders, and children in the City of San Rafael to gain knowledge of and maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs in their respective communities; and
WHEREAS, the year 2026 marks the 66th annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association; and
WHEREAS, the 2026 National Public Works theme is “Rooted in Service, Powered by Community,” highlighting that the roots of service run deep in public works, which propel innovations that have helped our communities evolve into places where people can lead lives of purpose and possibility; and WHEREAS, some work—like building roads and bridges—is highly visible, while other public works contributions—like maintaining water and sewer systems—are sometimes hidden from view; however, together, these efforts form the foundation of thriving communities, reminding us that every project, seen or unseen, powers the connection between service and the people it supports.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Rafael proclaim the week of May 17–23, 2026, as National Public Works Week and urge all residents to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our public works professionals, engineers, managers, and employees, and to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and advancing the quality of life for all.
Kate Colin
Mayor
____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting: _______________________
Disposition: ___________________________
Agenda Item No: 3.a
Meeting Date: May 18, 2026
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Police Department
Prepared by: Ronda Cordero, Lieutenant City Manager Approval: ______________ TOPIC: MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT AND RENEWAL OF MILITARY
EQUIPMENT FUNDING, ACQUISITION AND USE POLICY
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION RENEWING THE ORDINANCE APPROVING SAN RAFAEL POLICE
DEPARTMENT MILITARY EQUIPMENT FUNDING, ACQUISITION AND USE POLICY (POLICY 706)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution renewing the ordinance approving the San Rafael Police Department Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy (Policy 706).
BACKGROUND:
The California Legislature passed AB 481 in 2021, which requires the applicable governing body to adopt an ordinance approving a military equipment use policy for the funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment by a law enforcement agency. That law enforcement agency must also hold one community engagement meeting, at which the department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
In May of 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2007, adding Chapter 2.52 to the San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) to establish the requirements for approval and annual review of a military equipment policy. In Division 3 of Ordinance 2007, the City Council also approved Policy 706, Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition, and Use.
Government Code Section 7071(e)(1) requires the City Council to review Ordinance 2007 annually, along with the Police Department’s current annual Military Equipment Report, and find and determine whether each type of military equipment identified in that report has complied with the standards for approval outlined in SRMC Section 2.52.020(D) and the Military Equipment, Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy.
The April 15, 2026, Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC) meeting included a presentation on the Police Department’s military equipment inventory, its use, and the policy governing it. This meeting served as a public forum for community engagement and provided an opportunity to address any questions or concerns from the public and committee members.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
ANALYSIS:
AB 481 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report
The San Rafael Police Department AB 481 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report is provided as Attachment 1 to this staff report and includes the following:
(1) A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use. (2) A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment. a. The San Rafael Police Department received no complaints or concerns regarding any of the Military Equipment used in 2025.
(3) Results of any internal audits, and information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response.
a. As a result of an internal audit, there were no military equipment use policy violations.
As described in the 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report, the Police Department, in most instances, only deployed military equipment, as defined in the legislation, for training. However, the Police Department did have cause to deploy some equipment in the course of their duties. As described, this included:
• Category 1: The use of the Drone as First Responder was deployed in 113 incidents between October 30, 2025, and December 31, 2025. The UAV (shared equipment) was used 5 times during Marin Regional Crisis Response Unit (MRCRU) operations. The Marin County Sheriff’s Office Drone (not shared equipment) was used in one operation. • Category 2: The use of the Armored Rescue Vehicle (5-Call outs) • Category 14: The use of the Less-Lethal Impact Device. (1- Deployment) AB 481 2025 Military Equipment Inventory List
The San Rafael Police Department AB 481 2025 Military Equipment Inventory List is provided as Attachment 2 to this staff report and includes the following:
(1) The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.
(2) The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment. (3) If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.
On June 2, 2025, the City Council adopted the Resolution Renewing the Ordinance Adopting San Rafael Police Department Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy 706, adding a Drone as a First Responder (DFR) program by a unanimous vote. The DFR program was the only new addition to our Military Equipment Inventory List during the 2025 calendar year.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
The Police Department has not obtained, nor does it utilize, any equipment procured from the United States Department of Defense through the Law Enforcement Support Program (also known as the 1028 or 1033 program).
Less-Lethal Delivery Systems
The Police Department intends to facilitate the destruction and de-inventory of its Remington 870 Shotguns, except for two shotguns to be retained as required for the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) firearms training and qualification, and two shotguns in our Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) inventory, utilized as a less-lethal delivery system and breaching apparatus.
The Police Department will continue to transition its less-lethal delivery system devices from the modified Remington 870 Shotguns to the 40mm platform. The 40mm less-lethal delivery system has proven more effective when deployed, demonstrated greater accuracy, and offered greater ease of use for patrol officers. The 40mm less-lethal delivery system can also be deployed at a greater range than the Remington Shotguns, allowing officers more time and distance to utilize de-escalation tactics.
In consideration of the planned destruction of the Remington 870 Shotguns, as referenced, the Police Department will procure an additional eighteen (18) 40mm less-lethal delivery systems, under the City Manager’s authority, if the City Council adopts staff’s recommendation.
Review of the Military Equipment Use Policy
Staff has reviewed Policy 706 - the Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy and concluded that the Policy is effective and that no circumstances have changed that would require an update.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
Pursuant to AB 481, the Department is required to host a community meeting to provide an opportunity for the public to address any issues, concerns, or complaints related to Military Equipment.
The San Rafael Police Department's Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy is posted on the San Rafael Police Department website, along with information on community meetings from prior years.
On April 15, 2026, Police Department staff presented “AB 481 Military Equipment” at the monthly Police Advisory and Accountability Committee meeting, which served as our community meeting. Prior to the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC) meeting on April 15, 2026, a public notice on this topic was posted on the PAAC website on April 6, 2026. All required elements of the annual report were presented. The PAAC engaged in useful, inquisitive, and productive dialogue.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of purchasing eighteen (18) 40mm less-lethal delivery systems is estimated to be $21,635.59.
The cost of these less-lethal devices will be included in the Police Department budget that the City Council will later consider for FY 2026-27. There are no other equipment recommendations or additional expenditures to the General Fund.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options to consider in this matter:
1. Adopt the resolution.
2. Adopt a revised resolution with changes.
3. Do not adopt the resolution.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution renewing the ordinance approving the San Rafael Police Department Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy (Policy 706).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report
3. 2025 Military Equipment Inventory
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
RENEWING THE ORDINANCE APPROVING SAN RAFAEL POLICE
DEPARTMENT MILITARY EQUIPMENT FUNDING, ACQUISITION AND
USE POLICY (POLICY 706)
WHEREAS, Government Code sections 7071 et. seq. codifies Assembly Bill 481 (effective January 1, 2022) and requires legislative bodies to adopt ordinances approving military equipment use policies before law enforcement agencies can continue to engage in activities related to the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment; and WHEREAS, the San Rafael Police Department (“SRPD”) has military equipment in its inventory and engages in critical public safety activities in coordination with other jurisdictions on law enforcement-related matters, including safeguarding the public’s welfare and safety, working on regional task forces, conducting training exercises, providing mutual aid, and responding to emergencies; and WHEREAS, in May 2022, the City Council of the City of San Rafael adopted Ordinance No. 2007, adding Chapter 2.52 to the San Rafael Municipal Code, to establish the requirements for approval and annual review of a military equipment policy; and WHEREAS, in Division 3 of Ordinance No. 2007, the City Council also approved Policy 706 - Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy; and WHEREAS, the SRPD Military Equipment Use Policy 706, posted on SRPD’s website since its adoption, sets forth a military equipment funding, acquisition, and use policy that is consistent with the SRPD’s current practices, complies with all requirements of the Government Code and the San Rafael Municipal Code, will continue to ensure ongoing regulation and compliance with the law going forward and will continue to provide a means of community engagement and transparency regarding use of military equipment by the SRPD; and
WHEREAS, the SRPD has posted to its website and submitted to the City Council, its AB
481 Military Equipment Annual Report for calendar year 2025, describing how its military equipment was used and its purpose, a summary of complaints or concerns, the results of any audits or violations of the policy, the total annual cost of each type of military equipment, the quantity possessed, and the intention to acquire any additional equipment in the next year; and
WHEREAS, the Government Code and the San Rafael Municipal Code require that, following receipt of the annual report, the City Council conduct an annual review of the ordinance adopting the Military Equipment Use Policy and vote on whether to renew the ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received and reviewed the annual report and accompanying inventory list, has reviewed Ordinance No. 2007 approving San Rafael Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy 706, and has considered the requirements contained in section 7071(d) of the Government Code, and now desires to renew Division 3 of Ordinance No. 2007, approving the San Rafael Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy 706, without modification; and WHEREAS, the Police Department recommends replacing eighteen (18) modified Remington 870 Shotguns with more accurate and easier-to-use 40mm less-lethal delivery systems, which also allow for greater range and improved de-escalation; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed public hearing at its regular City Council meeting on May 18, 2026, concerning this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the San Rafael City Council as follows:
1. The City Council has received and reviewed the San Rafael Police Department AB 481 Military Equipment Annual Report for calendar year 2025 and the Inventory List, and reviewed Ordinance No. 2007 approving the San Rafael Police Department’s “Policy 706 – Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy”.
2. Based on the staff report and the oral and written comments received for the public hearing, the City Council hereby finds and determines, pursuant to Government Code Section 7071(d)(1), as follows:
a. The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. The acquisition and use of this equipment is part of the San Rafael Police Department’s overall approach to Critical Incident Management, Use of Force, De-Escalation, and public safety. The equipment will enable department members to properly respond to both planned and unplanned events efficiently and effectively.
b. The Policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties by ensuring required reporting, the opportunity for community engagement, and feedback, and transparency and oversight regarding the acquisition and use of specified military equipment in the City of San Rafael. c. The purchasing of equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.
d. Prior military equipment use complied with the policy that was in effect at the time of the use.
3. Based upon these findings, the City Council hereby renews Ordinance No. 2007, Division 3, approving “Policy 706 – Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy.”
I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on Monday, the 18th day of May 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
AB 481 Military Equipment
Annual Report 2025
Prepared by:
Lieutenant Ronda Cordero
San Rafael Police Department
Submitted April 3, 2026
1 Military Equipment Use AB 481 Compliance Requirements:
• Approval of the Military Use Policy (Completed May 2022, Policy 706) • Approval of the Police Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment Ordinance (Completed May 2022, SRMC 2.52)
• The initial Community Engagement Meeting will be on April 15th at the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC/Committee) meeting. • Current Military Equipment Inventory (Attached)
• Annual Report (See below)
Annual Report Description
Assembly Bill (AB) 481 requires police departments to report annually on the inventory, procurement, use, and misuse of covered military equipment items.
Per AB 481, an annual report must include the following:
(1) A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use. (2) A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment. (3) The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response. (4) The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report. (5) The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment. (6) If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.
SRMC 2.52 Military Equipment Policy (Approved May 2022) As required by AB 481, the City Council approved and enacted by resolution Municipal Code Section 2.52 to approve a Military Equipment Use Policy. The City Council's approval shall remain effective for one year, during which approval may be revoked, extended, renewed, modified, or amended by resolution of the City Council. Within a year of the initial approval, and at least annually thereafter, the City Council will review this section and related resolutions. The City Council may, by resolution, make amendments, modifications, or revisions to the Military Equipment Use Policy adopted by the San Rafael Police Department. The Ordinance must be reviewed and renewed annually.
A. The City Council has made the following determinations:
2 1. The military equipment inventoried and presented to the City Council is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.
2. The military equipment use policy (Policy 706) will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
3. The equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety (if any).
4. Prior military equipment use complied with the applicable equipment use policy (which included equipment now defined as military equipment) that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.
Military Equipment Defined
Category 1: Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles Category 2: Mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles or armored personnel carriers Category 3: High-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), two-and-a-halfton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached.
Category 4: Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants
Category 5: Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units.
Category 6: Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind.
Category 7: Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature
Category 8: Firearms of .50 caliber or greater
Category 9: Ammunition of .50 caliber or greater
Category 10: Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber Category 11: Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles
3 Category 12: Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools, munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, serviceissued handheld pepper spray1 Category 13: TASER® Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, longrange acoustic devices Category 14: Kinetic energy weapons and munitions (Less than Lethal)1 Category 15: Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency that requires additional oversight
Equipment Usage for 2025
As evident in the Military Equipment Inventory, the San Rafael Police Department does not own any equipment in categories 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, or 13. The SRPD has not obtained, nor does it utilize, any equipment procured from the United States Department of Defense through the Law Enforcement Support Program (also known as the 1028 or 1033 program).
Category 1: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles1 (Drone) and Ground Vehicle (Robot).
In October of 2025, the San Rafael Police Department introduced the Drone as First Responder (DFR) program. Between October 30th and December 31st, the San Rafael Police Department had one UAV (AIR-1) and two licensed pilot operators. In 2025, AIR1 responded to 113 police incidents. The DFR portal is available online and includes all flight logs.
The San Rafael Police Department also shares equipment that falls into Category 1 with the Novato Police Department (NPD) as part of the Marin Regional Crisis Response Unit (MRCRU). In 2025, the SRPD used the equipment shared in Category 1 for training purposes, including range training and SWAT training. In 2025, the UAV was launched in five MRCRU operations. The Marin County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) also has an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) that is not a shared piece of equipment. On occasion, we ask them for mutual aid assistance. For transparency reasons, we share that the (MRCRU) requested the UAV from the MCSO once in 2025.
These pages briefly outline notable 2025 SRPD deployments involving Category 1 equipment.
1. On April 11, 2025, the Novato Police Department (NPD) received numerous calls of gunshots, and reports that someone could be heard yelling for help. NPD patrol units were able to contact one resident who exited the residence. The resident advised he was awakened by the sound of gunshots and observed his roommate walking around the residence in a manic state, nude, covered in blood, and carrying a handgun. The resident 1 The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is a shared piece of equipment that the Novato Police Department purchased and stores.
4 stated he did not see or hear from a third roommate inside. NPD and MCSO established a perimeter and a quick response force (QRF). Due to limited visibility and a lack of contact with the occupants of the residence, an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) was deployed to assist in gathering intelligence and to provide cover for both officers and the community. Further investigation led officers to suspect that one of the unaccounted roommates was being held hostage. Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) officers arrived on scene and made contact with the suspect, who exited the residence. The suspect was uncooperative and did not follow commands. Additionally, the suspect appeared to be in an altered state, resisting both commands and de-escalation attempts.
As a result, a less-than-lethal 40MM round was deployed by the NPD. The suspect was subsequently taken into custody and examined at the scene.
2. On April 21, 2025, the Novato Police Department (NPD) Investigations Bureau requested the activation of the San Rafael Novato (SRN) and Central Marin Police Authority (CMPA) Crisis Response Units regarding search warrants for two suspected gang members, who were linked to an attempted homicide investigation. SRN and CMPA SWAT were tasked with serving the search warrants at two locations simultaneously on April 22, 2025. A tactical plan was created, and SWAT safely secured the residence. Both suspects were taken into custody, and the scenes at both locations were handed over to NPD investigations. During this operation, the UAV was deployed.
3. On May 7, 2025, at 1700 hours, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) requested the activation of the SRN and CMPA Crisis Response Units regarding a search/arrest warrant for a suspect who was linked to a homicide investigation. SFPD investigators tracked the suspect to a residence in southern Novato. SRN and CMPA SWAT were tasked with serving the search and arrest warrant. A Tactical plan was created, and SWAT safely secured the residence. The suspect was taken into custody without incident. The scene and suspect were handed over to SFPD Investigations.
4. On October 1, 2025, the NPD Investigations Bureau requested the activation of the SRN and CMPA Crisis Response Units regarding a suspect who was involved in an attempted murder with the use of a firearm. NPD investigations had probable cause to arrest the suspect and authored a search warrant for his residence. SRN and CMPA SWAT were tasked with apprehending the suspect and securing the residence for NPD Investigators. A Tactical plan was created, and SWAT safely secured the residence. The suspect was taken into custody, and the scene was handed over to NPD Investigations.
5. On November 4, 2025, an unwanted subject was reported on the property of 1 H Street. AIR-1 was the first unit to arrive. SRPD contacted the reporting party for an updated location of the unwanted subject. The reporting party advised that the subject moved onto El Camino Avenue. AIR-1 located the subject and provided an update to the ground units that arrived a few minutes later. The subject walked away from the officers and went into a resident’s backyard. AIR-1 maintained visual and guided ground units to where he was hiding. The subject was arrested for drug violations, a Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS) violation, and Resisting or Obstructing a Peace Officer (148 PC). (SR25-06216)
5 6. On November 10, 2025, an unresponsive driver was located at Fourth Street and Hetherton Street. AIR-1 was the first unit to arrive and observed that the driver was unconscious and appeared to be having a medical emergency. AIR-1 upgraded ground units to respond Code-3. Units arrived and found the driver unresponsive, and life-saving measures were performed. The driver was transported to MGH. (SR25-06333)
7. On November 10, 2025, a physical fight was reported in the parking lot of 95 Medway Road. AIR-1 was the first unit on the scene and observed the fight still in progress, with a good Samaritan pinning the suspect to the ground. AIR-1 provided an updated location, and units moved in and detained the suspect. It was determined that the suspect had been driving drunk, pulled into the parking lot, and then caused a disturbance. The suspect was arrested for battery and a variety of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) charges. (SR25-06336)
8. On November 12, 2025, there was a report of a subject setting a fire under the 101 Freeway at Fifth and Irwin Street. AIR-1 arrived on scene and located the fire and the suspect. AIR-1 provided the suspect description and updated the suspect’s location for ground units. Ground units located the suspect and issued him a misdemeanor citation for setting a fire. (SR25-06360)
9. On November 12, 2025, SRPD Officers were dispatched to Home Depot regarding a possible deceased subject in a vehicle. AIR-1 arrived on scene ahead of ground units and observed employees surrounding the vehicle. AIR-1 observed one of the employees open the trunk, and an unconscious male could be seen. It was determined that the sole male occupant died while sleeping in the vehicle. No foul play was suspected. (SR25- 06364)
10. On November 27, 2025, at 1730 hours, the NPD received a call from security officers at the United States Coast Guard (USCG) housing in Hamilton regarding a trespasser.
Approximately one hour later, NPD received a call of “shots fired” in the same general vicinity. USCG security officers stated that while they were attempting to contact the trespasser, he fired several rounds at them from what they believed was a handgun and then fled on foot. Officers from multiple agencies conducted extensive searches of the area but did not locate the suspect.
Over the course of the next 24 hours, NPD received multiple “shots fired” calls in the same general area. The decision was made to activate the Marin Regional Crisis Response Unit (MRCRU) for an extensive open-air search of the area. The SWAT team was divided into two separate teams, each overseen by a Tactical Commander. Each team was assigned to search a different section of the vast area, with one starting on the north end of the neighborhood, while the other started on the south end. SWAT used Armored Rescue Vehicles (ARV) and the MCSO UAS team to conduct their search. After a thorough and extensive search of several large open areas, unoccupied buildings, and making contact with several residents in the area, no victims, suspects, or weapons were located.
6 Category 2: Armored Rescue Vehicle: Ford Transit-Van
The Armored Rescue Vehicle (ARV) is a resource shared with the Novato Police Department and Central Marin Police Authority. The Marin Regional Crisis Response Unit (MRCRU) deployed the Armored Rescue Vehicle five times in 2025. All five of those occasions are outlined above:
1. The incident involving “shots fired” where officers believed there was a hostage situation inside a residence in Novato, noted in incident #1 above.
2. The incident involving two simultaneous search warrants for gang members related to an attempted homicide noted in incident #2 above.
3. The incident involving an outside agency assist on an arrest/search warrant for a suspect linked to a homicide investigation in Novato, noted in incident #3 above.
4. The incident involving the execution of an arrest/search warrant of a suspect linked to an attempted homicide case in Novato, noted in incident #4 above.
5. The incident involving reports of “shots fired” in the Hamilton area of Novato, where MRCRU was activated and completed an entire search of the area noted in incident #10 above.
Category 7: Breaching Projectiles
In 2025, the SRPD did not use any equipment in Category 7.
Category 10: Patrol and SWAT Rifles and ammunition
In 2025, the SRPD used the equipment shared in Category 10 solely for training situations, including range and SWAT.
Category 12: Diversionary Device, Tear Gas & Air Powered Less Lethal Device (pepper ball)
In 2025, the SRPD used the equipment shared in Category 12 solely for training situations, including range and SWAT.
Category 14: Less than Lethal Impact Device (Kinetic Energy Munitions) In 2025, the San Rafael Police Department used the equipment in Category 14 for training, including range and SWAT training. The San Rafael Police Department also used a Less-than-lethal Impact Device (40MM) in one incident.
1. On February 3, 2025, officers responded to 280 Smith Ranch Road regarding a subject brandishing a box cutter at an individual. Upon arrival, officers contacted the suspect, who was verbally and physically aggressive towards officers and assumed a fighting stance. The suspect refused to follow lawful commands. A CED was deployed but was ineffective. Another officer deployed his less-than-lethal 40mm and struck the suspect with two rounds, but they were also proven to be ineffective. The suspect grabbed one of the officers and struck him on the head with a closed fist. The suspect continued to actively resist and attempted to prevent officers from performing their duties through 7 physical violence. They were able to overcome his resistance by taking him to the ground and handcuffing him. (SR25-00599)
Summary of Complaints for 2025
The San Rafael Police Department did not receive any complaints concerning military equipment in 2025.
Violations of Policy 706
An internal review revealed no violations of Policy 706.
Total Annual Cost for Military Equipment
The attached Military Equipment Inventory documents the fiscal impact for each category’s yearly maintenance costs. In 2025, we purchased five new, less-than-lethal 40mm impact devices. This purchase was to replace five Remington shotguns utilized as less-than-lethal delivery systems. We will be destroying five Remington shotguns from our inventory.
Replacement Military Equipment Inventory List
1. Less than Lethal Impact Device 40mm (Category 14 on Current Inventory List)
Proposed Less than Lethal Impact Device to replace current Remington Shotgun: Lessthan-lethal Impact Device (Single-Use) – ALSTAC – 40mm Currently, our department is equipped with 17 Less-than-lethal Impact Devices (40mm) and 25 Remington shotguns utilized as less-than-lethal delivery systems. The department is looking to transition from the use of both 40mm and 12-gauge less-than-lethal weapon platforms to just the 40mm platform.
When compared to the Remington shotgun, the Less-than-lethal 40mm platform has proven to be more effective when deployed, has demonstrated greater accuracy, and has greater ease of use for patrol officers. The Less-than-lethal 40mm platform can also be deployed at a greater range than the Remington Shotguns, allowing officers more time and distance to utilize de-escalation tactics.
By fully transitioning to the Less-than-lethal 40mm platform, when training in the use of control devices, the officers will be able to focus on one weapon platform, increasing their proficiency and tactics in its use.
In 2025, SRPD purchased five Less-than-lethal 40mm Impact Devices to replace five Remington Shotguns that are to be destroyed from our inventory, so they will no longer be in circulation. Following this replacement plan, the department plans to purchase eight more Less-than-lethal 40mm devices. The approval of the purchase of eight Less-thanlethal 40mm impact devices would be accompanied by the disposal of eight Remington Shotguns from our inventory.
We plan to retain two Remington Shotguns in our inventory for firearms instructor POSTapproved courses, which require the qualification in this weaponry. 8 DESCRIPTION: The Less-than-lethal Impact Device is a double-action, single-shot, 40mm delivery system. It is designed to discharge 40mm less-than-lethal munitions. They are kept secured in patrol vehicles and secured in the Armory at the Public Safety Center.
Per SRPD Policy, the 40mm Less-than-lethal Impact Devices are classified as control devices and are covered in Policy 303.
TOTAL REPLACEMENT COST: $9,685.59 for 8 less-than-lethal 40mm impact devices (based on the current quote; this amount may vary depending on the time of purchase).
We would destroy 8 Remington shotguns utilized as Less-than-lethal Delivery Systems in accordance with DOJ laws and policy, and they would be removed from our inventory.
PURPOSE: To provide an effective, less-than-lethal force option for use by SRPD officers in the performance of their duties.
AUTHORIZED USE: Members may deploy Less than Lethal 40mm impact munitions in any circumstance where the member can articulate a reasonable expectation that the Less than Lethal 40mm impact device may be needed, subject to the Legal and Procedural Rules found below. Situations for the use of these weapon systems may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• The suspect is armed with a weapon, and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions.
• The suspect has made credible threats to harm themself or others. • The suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles, or other dangerous projectiles at people and/or officers.
• There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has already committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders.
LIFESPAN: Less than Lethal Impact Device 40mm – 10 years TRAINING: Officers must successfully complete regular department control device training, as outlined in Policy 303.10, and any qualifications required by law.
FISCAL IMPACT: Annual Maintenance is approximately $100 per 40mm device.
LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL RULES: Use of Less than Lethal Impact Device – 40mm and ammunition is subject to the requirements of POLICY 300 (Use of Force), POLICY 303 (Control Devices and Techniques). It is the policy of the San Rafael Police Department to utilize less-than-lethal impact devices, 40mm, only for official law enforcement purposes, in accordance with all requirements under State and Federal law, including those regarding the use of force.
1. New Proposed Items for the Military Equipment Inventory List There are no new proposed items for the Military Equipment list in 2025.
April 24, 2026
Type Description Quantity Capabilities Expected lifespan Manufacturer's description Purpose and authorized uses Fiscal impact Legal and procedural rules Required training Compliance mechanisms Category 1
Tactical Robot ROBOTEX remote controlled
tactical robot, track driven,
attachable arm and trailers 1
Remote intelligence gathering
device 10 years
The AVATAR® enhances the capabilities of SWAT and tactical response teams by allowing them to quickly and safely inspect dangerous situations, there is no longer a need to send personnel in before you’ve had a chance to assess the situation
Emergency incidents above normal patrol operations. $27,627.68 initial cost in 2010. $500
average yearly
maintenance costs
Refer to SRPD policy 300. Agency authorized
orientation course
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Tactical Robot Northern Lights Tactical remote
controlled, armored tactical robot 1
Larger and heavier robot capable
of delivering items in high risk
situations and range training
10 years
Northern Lights Tactical TRACS robot target system. Features 10- inch foam- filled tires and has a top speed of 7 miles per hour.
Range training for moving targets. And exceptional high risk situations.
$10,025 initial cost in 2008.
$100 average yearly
maintenance costs
Refer to SRPD policy 300 and
range procedures
None Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles - Drone First
Responder (DFR)
FLOCK Aerodome Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) - Drone as
First Responder (DFR) 1
Rapid aerial visibility for faster
police response, improved
situational awareness, safer
outcomes
1 year subscription
on leased
equipment
FLOCK Aerodome is a comprehensive Drone as First Responder (DFR) system designed for public safety, combining rapiddeployment drones with automated, rugged docking stations. The system provides real-time aerial intelligence (HD/thermal video), 60+mph flight speeds, and integrated LPR/911 data, enabling, on All-hazard and incidents which would benefit from an
aerial perspective.
$150,00 per year
Refer to SRPD policy 606 -
Unmanned Aerial System
All authorized operators will
complete all FAA required
training.
Requires Watch Commander authorization
Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles (Shared with
Novato PD)
Small unmanned aerial system
4 28 minute flight time per battery,
maximum transmission distance 3-
10 km based on surroundings
3 years
Grey DJI unmanned aerial system, <249 g weight, four rotor remotely operated airframe with video and photo capability All-hazard and incidents which would benefit from an
aerial perspective. $2,000 initial cost; $500
annual maintenance
Refer to Novato PD policies
613.
Agency-authored orientation
course; Monthly individual
training; Quarterly team
Requires Watch Commander authorization
Category 2
Armored Rescue
Vehicle: Ford TransitVan 350 HD (Shared
with Novato PD)
Armored, wheeled vehicle.
White, reflective San Rafael /
Novato PD markings and
red/blue lights.
Equipped with a siren. Can hold
a driver, equipment, and seven
1 Range 100 mi. Armor rated to
.50 cal.
10 years
Four-wheeled, five-speed automatic transmission, gas enginepowered personnel carrier with ballistic glass and armor rated to .50 cal.
To provide for the safe transport, security, and rescue of agency personnel and citizens in high-risk incidents.
Shared resource with
Novato PD, $150,272.50
initial cost, $1000 annual
maintenance costs
Refer to policies 702, 703. Agency-authored orientation course
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Category 7
Breaching Projectiles:
Remington TB- 12BK
12 Gauge breaching rounds
184
Operational range 0-1 foot
5 years
Ballistic breaching round used to defeat a variety of structures to include exterior and interior doors.
To breach entrances beyond the capabilities of hand held / impact methods.
$150 initial purchase for
duty projectiles, less than
$50 per year for on going
Refer to policies 300, 303,
303.9, 303.9.1,
303.9.2, 303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Shotgun: Remington 870
(SWAT)
12-guage Shotgun
Utilized as breaching tool 1
Single round
10 years
Single shot pump-action. To breach entrances beyond the capabilities of hand held / impact methods.
$424 each,
$500-ongoing for
maintenance costs
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Category 10
Patrol Rifle (COLT,
Olympic Arms & Knights
Armament)
.223 caliber AR-15 rifle, semi
automatic [Standard Issue
Firearm - Patrol Application]
74 Single round
10 years
M4/AR15 semi-automatic rifle, gas operated, 16.1 inch barrel Officers may use deadly force to protect themselves or others from what they reasonably believe is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
$884 each for initial
purchase $500 ongoing for
maintained costs.
Refer to SRPD policies 300 &
306.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Rifle: COLT (SWAT
Operator)
.223 caliberM-4 semi-automatic
rifle, short barrel 17
Single or multiple round option
10 years
M-4 semi-automatic rifle, 11.4 inch barrel Officers may use deadly force to protect themselves or others from what they reasonably believe is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
$1,200 each,
$500 yearly maintenance
costs.
Refer to SRPD policies 300 &
306.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor. Use is subject to the applicable
policies (300.5, 300.5.1,
Rifle : Accuracy
International
.308 AT LE
2 Single round only
10 years
Precision .308 caliber, gas-operated rifle Precision Rifle team use. Officers may use deadly force to protect themselves or others from what they reasonably
believe is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily $5,844 each initial cost,
$500 yearly maintenance
Refer to SRPD policies 300 &
306.
Agency-authored orientation
course; monthly refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
.223 caliber rounds .223 caliber rounds (Patrol Rifle
Rounds) $10,000+
Operational range 0-1000 yards
N/A
.223 caliber rounds Officers may use deadly force to protect themselves or others from what they reasonably believe is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
$358 per 1000 rounds,
$10,000 a year for ongoing
replacement costs
Refer to SRPD policies 300 &
306.
Initial orientation course
including qualification; annual
recertification including
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
.308 caliber rounds .308 caliber rounds (Precision
Rifle Rounds) 500+
Operational range 0-1000 yards
N/A
.308 caliber rounds Officers may use deadly force to protect themselves or others from what they reasonably believe is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
$450 per 500 rounds, $450
a year for replacement
rounds
Refer to SRPD policies 300 &
306.
Initial orientation course
including qualification; annual
recertification including
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Category 12
Diversionary Device -
Def-Tec
Diversionary Device with reloads
45 Approx. 162db at 5 feet
5 years
A reloadable unit that can be used up to 30 times. Distraction / diversionary device to be used in high risk situations in accordance to policy.
$35 each, no ongoing costs. Refer to SRPD policy 300
303,303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Diversionary Device -
ALS-TRMR
Reloadable Diversionary Device
(Housing unit only) 10
Approx. 172db and 1.2 PSI at 5
feet 5 years
The reloadable diversionary device can be reloaded up to 250 times. The body incorporates a safety button. Upon deployment the device's kinetic energy causes the top to move the firing pin into the Distraction / diversionary device to be used in high risk situations in accordance to policy.
$250 each, replacements
cost when needed.
Refer to SRPD policy 300
303,303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Reloadable Distraction
Rounds
Reloads for the ALS-TRMR
distraction device, 12 Gauge
muzzle bang 45 N/A 5 years
12 gauge muzzle bang that produces 175dB at 5 feet Distraction / diversionary device to be used in high risk situations in accordance to policy.
$7.50 per box of 5. $100 a
year ongoing costs for
replacements
Refer to policies 300, 303,
303.9, 303.9.1,
303.9.2, 303.9.3.
Initial orientation course
including qualification; annual
recertification including
qualification.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
April 24, 2026
Type Description Quantity Capabilities Expected lifespan Manufacturer's description Purpose and authorized uses Fiscal impact Legal and procedural rules Required training Compliance mechanisms Tear Gas: Chemical CS
/ Chemical OC
Combination CS and OC irritants
(Can be "thrown" or discharged
via department approved
138
Capable of deployed up to 450 feet
5 years
When utilized, the submunition will discharge the agent for approximately 20-30 seconds, on average, providing a wide area of coverage.
Agency approved less lethal and chemical rounds to be
used in accordance to policy in high risk and volatile
situations.
$944.20 initial purchase and
average
$500/year
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.6, 303.9,
303.9.1, 303.9.2, 303.9.3,
Initial Orientation course
including qualification; annual
ongoing training
Operational use under the review of the
Watch Commander or appropriate team
supervisor.
Custom Air-Powered
Less Lethal Delivery
System (pepper ball) - Tippman 98
Semi-automatic, single shot,
compressed air powered delivery
system (paint ball gun)
4 Effective range 150 Ft 10 years
.68 caliber, semi-automatic, 3000 PSI HPA (paint ball gun that is meant to discharge chemical irritant projectiles)
Agency approved less lethal and chemical rounds to be
used in accordance to policy in high risk situations.
$600 Initial cost, $150 every
two years for more
projectiles.
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor. Use is subject to the applicable
policies (300.5, 300.5.1,
Category 14
Less Lethal Impact
Device (Single-Use) -
ALSTAC -40mm
Double action, single shot,
40mm less than lethal weapon 17
Up to 40 yards
10 years
A double-action, single shot, 40mm delivery system. Designed to discharge 40mm less-than-lethal ammunition
Agency approved less lethal and chemical rounds to be
used in accordance to policy in high risk situations.
$1195.00 initial purchase
each, no anticipated
ongoing costs
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Operational use under the review of the
SWAT Commander or appropriate team
supervisor. Use is subject to the applicable
policies (300.5, 300.5.1,
Kinetic Energy
Projectiles: 40mm (ALS
4006D)
40mm, foam-tipped kinetic
energy discharged from an
agency-authorized 40mm
delivery device.
100+
Operational range 5-120 ft.
5 years
40mm foam-tipped projectile capable of traveling 325 fps to a maximum range of 120 feet.
To compel an individual to cease his/her actions when
such munitions present a reasonable option. A verbal
warning of the intended use of the device should precede its application.
$25.00 each and
approximately
$1000 yearly for training
projectiles
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Initial orientation course
including qualification; annual
recertification including
qualification.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Shotgun: Remington
870
12 Gauge pump-action Shotgun
(Orange Stock / Utilized as Less
Lethal Delivery System) 20
Single round
10 years
Single shot pump-action. To be used with Less-lethal bean bag rounds.To compel an individual to cease his/her actions when such munitions present a reasonable option. A verbal warning of the
intended use of the device should precede its application. $424 each,
$500-ongoing for
maintenance costs
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Shotgun: Remington
870 (SWAT)
12 Gauge pump-action Shotgun
(Orange Stock / Utilized as Less
Lethal Delivery System)
1 Single round 10 years Single shot pump-action. To be used with Less-lethal bean bag rounds.To compel an individual to cease his/her actions when such munitions present a reasonable option. A verbal warning of the
intended use of the device should precede its application. $424 each,
$500-ongoing for
maintenance costs
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
Kinetic Energy
Projectiles: 12 Gauge
"bean bag" rounds
12 Gauge cotton sock
discharged froman agencyauthorized 12 Gauge deliver
100+
21 feet
N/A
12 gauge cotton sock round capable of traveling 525 fps. To compel an individual to cease his/her actions when such munitions present a reasonable option. A verbal
warning of the intended use of the device should precede $535.00 per 100, $500
annual replacement cost
Refer to SRPD policies 300,
303, 303.9, 303.9.1, 303.9.2,
303.9.3.
Agency-authored orientation
course; annual refresher.
Use is subject to the applicable policies
(300.5, 300.5.1, 301, 303.11).
____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting: _______________________
Disposition: ___________________________
Agenda Item No: 3.b
Meeting Date: May 18, 2026
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community & Economic Development
Prepared by: Micah Hinkle,
Director of Community &
Economic Development
Catherine Quffa,
Director of Library and Recreation
Sullina D. Smith,
Senior Management Analyst II
City Manager Approval: ______________
TOPIC: UPDATE TO PARK IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS AND NEXUS STUDY SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.24, ENTITLED “PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FEE,” AND CHAPTER 15.09, ENTITLED “PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES,” OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE; CEQA DETERMINATION:
EXEMPT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21065 AND CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15378, 15262, 15273, AND 15061(b)(3), AND RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PARK NEXUS STUDY AND ASSOCIATED PARK AND
RECREATION FACILITIES PROJECT LIST, ADOPTING UPDATED CHARGES FOR THE
PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FEE, AND ADOPTING UPDATED PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS AND PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES; CEQA DETERMINATION:
NOT A PROJECT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21065; CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15378 AND EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15262,15273, AND 15061(b)(3)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 3.24, entitled “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee,” and Chapter 15.09, entitled “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees,” of the San Rafael Municipal Code, waive further reading of the Ordinance and refer to it by title only; and
2. Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Park Nexus Study and Associated Park and Recreation Facilities Project List, Adopting Updated Charges for the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, and Adopting Updated Park Dedication Requirements and Park Dedication and In-lieu Fees.
BACKGROUND:
Development impact fees are a vital and legally authorized funding mechanism that enables local governments to offset the cost of public infrastructure necessitated by new development. These fees SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
must be supported by a nexus study that establishes a clear, evidence-based connection between new development and its impacts. Such studies ensure that fees are proportional, equitable, and in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.), thereby making them legally defensible.
While this staff report focuses on updating the City of San Rafael’s (City) park-related development impact fees, the City is engaged in a broader, multi-year initiative to review and update all of its major development impact fee programs. These include the Traffic Mitigation Fee, the Affordable Housing Fee, and the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, which encompasses the Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee.
The park fee programs are the first to be updated, and staff will return to the City Council in the future with additional nexus studies and recommendations for the other fee programs, including the consideration of a new Public Safety Facilities Impact Fee.
This effort reflects a broader statewide trend, as cities that historically experienced little development are now seeing increased growth due to state housing laws that accelerate residential construction. Many jurisdictions, including San Rafael, are revisiting long-standing impact fees to ensure they remain legally compliant and keep pace with growing demand, so new development contributes its fair share toward needed public facilities. This initiative was also identified as a priority in the Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan, adopted by the City Council in April 2023, which calls for strengthening the longterm sustainability of San Rafael’s park system through updated and cost-effective financing strategies.
The City of San Rafael has long required new residential development to contribute to its parks and recreation infrastructure. In 1971, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1029, which added Chapter
3.24 to Title 3 of the San Rafael Municipal Code, establishing the City’s Park and Recreation Facilities Fee. This ordinance authorized the City to impose fees in connection with the construction of dwelling units to fund the acquisition, improvement, and expansion of public parks, playgrounds, and recreation facilities. In 1989, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1558, which added Chapter 15.38 to the San Rafael Municipal Code (now codified as Chapter 15.09), establishing the City’s Park Dedication and InLieu Fees program pursuant to the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477). This ordinance authorized the City to require the dedication of land, payment of in-lieu fees, or a combination of both, as a condition of approval for residential subdivision projects to fund the acquisition, development, or rehabilitation of parkland or related improvements.
Today, residential growth continues to place an increasing demand on San Rafael’s existing park and recreation facilities. To address this, the City initiated a comprehensive update to both park fee programs to ensure that new development continues to contribute its fair share toward expanding and preserving the park system. This update addresses several key factors, including compliance with recent state law changes, such as Assembly Bill 602, the need to maintain equity and fiscal responsibility in fee application, substantial increases in land acquisition and construction costs, and the growing demand for parks and recreational amenities generated by new development. The overarching objective of the fee update is to establish a fair, transparent, and legally defensible fee structure that ensures growth pays for growth while supporting the community’s long-term quality of life.
In January 2025, the Community & Economic Development Department, in coordination with the Library & Recreation Department, engaged Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) to prepare a new nexus study. The resulting Draft Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee and Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study), dated August 18, 2025 (Attachment 3), provides the necessary legal, technical, and policy foundation to support the proposed fee updates.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
At the April 14, 2026 City Council Finance Subcommittee meeting, staff presented the Nexus Study findings, including the full fee burden market comparison, and staff’s recommendation to adopt the maximum allowable fee levels.
ANALYSIS:
The Nexus Study establishes the maximum fee levels the City could adopt under the Mitigation Fee Act based on the projected impacts of new residential development. It also satisfies Assembly Bill 602 requirements by updating the analysis, incorporating a capital improvement plan, and calculating fees in proportion to unit square footage.
As required under Government Code Section 66324(c)(1), the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, and the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees shall not apply to accessory dwelling units of less than 750 square feet.
Capital Improvement Planning
To meet the capital improvement plan requirement, staff reviewed projects identified in the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan as well as planned parks capital improvement projects to identify those eligible for funding through Parks and Recreation Facilities fees, such as park and community center renovations, new amenities, and land acquisition. Estimated costs for identified projects exceed $113 million based on current construction pricing, with approximately $110 million attributable to new development. This methodology, as applied in the Nexus Study, results in proposed per-square-foot fees that reflect the relationship between new development and its share of park and recreation system costs.
Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fee – pursuant to SRMC Chapter 15.09 and the Quimby Act The Nexus Study provides an updated methodology for calculating the Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee, which are applied to subdivision projects, ensuring that the fee reflects current land values, development patterns, and the level of parkland needed to serve new residential growth.
The Nexus Study demonstrates a clear and reasonable relationship between new residential development and the need for additional parkland, establishing the essential nexus required to support the Park Dedication In-Lieu Fee. The fee is structured to fund only those costs directly attributable to new development and is not imposed for general revenue purposes. Instead, it is levied to support the acquisition and dedication of parkland consistent with the types of improvements identified in the Nexus Study. The fee does not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the required land and is proportionate to the impacts generated by new developments.
Recommended Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Residential Subdivision Units Percent of Maximum Single Family Detached
Fee per Unit
Multi-Family
Fee per Unit
100% $12,596 $11,282
(Recommended fees include a 2% administrative allowance.) In addition, staff recommends adopting updated parkland dedication requirements for residential subdivision projects, reflecting the City’s current service level of 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents and updated average household size assumptions, to ensure that new development contributes its proportionate share of land to support the City’s park system.
Recommended Parkland Dedication Requirements for Residential Subdivision Units SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
Avg. Household
Size
Quimby Standard
(Acres per 1,000 pop.)
Sq. Ft. of Park Land per
Dwelling Unit
Single Family
Detached Units 2.59 1.824 206 (205.78)
Multi-Family Units 2.32 1.824 184 (184.33)
Under the updated fee structure, Subdivision projects will be subject to both the Parkland Dedication InLieu Fee and the Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee, ensuring that new development contributes toward both parkland acquisition and recreation facility improvements. Because Subdivision projects already satisfy parkland acquisition requirements through the Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee established pursuant to the Quimby Act, they are not subject to the parkland acquisition component included in the Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee applicable to Non-Subdivision projects. This approach avoids duplicative parkland acquisition charges while ensuring subdivision projects contribute their proportional share toward recreation facility improvements. Together, the updated dedication requirements and fee structure modernize the City’s park impact fee program by aligning it with current legal standards, improving transparency, and ensuring proportionality between development impacts and required contributions.
As an alternative to paying the full in-lieu fee, developers may dedicate land of equivalent value, based on the same calculation used for the fee, or choose a combination of partial land dedication and a reduced fee payment. This flexibility ensures that project applicants have multiple pathways to comply with the parkland requirement while maintaining proportionality to the impacts of their development.
Park and Recreation Facilities Fee – pursuant to SRMC Chapter 3.24 and the Mitigation Fee Act The Nexus Study confirms that current Park and Recreation Facilities Fees are well below the actual cost of serving new development and have not been comprehensively analyzed in many years. In compliance with State law, the updated fee schedule bases fees on square footage and reflects the full maximum fee levels supported by the Nexus Study. This update aligns the fee program with current conditions and ensures that new development contributes proportionately toward park and recreation facilities.
The Nexus Study demonstrates a clear and reasonable relationship between new residential development and the need for additional parkland and recreation facilities, establishing the essential nexus required to support the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee. Like the Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee, this fee is structured to fund only those costs directly attributable to new development and is not imposed for general revenue purposes. Instead, it is levied to support the acquisition, improvement, and expansion of park and recreation facilities consistent with the types identified in the Park Facilities Impact Fee Project List, included in the Nexus Study. The fees do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing these facilities and are proportionate to the impacts generated by new developments.
The recommended fees for subdivision units are less than the recommended fees for non-subdivision units because the subdivision fees only include the park and recreation facilities costs and the nonsubdivision fees include both parkland and park and recreation facilities costs.
Recommended Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units Percent of Maximum Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
100% $4.50 $8.35
(Recommended fees include a 2% administrative allowance.) SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 5
Recommended Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Non-Subdivision Units
Percent of Maximum Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
100% $9.98 $18.50
(Recommended fees include a 2% administrative allowance.) Overall, the proposed fee updates establish a clear, consistent, and legally defensible framework that aligns development impacts with infrastructure funding, supports the City’s long-term service goals, and reduces reliance on existing residents to fund growth-related improvements.
The proposed fee updates are consistent with the goals of the City’s General Plan 2040, which emphasizes sustainable growth, expanded access to parks, and fiscal responsibility. By aligning fees with the cost of providing facilities needed to serve new development, the City can maintain service levels while accommodating future growth.
Full Fee Burden Market Comparison
To provide additional context for evaluating the proposed fee updates, staff conducted a comprehensive fee-burden market comparison that examines the total cost of development impact fees across multiple categories, including parks, traffic, utilities, schools, and other applicable fees. This analysis reflects how development projects experience fees in practice, rather than evaluating individual fee categories in isolation.
The comparison applies representative development prototypes, including a townhome (subdivision) project and a mid-rise apartment (non-subdivision) project, to evaluate San Rafael’s total fee burden relative to peer jurisdictions across Marin County and the broader Bay Area. Key findings from this analysis include:
• For non-subdivision projects, which represent the majority of development activity in San Rafael, adoption of the maximum allowable fees would place the City approximately at the regional average for total fee burden.
• For subdivision projects, adoption of the maximum allowable fees would place the City modestly (approximately 12%) above the current market average , while remaining comparable to or below nearby jurisdictions such as Novato.
• Even at maximum fee levels, San Rafael remains competitive within the regional context, particularly as many peer jurisdictions are actively updating their development impact fees.
These findings indicate that adoption of the maximum allowable fees is consistent with regional conditions while maintaining the City’s competitiveness. It is also important to note that, even when the maximum allowable park impact fee is considered, approximately 45-50% of the overall impact fee burden is levied by other local agencies (e.g., water, sewer, schools).
Additional detail, including assumptions and methodology, is provided in Attachment 4.
Recommended Fee Levels
In considering the adoption of updated fees, the City Council may adopt the maximum justifiable fee identified in the Nexus Study or adopt a lower amount. Based on an evaluation of other agency fees in the Bay Area, staff recommends adoption of the maximum allowable fee levels identified in the Nexus Study, effective 60 days after adoption. Adopting the maximum fee levels ensures that new development SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 6
pays its full, proportionate share toward parkland acquisition and recreation facility improvements, consistent with the Nexus Study and State law requirements.
As demonstrated in the market analysis, this approach places San Rafael at or near the regional average for total fee burden for non-subdivision projects and maintains competitiveness for subdivision projects, while ensuring that new development fully mitigates its impact on the City’s park and recreation system.
Adopting fees below the maximum would result in a funding gap between the cost of park infrastructure needed to serve new development and the revenue generated by the fee program, effectively requiring subsidy from existing residents or resulting in reduced service levels.
While staff recommends adoption of the maximum allowable fees at this time, the City Council retains the flexibility to revisit fee levels in the future as part of broader development impact fee updates or in response to changing market conditions.
To maintain alignment with rising land and construction costs, staff also recommends annual indexing of the fees using the Engineering News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index. This ensures the fees remain consistent with the actual cost of providing parkland and recreation facilities over time.
If adopted, the updated fee schedules will be incorporated into the City’s Master Fee Schedule and will take effect 60 days after adoption, consistent with legal requirements. Importantly, the proposed changes will not impact development projects that are already vested. Projects with vested rights, including those protected under Senate Bill 330, will remain subject to the fee schedules in effect at the time those rights were established.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
The City complied with all legal requirements by publishing public hearing notices in the Marin Independent Journal on April 17 and April 24, 2026. These notices informed the public of the upcoming San Rafael City Council public hearing scheduled for Monday, May 18, 2026, regarding the proposed park impact fee updates and the adoption of the Nexus Study. The notices included details such as the meeting time and location, contact information for City staff for those wishing to obtain additional information about the data supporting the fees, and instructions on how to submit public comments.
No formal requests for notice were filed. Nevertheless, the City provided direct notice to the Marin Builders Association and the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce to ensure stakeholders remained informed. The draft Nexus Study was also made available for public review on the City’s website more than 14 days before the hearing, providing an opportunity for public review and feedback.
Beyond formal noticing, staff conducted early and ongoing outreach to solicit policy-level input. An initial overview of the Nexus Study’s progress was presented to the City Council Finance Subcommittee during its regular meeting on May 13, 2025, with a follow-up update at the regular meeting on September 2, 2025. Additionally, staff conducted meetings with key local stakeholders, including the Marin Builders Association and the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, to discuss and preview potential policy changes and gather input from these community groups.
Feedback from these stakeholders was mixed. While there was general acknowledgment that new development should contribute its fair share toward infrastructure, stakeholders also expressed concern about the cumulative cost burden on development. In particular, one developer noted that the proposed fee levels could impact the financial feasibility of housing projects. At the same time, there was a shared SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 7
understanding of the importance of establishing a fee structure that is fair, transparent, and supports continued investment in San Rafael’s growth.
On April 14, 2026, staff presented the Park Impact Fee update, including the Nexus Study findings and staff’s recommendation, to the City Council Finance Subcommittee. In April 2026, staff also launched a dedicated project webpage to provide centralized access to information related to the Park Impact Fee update, including the Nexus Study, staff reports, and supporting materials, as well as information on the City’s broader development impact fee updates. This webpage was distributed through targeted email outreach to stakeholders, including developers, project applicants, neighborhood groups, and community organizations, to increase transparency and provide an opportunity for ongoing engagement.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Environmental Review. Adoption of the Nexus Study and the Parks and Recreation Facilities Project List (“Project List”), which serves as the Capital Improvement Program required by Government Code section 66016.5, does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15378. While CEQA requires environmental review to occur at the earliest feasible stage, CEQA does not require review of actions that are speculative, conceptual, or preliminary in nature and that do not commit the City to a definite course of action that may result in a physical change in the environment.
The Nexus Study and Project List are planning-level fiscal and policy documents that identify conceptual public facility needs and provide general cost estimates for long-range capital planning, budgeting, and rate-setting purposes only. Adoption of the Nexus Study and Project List do not approve, fund, or authorize construction of any specific capital improvement project; do not establish final project descriptions, locations, designs, construction methods, phasing, or schedules; and do not commit the City to proceed with any particular project identified in the Project List. The City retains full discretion to modify, defer, redesign, relocate, or decline to pursue any project listed in the Project List. Accordingly, adoption of the Project List does not represent a commitment to a definite course of action within the meaning of CEQA and does not result in any direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment.
Even if adoption of the Nexus Study, Project List, or fee amendments were considered a “project” for purposes of CEQA, then consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), adoption of the Project List and fee amendments constitutes the establishment of a government funding mechanism and longrange fiscal planning tool. Section 15378(b)(4) provides that a “project” does not include fiscal activities or administrative actions that do not involve any commitment to a specific project or physical development. The Project List functions solely to inform budgeting, financial planning, and infrastructure funding decisions and does not authorize or entitle any physical development.
The Nexus Study and Project List also qualify as a feasibility and planning study that is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines section 15262, as it evaluates potential public facility needs and funding strategies at a conceptual level, prior to the City’s approval, adoption, or funding of any specific capital improvement project. Environmental review at this stage would be premature and speculative, as the City lacks sufficient project-level detail to meaningfully analyze environmental impacts or alternatives.
In addition, because the Nexus Study and Project List are prepared in connection with the establishment and adjustment of fees and rates to finance public facilities, adoption of these documents and related fee amendments is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15273. Section 15273 recognizes that public agencies must be able to engage in fiscal planning and establish funding mechanisms to meet SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 8
infrastructure and capital financing needs without triggering CEQA review before any specific project has been approved or defined.
Adoption of the Nexus Study and Project List expressly reserves full discretion to the City Council and other decision-making bodies to approve, deny, modify, or pursue alternatives for any individual capital project identified in the Project List, including alternative designs, locations, phasing, or funding approaches. No construction, ground-disturbing activity, or irreversible commitment of resources will occur unless and until the City takes separate future discretionary actions to approve a specific project, following appropriate environmental review under CEQA. Adoption of the Project List does not limit the range of alternatives available to the City or predetermine the outcome of any future CEQA analysis.
Finally, the action is exempt under the common sense exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that adoption of the Nexus Study, Project List, and related fee amendments, by themselves, have no possibility of resulting in a significant effect on the environment. Any future capital improvement projects would be subject to separate discretionary approvals and environmental review in accordance with CEQA and City practice.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adopting the updated Park and Recreation Facilities Fees and Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees will provide a dedicated revenue source to fund park and recreation capital improvements directly related to new residential development.
Over the 15-year planning horizon identified in the Nexus Study, the proposed Park and Recreation Facilities Fees are estimated to generate approximately $63.3 million in revenue at the maximum allowable rate established by the Nexus Study. These funds will be used exclusively for the acquisition, development, and improvements of parkland and recreation facilities, consistent with the Park Impact Fee Project List and applicable state law. Additional revenues would be generated through the updated Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees, to the extent that applicants for Subdivision projects opt to pay a fee instead of providing parkland acreage as a component of their project.
The Nexus Study identifies approximately $113 million in eligible park capital improvement projects, with roughly $110 million attributable to new development. The Study establishes maximum legally defensible fee levels and staff recommends adopting these maximum rates to ensure new development funds its proportional share of growth-related improvements.
Setting fees below the maximum would result in a measurable amount of foregone revenue that would otherwise offset the cost of these improvements. This shortfall would effectively shift a portion of the cost burden from new development to the City, requiring either General Fund subsidy, reliance on other discretionary funding sources, or a reduction in the overall service level the City is able to provide to the community. In the absence of such funding, reduced fee levels could limit the scope, timing, or delivery of planned park and recreation improvements. No alternative funding has been identified in the current budget to address this potential gap.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options to consider on this matter:
1. Conduct a public hearing, introduce the ordinance, waive further reading of the ordinance, and refer to it by title only.
2. Conduct a public hearing, introduce the ordinance with modifications, waive further reading of the ordinance, and refer to it by title only.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 9
3. Adopt resolution with modifications.
4. Direct staff to return with more information.
5. Take no action.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 3.24, entitled “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee,” and Chapter 15.09, entitled “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees,” of the San Rafael Municipal Code, waive further reading of the Ordinance and refer to it by title only; and
2. Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Park Nexus Study and Associated Park and Recreation Facilities Project List, Adopting Updated Charges for the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, and Adopting Updated Park Dedication Requirements and Park Dedication and In-lieu Fees.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance amending SRMC Chapter 3.24 entitled “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee” and Chapter 15.09 entitled “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees”
2. Resolution
3. Draft Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee and Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Nexus Study
4. Market Comparison of Development Impact Fees for Residential Development 1 ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING CHAPTER 3.24, ENTITLED “PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FEE,” AND CHAPTER 15.09, ENTITLED “PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES,” OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
DIVISION 1. FINDINGS.
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael (“City”) desires to update the San Rafael Municipal Code (“SRMC”) provisions regarding the City’s Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code section 66000 et seq., permits the City to impose development impact fees on new development for the purposes of funding the public facilities necessary to serve that new development; and WHEREAS, the City’s current Park and Recreation Facilities Fee requirements are contained in SRMC, Chapter 3.24, entitled “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee”; and WHEREAS, SRMC Section 3.24.040 sets forth a fee program to fund the costs associated with increased demand for community and neighborhood parks and recreational facilities created by new development. New development will increase the need for such park and recreation facilities within the City; and WHEREAS, the City desires to begin imposing a Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, consistent with the updated fee program set forth in SRMC Section 3.24.040, on new development to fund the costs associated with constructing and expanding park and recreation facilities and to update the fee to bring it in line with current City objectives; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 66477 (the “Quimby Act”) allows legislative bodies of cities to adopt an ordinance requiring the dedication of land or to impose fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreation purposes, as a condition of approval of a tentative map or parcel map; and WHEREAS, the City’s current Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees requirements are contained in SRMC, Chapter 15.09, entitled “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees”; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City’s existing ordinance regarding the dedication of parkland and the payment of in-lieu fees to update the Parkland Dedication and In-Lieu Fees Ordinance consistent with state law. 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
DIVISION 2. AMENDMENT OF MUNICIPAL CODE. Chapter 3.24 of Title 3 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Rafael is hereby amended to repeal and replace the chapter with the following:
Chapter 3.24 – PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FEE
Section 3.24.010 – Findings and intent.
The City Council hereby finds and declares that:
(a) New development increases demand on existing park and recreation facilities and creates the need for expanded or new facilities to serve new development. The purpose of this chapter is to enable the collection of mitigation fees to be used for the purpose of developing new or expanding existing park and recreation facilities.
(b) It is the City’s intent and desire to require that new development contribute its fair share toward the purchase, development and/or improvement of park and recreation facilities.
(c) The imposition of impact fees is one of the customary methods of ensuring that development bears a proportionate share of the cost of capital facilities necessary to accommodate such development in order to promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare.
(d) The provisions of this chapter are consistent with the City of San Rafael general plan and enacted pursuant to Section 66000 et seq. of the California Government Code (the “Mitigation Fee Act”).
(e) This fee shall be known as the “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee for the City of San Rafael.”
Section 3.24.020 – Purpose.
The purpose of the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee is to fund the creation and improvement of park and recreation facilities, including, but not limited to, the planning, designing, developing, and improving of existing and newly acquired park and recreation facilities related to new development and ensure that new development pays for its fair share of park and recreational facilities.
Section 3.24.030 – Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall be defined as follows:
3 (a) “Building permit” includes full structural building permits as well as partial permits such as foundation-only permits or tenant improvements. (b) “Certificate of occupancy” as used in this chapter, has the same meaning as in California Government Code Section 66007(e).
(c) “New development” shall mean all new residential building construction that intensifies existing park facilities demands, creates additional impacts on park facilities, and creates one or more new residential units. (d) “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee” shall mean the mitigation fee imposed on new development for the purpose of funding park and recreational facilities related to new development, including funding projects on the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Project List.
(e) “Project List” shall mean a list of the park facilities funded in part or in whole by the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee. The Project List shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council and may be amended from time to time pursuant to Government Code section 66002.
(f) “Park facilities” shall mean any public improvements deemed necessary by the City to develop, improve or expand land and facilities for park and recreational purposes. Such improvements may include, but are not limited to: grading; landscaped areas for active and passive recreational use, trails and sports fields; irrigation and drainage systems; lawn, shrubs and trees; facilities for recreational community gardening; walkways; bicycle facilities and park lighting; playground or other recreational equipment; picnic facilities; community center or other buildings, swimming pools; volleyball, basketball, tennis, racquetball and other courts; vehicle driveways and parking areas and any other facilities which may hereafter be authorized by state law or approved by the City.
Section 3.24.040 – Establishment of a park facilities and recreation impact fee.
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, developers of new development shall pay a Park and Recreation Facilities Fee in an amount established by resolution of the City Council in accordance with a nexus study that demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed and demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the need for park facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee will be imposed.
Section 3.24.050 – Exemptions.
The following types of development shall not be required to pay a park facilities and recreation fee:
4 (a) Alterations, renovations or expansion of an existing building or structure that do not add new dwelling units.
(b) Replacement of building square footage or dwelling units on the same lot that does not add new dwelling units.
(c) The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed or damaged building or structure that does not add new dwelling units.
Section 3.24.060 – Determination of required fees.
(a) The community development director, or the director’s designee, shall be responsible for determining the fees required by this chapter. This determination shall be made at the time of application for the building permit, unless otherwise required by law.
(b) The park facilities and recreation fee may be modified automatically on an annual basis in accordance with the change in the Engineering News-Record (“ENR”) Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco area. This adjustment shall not require any action of the City Council.
Section 3.24.070 – Payment of fees.
(a) The fees required by this chapter from new development shall be paid at the time the City issues a building permit for each new development project.
Unless otherwise required by law, the amount of the fees to be paid under this chapter shall be in the amount of the fee in effect at the time the fee is paid. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, payment of the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee may be deferred to the date of approval of the first temporary certificate of occupancy, the final building inspection, or the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first, provided the owner, or lessee if the lessee’s interest appears of record, of the real property for which the fees are required enters into a recordable agreement with the City prior to issuance of the building permit for the development, which shall constitute a lien on the property from the date of recordation and shall be enforceable against successors in interest to the property owner or lessee. The agreement shall provide that approval of the first temporary certificate of occupancy, final building inspection, or final certificate of occupancy for each separate building (if there are multiple buildings) shall not be granted until the impact fees are paid for that building. The agreement shall also provide that, in any action to collect the impact fee or any portion thereof, the City shall be entitled to all of its costs of enforcement and collection, including reasonable attorney’s fees.
The City Manager may execute such agreements on behalf of the City in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
5 (c) If new development adds additional square footage or dwelling units to a parcel with an existing building, which requires the payment of a new or additional Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, the fee amount associated with the existing use on the project site shall be credited against the new total fee due, as determined by the community development director; provided, however, that in no event shall the City refund the fees previously paid. (1) The fee credit only applies if the existing use on the project site has been active within 8 years prior to the application being filed.
Section 3.24.080 – Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Fund and Accounting. (a) Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Fund. Fees collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in a newly established Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Fund, and shall be segregated and used and expended for the creation of park facilities related to new development, including the acquisition of land, and the improvement and expansion of park and recreation facilities.
Any interest accrued by the account shall be used solely for the purpose of funding park facilities.
(b) Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Accounting. The City shall maintain accounts and prepare reports in accordance with California Government Code Section 66001 et seq.
Section 3.24.090 – Fee adjustments.
Any person subject to a fee required by this chapter may apply to the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, for a reduction, adjustment or waiver of that fee based upon the applicant’s contention that (1) the amount of the fee is not reasonably related to the impacts of the applicant’s development project on park and recreation facilities; (2) the fee is not roughly proportionate to the development’s impact on the need for park and recreation facilities; or (3) the fee requires the developer to pay more than is necessary to address the impacts of the new development on park and recreation facilities. (a) Application. An applicant shall file a written request to adjust fees with the community development director, not later than ten days after the City notifies the developer of the amount of the fee to be charged. Additional time, as determined by the community development director, or the director’s designee, will be allowed when significant additional information is required of the developer. The application shall provide evidence illustrating that the payment of the fee authorized by this chapter and imposed by implementing resolution bears no reasonable relationship or nexus with the impact of the development on the need for park facilities within the City and state in detail the factual basis for the request for reduction, adjustment or waiver. If an 6 applicant desires to receive a building permit prior to the completion of the appeal process, applicant shall deposit the fee being appealed with the application. Such fee or portion thereof will be refunded if the appeal is successful.
(b) Decision of the Community Development Director. The community development director, or the director’s designee, shall issue a decision on the application within thirty days after the application is filed with the community development department. The community development director’s, or the director’s designee’s, decision shall state his or her determination regarding the amount of the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee that may reasonably be imposed on the new development and include a brief description of the basis for the director’s decision.
(c) Appeal of the Decision of the Community Development Director. Decisions of the community development director, or the director’s designee, may be appealed to the City manager. Appeals must be filed within ten days of the community development director’s, or the director’s designee’s decision. The City manager shall review the application and evidence presented to the community development director and issue a decision within fifteen days. The decision of the City manager is final and may be protested pursuant to Government Code Section 66020.
Section 3.24.100 – Fee refunds.
Upon application, fees collected by the City pursuant to this chapter shall be refunded under the following circumstances:
(a) Fees collected pursuant to this chapter are erroneously or illegally collected. (b) The building permit expires, and no extension has been granted, for the development project upon which fees were imposed pursuant to this chapter.
An application for refund pursuant to this subsection shall be filed with the community development director no later than ninety days after expiration of the building permit. The amount of refund shall be reduced by an amount to cover the cost to the City for processing the refund.
Section 3.24.110 - Credit for dedication of land.
At the option of the parks and recreation commission and the City Council, land or parks and recreation facilities may be dedicated to the City for park purposes in lieu of the fees designated in this chapter. The amount of land to be dedicated and the amount of credit to be given, if any, shall be at the discretion of the parks and recreation commission and the City Council.
7 DIVISION 2. AMENDMENT OF MUNICIPAL CODE. Chapter 15.09 of Title 15 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Rafael is hereby amended to repeal and replace the chapter with the following:
Chapter 15.09 - PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES
Section 15.09.010 – Purpose.
This chapter is enacted pursuant to Section 66477 of the Subdivision Map Act (“Quimby Act”) and the general police power of the City of San Rafael. The park and recreational facilities for which dedication of land and/or payment of a fee is required by this chapter are consistent with the San Rafael general plan.
Section 15.09.020 – Dedication Requirements.
(a) Dedication of Park Land. As a condition of approval of a tentative or final subdivision map or parcel map, the subdivider shall dedicate land for park or recreational purposes, pay a fee for such purposes, or both, according to the standards and formulas contained in this chapter and as set by resolution. (b) Purpose of Land Dedication. Land dedicated to the City for park or recreational purposes shall advance the goals and objectives of the recreation element of the San Rafael General Plan and be improved to all applicable local, state, and federal standards.
(c) Standard for Parkland Dedication. The amount of land dedicated or fees paid shall be based upon the residential density, which shall be determined on the basis of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map or parcel map and the average number of persons per household. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that the average number of persons per household by units in a structure is the same as that disclosed by the most recent available federal census or a census taken pursuant to Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 40200) of Part 2 of Division 3 of Title 4. However, the standard for the dedication of land, or the payment of fees, or both, shall not exceed the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area per 1,000 persons currently residing in the City or the City’s adopted park land standards. (1) The park area per 1,000 members of the population of the city, county, or local public agency shall be derived from the ratio that the amount of neighborhood and community park acreage bears to the total population of the city, county, or local public agency as shown in the most recent available federal census. The amount of neighborhood and community park acreage shall be the actual acreage of existing 8 neighborhood and community parks of the city, county, or local public agency as shown on its records, plans, recreational element, maps, or reports as of the date of the most recent available federal census. (2) The City Council shall, by resolution, establish the requirement for parkland dedication in accordance with the foregoing and the requirements of the Quimby Act.
(d) Amount of Fee Required. Where a fee is required or proposed to be paid in lieu of land dedication, the amount of the fee shall be established by City Council resolution and shall be based upon the fair market value of the amount of land which would otherwise be required to be dedicated.
Section 15.09.030 – Determination of Dedication of Land or Payment of Fee. (a) Procedure. The procedure for determining whether the subdivider is to dedicate land, pay a fee, or both, shall be as follows:
(1) Subdivider.
(A) At the time of filing a tentative map for approval, the owner of the property shall, as a part of the filing, indicate whether the owner desires to dedicate property for park and recreational purposes or desires to pay a fee in lieu of dedication. (B) If the owner desires to dedicate land for this purpose, the owner, with the concurrence of the director, shall designate the area on the tentative map as filed.
(2) Action of City. If dedication of land is proposed, the tentative map will be referred to the City Council for approval, conditional approval or denial. The City Council shall consider the land dedication as part of the public hearing on the tentative map and shall determine whether to require a dedication of land within the subdivision, payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both.
(3) Prerequisites for Approval of Final Map.
(A) Where dedication is required, it shall be accomplished in compliance with Government Code Section 66477.
(B) Where fees are required, the same shall be deposited with the City before building permit issuance, unless otherwise required by law.
(C)Open space covenants for private park or recreational facilities shall be submitted to the City before approval of the final map and shall be recorded concurrently with the final map.
(b) Determination.
9 (1) Whether the City Council accepts the land dedication or elects to require the payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both, shall be determined by consideration of all of the following:
(A) The compatibility of the land dedication with the San Rafael general plan;
(B) The natural features, access, and location of land in the subdivision available for dedication;
(C)The size and shape of the subdivision and land available for dedication;
(D)The feasibility of dedication; and
(E) The location of and proximity to existing and proposed park sites and trailways.
(2) The determination of the City Council as to whether land shall be dedicated or whether a fee shall be charged, or a combination thereof, shall be final and conclusive.
(3) On subdivisions involving 50 parcels or fewer, only the payment of fees shall be required; however, land may be accepted upon agreement of the subdivider and the City Council.
(A) This limitation does not apply to condominium projects, stock cooperative, or community apartment projects, as those terms are defined in Sections 4105, 4125, and 4190 of the Civil Code, when such projects exceed 50 dwelling units even though the number of parcels may be less than 50.
(c) Requirements for Dedicated Land. The subdivider shall, without credit:
(1) Provide full street improvements and utility connections including, but not limited to, curbs, gutters, street paving, traffic control devices, street trees, and sidewalks to land which is dedicated pursuant to this section; (2) Provide for fencing along the property line of that portion of the subdivision contiguous to the dedicated land;
(3) Provide improved drainage through the dedicated land; and (4) Provide other minimal improvements including, but not limited to removal of debris, clearing of the site and temporary hydro-seeding, which the library and recreation director determines to be essential to the acceptance of the land for recreational purposes.
(5) The location, size and configuration of the land to be dedicated and the improvements to be made pursuant to this section shall be reviewed by the city’s park and recreation commission and approved by the library and recreation director.
(d) Limitations on the Use of Land and Fees. Unless otherwise authorized by Government Code Section 66477, the land and fees received in compliance 10 with this section shall be used only for the purpose of providing park and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision for which received, and the location of the land and amount of fees shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivision.
Section 15.09.040 – Credit for private recreation facility.
Credit may be given for private recreation facilities or common, open area in the subdivision only as hereinafter provided. When private recreation facilities and common open areas designed to be usable for active recreational purposes are provided in a proposed planned development, real estate development, stock cooperative, or community apartment project, as defined in Sections 11003, 11003.1, 11003.2, 11003.4 and 11004, respectively, of the Business and Professions Code, or condominiums, as defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, partial credit, not to exceed fifty percent (50%), may be given against the requirement of land dedication or payment of fees in lieu thereof if the City finds that it is in the public interest to do so and that the following standards are met:
(a) Yards adjacent to each residential unit, setbacks, and other open areas required by the zoning and building ordinances and regulations shall not be included in the computation of such private recreation area; and (b) Private park and recreation facilities shall be owned by a homeowners’ association composed of all property owners in the subdivision and being an incorporated nonprofit organization capable of dissolution only by a one hundred percent affirmative vote of the membership, operated under recorded land agreements through which each lot owner in the neighborhood is automatically a member, and each lot is subject to a charge for a proportionate share of expenses for maintaining the facilities, or subject to a covenant running with the land requiring continued operation by the developer or owner; and
(c) Use of the private park and recreation facilities are restricted for park and recreation purposes by recorded covenant which runs with the land in favor of the future owners of the property and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the City or its successors; and (d) The proposed private park and recreational facilities are designed for active use, and are reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreation purposes, including recreational community gardening, children’s play apparatus areas, picnic areas, hiking, jogging, and bicycle trails and paths, or landscaped exercise areas, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access, and location; and
11 (e) The facilities that are proposed are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the recreation element of the San Rafael general plan; and (f) Open space land intended for the protection of environmentally sensitive areas or to protect views and ridgetops or hillside areas not suitable for active recreation use shall not be credited, regardless if passive recreation use (trails, pedestrian access) is allowed in these areas; and (g) The private facilities for which credit may be given must be a minimum of one acre and with at least three (3) of the local park basic elements listed below, or a combination of such and other recreation improvements that will meet the specific recreation needs of future residents of the area:
Elements Acres
1. Children’s play apparatus
area
.50 to .75
2. Landscape park-like with
quiet areas
.50 to 1.00
3. Family picnic area .25 to .75
4. Game court area (tennis,
badminton, basketball, etc.)
.25 to .50
5. Turf playfield (< 5% slope) 1.00 to 3.00
6. Swimming pool (with
adjacent deck and lawn
areas)
.25 to .50
7. Recreation center building .15 to .25
Before credit is given, the City shall make written findings that the above standards are met. (h) The determination of the City as to whether credit shall be given and the amount of credit shall be final and conclusive.
Section 15.09.050 – Disposition of fees.
(a) Fees determined pursuant to Section 15.09.030 and by City Council resolution shall be paid to the City and shall be deposited into the Parkland Dedication Fund, or its successor. Money in the fund, including accrued 12 interest, shall be expended solely for acquisition, development, or rehabilitation of park land, or improvements related thereto. (b) The City shall develop and maintain a schedule specifying where, when and how it will use the dedicated land, in-lieu fees or both to develop park and recreational facilities to serve the residents of the subdivision. (c) Collected fees shall be committed within five (5) years of receipt of payments or within five (5) years after the issuance of building permits on one half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. If such fees are not committed, these fees, less an administrative charge, shall be distributed and paid to the then record owners of the subdivision in the same proportion that the size of their lot bears to the total area of all lots in the subdivision.
Section 15.09.060 – Exemptions.
The following are exempted from the provisions of this chapter:
(a) Subdivisions containing four (4) or fewer parcels or lots that are not used for residential purposes; provided, however, that a condition shall be placed on the approval of such tentative map that if a building permit is requested for construction of a residential structure or dwelling units on one or more of the parcels or lots, the in-lieu fee shall be required to be paid by the property owner of each such parcel or lot, as a condition to the issuance of such permit; (b) Commercial or industrial subdivisions;
(c) Condominium projects or stock cooperatives which consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing apartment building which is more than five (5) years old and no new dwelling units are added.
Section 15.09.070 – Subdivider provided park and recreation improvements.
The value of any park and recreational improvements to the dedicated land shall be credited against the fees and/or dedication of land required by this chapter provided that:
(a) The subdivider shall apply to the community services director for permission to construct such improvements;
(b) If permission is granted, the community services director, in consultation with the department of public works, shall determine the dollar value of the improvements.
Section 15.09.080 – Access.
All land offered for dedication for public park or recreational purposes, shall have access to at least one existing or proposed public street. This requirement may be waived by the City 13 Council if the City Council determines that public street access is unnecessary for the maintenance of the park area or use thereof by residents.
Section 15.09.090 – Development agreement.
Except as expressly prohibited by Section 66477 of the Subdivision Map Act, the terms and procedures contained in this chapter may be waived or modified by a development agreement adopted pursuant to Section 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code.
DIVISION 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
The City Council finds that adoption of this Ordinance does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378 and is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15262, 15273, and 15061(b)(3), because the Ordinance establishes and updates funding mechanisms and policy provisions related to park impact fees and park dedication requirements and does not approve or authorize any specific physical development project.
DIVISION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases shall be declared invalid.
DIVISION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE; PUBLICATION.
A summary of this Ordinance shall be published and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which it is adopted.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage, and the summary of this Ordinance shall be published within fifteen (15) days after the adoption, together with the names of those Councilmembers voting for or against same, in the Marin Independent Journal, a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of San Rafael, Marin County, State of California.
Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, the City Clerk shall also post in the office of the City Clerk a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance, along with the names of those Councilmembers voting for or against the Ordinance. 14 THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was first read and introduced at a regular meeting of the San Rafael City Council on the day 18th day of May 2026, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the San Rafael City Council on the 1st day of June 2026 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
_______________
KATE COLIN, Mayor
Attest:
______________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE PARK
NEXUS STUDY AND ASSOCIATED PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES
PROJECT LIST, ADOPTING UPDATED CHARGES FOR THE PARK AND
RECREATION FACILITIES FEE, AND ADOPTING UPDATED PARK DEDICATION
REQUIREMENTS AND PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Municipal Code (“SRMC”) Chapter 3.24, entitled “Park and Recreation Facilities Fee,” imposes upon new development a requirement to pay a Park and Recreation Facilities Fee; and
WHEREAS, SRMC Section 3.24.040 empowers the City Council to establish the amount of the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee by resolution in accordance with a nexus study that demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed and demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the need for park facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee will be imposed; and
WHEREAS, the SRMC Chapter 15.09, entitled “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees,” imposes a park land dedication or in-lieu fee requirement as a condition of approval of a tentative map for a residential subdivision, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; and WHEREAS, SRMC Section 15.09.040(e) empowers the City Council to establish the dedication requirements and the amount of the In-Lieu Fee by resolution in accordance with a nexus study that complies with the Quimby Act; and WHEREAS, new development projects attract new residents to the City, generating an increased demand for park, parkland, and parks and recreation facilities and impacting existing park and recreation facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that the City requires a cost-effective and efficient way of serving future residents while maintaining existing levels of service; and WHEREAS, the City contracted with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (“KMA”) to perform a nexus study for a proposed Park and Recreation Facilities Fee update and Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees update; and
WHEREAS, KMA prepared and submitted a Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee and Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, dated August 18, 2025, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference (“Nexus Study”); and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study substantiates a methodology that will charge each new development project only for the costs necessary to mitigate the impacts expected to be caused by that development project; and
WHEREAS, there is a reasonable relationship and an essential nexus between the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and the development projects on which the Fees will be imposed because the Fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development; and
WHEREAS, there is a reasonable relationship and an essential nexus between the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees and the development projects on which the Fees will be imposed because the Fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development; and
WHEREAS, the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee does not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the land and facilities for which the Fee is imposed; and WHEREAS, the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the land and facilities for which the Fees are imposed; and WHEREAS, the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee is not levied, collected, or imposed for general revenue purposes, but is levied specifically to fund facilities of the types set forth in the Nexus Study; and
WHEREAS, the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees are not levied, collected, or imposed for general revenue purposes, but is levied specifically to fund facilities of the types set forth in the Nexus Study; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study establishes that the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee has an “essential nexus” to the City’s legitimate land use interest of providing park and recreation facilities necessary to serve new growth, and the amount of the Fee is roughly proportionate to the City’s costs of constructing park and recreation facilities to serve new development; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study establishes that the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees have an “essential nexus” to the City’s legitimate land use interest of providing parkland and park and recreation facilities necessary to serve new growth, and the amount of the Fee is roughly proportionate to the City’s costs of acquiring new parkland and constructing park and recreation facilities to serve new development; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study identifies the City’s existing level of service for parkland and park and recreation facilities, identifies the proposed new level of service, and includes an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes a Parks Development Impact Fee Project List (“Project List”), a list of park and recreation facilities funded in part or in whole by the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, which serves as its capital improvement plan pursuant to subdivision (a)(6) of Section 66016.5 of the Government Code for the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study was presented to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed Park and Recreation Facilities Fee program and fee amounts and the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees requirements are consistent with the City’s General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the 2023-2031 Housing Element identifies the preservation and production of affordable housing as a critical policy priority and includes goals, policies, and programs intended to encourage the development of housing affordable to lower-income households; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adopting reduced development impact fees for one hundred percent (100%) affordable housing projects supports the City’s housing policies by reducing development costs for deed-restricted affordable housing and encouraging the construction of additional affordable housing units within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that adopting a reduced Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and reduced Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees for one hundred percent (100%) affordable housing projects serves an important public purpose by advancing housing affordability, promoting socioeconomic diversity, and supporting implementation of the City’s adopted Housing Element goals and programs; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 66016, 66016.5, 66018, 66019, and 6062a, the City must adopt the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees only after notice and public hearing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 66002, 66016.5, 66018, 66019, and 6062a, notice of a public hearing on the proposed fee schedule and the adoption of the Nexus Study was published on April 17 and April 24, 2026, in the Marin Independent Journal, a newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 66019 and 66016.5, notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matters to be considered and a statement that required data is available was mailed at least thirty (30) days prior to the meeting to those members of the public who filed a written request with the City; and
WHEREAS, at least fourteen (14) days prior to the public hearing referenced above, the City made available for public inspection information required under Government Code Section 66000, et seq.; and
WHEREAS, on May 18, 2026, the City Council held a noticed public hearing to consider the City’s proposed new Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and Park Dedication and InLieu Fees, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to comment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to this matter, including any supporting reports by City Staff and any information provided by the public, prior to the close of the public hearing, pursuant to Government Code section 66019.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes as follows:
1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
a. The above recitals are correct and are material to this Resolution and are incorporated into this Resolution as findings of the City Council. b. The fees proposed bear a reasonable relationship to the need for park and recreation facilities by the future inhabitants of new development and are roughly proportionate to the impacts of new development.
2. Environmental Review. The City Council finds that adoption of the Nexus Study and the Parks and Recreation Facilities Project List (“Project List”), which serves as the Capital Improvement Program required by Government Code section 66016.5, does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15378. While CEQA requires environmental review to occur at the earliest feasible stage, CEQA does not require review of actions that are speculative, conceptual, or preliminary in nature and that do not commit the City to a definite course of action that may result in a physical change in the environment.
The Nexus Study and Project List are planning-level fiscal and policy documents that identify conceptual public facility needs and provide general cost estimates for long-range capital planning, budgeting, and rate-setting purposes only. Adoption of the Nexus Study and Project List do not approve, fund, or authorize construction of any specific capital improvement project; do not establish final project descriptions, locations, designs, construction methods, phasing, or schedules; and do not commit the City to proceed with any particular project identified in the Project List. The City retains full discretion to modify, defer, redesign, relocate, or decline to pursue any project listed in the Project List. Accordingly, adoption of the Project List does not represent a commitment to a definite course of action within the meaning of CEQA and does not result in any direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment.
Even if adoption of the Nexus Study, Project List, or fee amendments were considered a “project” for purposes of CEQA, then consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), adoption of the Project List and fee amendments constitutes the establishment of a government funding mechanism and long-range fiscal planning tool. Section 15378(b)(4) provides that a “project” does not include fiscal activities or administrative actions that do not involve any commitment to a specific project or physical development.
The Project List functions solely to inform budgeting, financial planning, and infrastructure funding decisions and does not authorize or entitle any physical development.
The Nexus Study and Project List also qualify as a feasibility and planning study that is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines section 15262, as it evaluates potential public facility needs and funding strategies at a conceptual level, prior to the City’s approval, adoption, or funding of any specific capital improvement project. Environmental review at this stage would be premature and speculative, as the City lacks sufficient project-level detail to meaningfully analyze environmental impacts or alternatives.
In addition, because the Nexus Study and Project List are prepared in connection with the establishment and adjustment of fees and rates to finance public facilities, adoption of these documents and related fee amendments is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15273. Section 15273 recognizes that public agencies must be able to engage in fiscal planning and establish funding mechanisms to meet infrastructure and capital financing needs without triggering CEQA review before any specific project has been approved or defined.
The City further finds that adoption of the Nexus Study and Project List expressly reserves full discretion to the City Council and other decision-making bodies to approve, deny, modify, or pursue alternatives for any individual capital project identified in the Project List, including alternative designs, locations, phasing, or funding approaches. No construction, ground-disturbing activity, or irreversible commitment of resources will occur unless and until the City takes separate future discretionary actions to approve a specific project, following appropriate environmental review under CEQA. Adoption of the Project List does not limit the range of alternatives available to the City or predetermine the outcome of any future CEQA analysis.
Finally, the City Council finds that the action is exempt under the common sense exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that adoption of the Nexus Study, Project List, and related fee amendments, by themselves, have no possibility of resulting in a significant effect on the environment. Any future capital improvement projects would be subject to separate discretionary approvals and environmental review in accordance with CEQA and City practice. CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15061(b)(3).
3. Adoption of Nexus Study. The City Council finds and determines that the Nexus Study complies with California Government Code section 66000 et seq. and the Quimby Act and is consistent with the General Plan, and hereby approves and adopts the Nexus Study as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.
4. Adoption of the Project List. The City Council hereby finds that the Project List is consistent with the General Plan and approves and adopts the Project List, funded in part or in whole by the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, as shown in Table 12 of the Nexus Study.
5. Rates for Park and Recreation Facilities Fee. The City Council hereby sets rates for the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee as shown in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. These rates will be incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule.
6. Requirements and Rates for Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees. The City Council hereby sets dedication requirements and in-lieu fee amounts for the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees as shown in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. These requirements and fees will be incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule.
7. Exemption. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66324(c)(1), the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees shall not apply to accessory dwelling units of less than 750 square feet.
8. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Resolution be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this and each section, subsection, phrase, or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrases, or clauses be declared unconstitutional on their face or as applied.
9. Effective Date. The Resolution shall take effect immediately. In accordance with Government Code Section 66017, the updated Park and Recreation Facilities Fee, set forth in Exhibit B, and the updated Park Dedication and InLieu Fees, set forth in Exhibit C, shall be in full force and effect 60 days after the adoption of this Resolution and shall be published or posted as required by law.
I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 18th day of May 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
PARKLAND DEDICATION IN-LIEU FEE AND PARKLAND AND RECREATION FACILITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY, DATED AUGUST 18, 2025
EXHIBIT B
PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FEE
Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
$4.50 $8.35
Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Non-Subdivision Units
Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
$9.98 $18.50
Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
The below fee shall apply only to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and is based upon the square footage shown in the adopted fee schedules.
Exemption. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66324(c)(1), the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee and the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees shall not apply to accessory dwelling units of less than 750 square feet.
Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
$2.50
Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for One Hundred Percent (100%) Affordable Housing Projects
The below fees shall apply only to residential developments in which all dwelling units, excluding any manager’s units, are subject to recorded affordability restrictions approved by the City and restricted to occupancy by lower-income households in accordance with applicable state law.
Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units for One Hundred Percent (100%) Affordable Housing Projects Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
$1.13 $2.09
Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for NonSubdivision Units for One Hundred Percent (100%) Affordable Housing Projects
Single Family Detached
Fee per Sq. Ft.
Multi-Family
Fee per Sq. Ft.
$2.50 $4.63
Annual Adjustment
Beginning January 1, 2027, and on January 1 of each year thereafter, the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee shall be adjusted to equal the base amounts set forth in the adopted fee schedules, as modified by the percentage change, if greater than zero, in the Engineering News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index for the twelve-month period from November to November immediately preceding the date of the adjustment.
EXHIBIT C
PARK DEDICATION AND IN-LIEU FEES
Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Residential Subdivision Units Single Family Detached
Fee per Unit
Multi-Family
Fee per Unit
$12,596 $11,282
Parkland Dedication Requirements for Residential Subdivision Units Avg. Household
Size
Quimby Standard
(Acres per 1,000 pop.)
Sq. Ft. of Park Land
per Dwelling Unit
Single Family
Detached Units 2.59 1.824 206 (205.78)
Multi-Family
Units 2.32 1.824 184 (184.33)
Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for One Hundred Percent (100%) Affordable Housing Projects
The below fee shall apply only to residential developments in which all dwelling units, excluding any manager’s units, are subject to recorded affordability restrictions approved by the City and restricted to occupancy by lower-income households in accordance with applicable state law.
Single Family Detached
Fee per Unit
Multi-Family
Fee per Unit
$3,149 $2,820.50
Annual Adjustment
Beginning January 1, 2027, and on January 1 of each year thereafter, the Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees shall be adjusted to equal the base amounts set forth in the adopted fee schedules, as modified by the percentage change, if greater than zero, in the Engineering News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index for the twelve-month period from November to November immediately preceding the date of the adjustment.
DRAFT PARKLAND DEDICATION IN-LIEU FEE AND
PARKLAND AND RECREATION FACILITY
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY
Prepared for:
City of San Rafael
Prepared by:
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
DRAFT
August 18, 2025
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION, SUMMARY OF CURRENT PROGRAM AND FINDINGS OF STUDY...... 1 A. Summary of Current Program ........................................................................................... 1 B. City’s Objectives for Updating its Parks Dedication and Fee Program ............................. 1 C. Report Background and Legal Context ............................................................................. 2 D. Findings And Conclusions................................................................................................. 7 II. DETERMINATION OF QUIMBY PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENT AND IN-LIEU FEES ....................................................................................................................................... 9 III. MITIGATION FEE ACT NEXUS FINDINGS.........................................................................11 A. Purpose...........................................................................................................................11 B. Use of Fee.......................................................................................................................11 C. Relationship ....................................................................................................................11 D. Need................................................................................................................................11 E. Proportionality .................................................................................................................12 IV. DEMAND FOR NEW PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND SUPPORTED IMPACT FEE AMOUNTS....................................................................................................................13 A. Population and Residential Demand for Park and Recreation Facilities .........................13 B. New Residential Development ........................................................................................13 C. Parks and Recreation Facility Inventory and Standards .................................................14 D. Existing Facilities Inventory Replacement Cost Method for Establishing Fee Amounts . 15 E. Replacement Cost of Existing San Rafael Parks and Recreation Facilities....................15 F. Maximum Supported Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Subdivision Projects that Do Not Dedicate Park Land ............................................................................................17 G. Maximum Supported Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Subdivision Units ................................................................................................................................18 H. Maximum Supported Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Non-Subdivision Units.....................................................................................................19 V. Estimated Range and Maximum Amount of Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Revenue through 2040 ............................................................21 VI. USE OF FEE REVENUE ......................................................................................................23 VII.IMPACT FEES IN NEIGHBORING CITIES, MAXIMUM SUPPORTED FEES, AND RECOMMENDED FEES.......................................................................................................25 A. Park and Recreation Fees in Neighboring Jurisdictions..................................................25 Appendix A: Inventory of Parks from Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Recent Residential Land Sales in San Rafael, and Parkland and Recreational Facility Construction Cost Estimates.............................................................................................28 Appendix A Table 1. City Operated Parks by Type and Recreation Provided………… 29 Appendix A Table 2. Residential Land Sales - Marin County…………………………….. 30 DRAFT
Appendix A Table 3. Recreation Facility Construction Cost Estimates Prepared for Other Bay Area Park Development Impact Fee Nexus Studies………………………….. 31 Appendix A Table 4. American Community Survey, 2023: City of San Rafael Population, Household, Vacancy and Household Size Data……………………………… 32 List of Tables
Table 1. Parkland Dedication Requirements for Residential Subdivision Units................... 7 Table 2. Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee for Residential Subdivision Units ...... 7 Table 3. Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units........................................................................................................................ 8 Table 4. Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Non Subdivision Projects .................................................................................................................. 8 Table 5. Quimby Land Dedication Requirement ...................................................................... 9 Table 6. Maximum Parkland Dedication In-lieu Fee for Residential Subdivisions Units ...10 Table 7. Current and Projected San Rafael Population.........................................................13 Table 8. Existing Park and Recreation Facilities Operated by the City of San Rafael........14 Table 9. Replacement Cost of Existing San Rafael Parks and Recreation Facilities - Existing Inventory Method.......................................................................................................16 Table 10A. Calculation of Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Subdivision Units that Do Not Dedicate Land, to be Paid at Entitlements or Building Permit...............18 Table 10B. Calculation of Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Subdivision Units, to be Paid at Building Permit……………………………………………….. 19 Table 10C. Calculation of Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Non-Subdivision Units, to be Paid at Building Permit………………… 20 Table 11. Estimated Range of Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Revenue through Yr. 2040…………………………………………………………………………… 22 Table 12. Parks Development Impact Fee Project List..........................................................24 Table 13. Parkland Dedication and In-lieu Fee Requirements for Residential Subdivisions and Park Facility Impact Fees
DRAFT – Select Peer Jurisdictions...................................................26 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
I. INTRODUCTION, SUMMARY OF CURRENT PROGRAM AND FINDINGS OF STUDY This Parkland Dedication In-lieu Fee and Parks and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (Report) provides the City of San Rafael (City) with the necessary technical documentation to support updating its current Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fee program for residential subdivision projects and to establish a Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee to fund parks and recreation capital facilities, including land acquisition, park improvements and recreation facilities. The study has been prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA).
A. Summary of Current Program
The City’s existing “Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fee” program is provided in Chapter 15.09 of the City’s municipal code. The program’s basic standard is that subdivision projects shall provide three (3) acres of land for each one thousand (1,000) residents, which translates into a dedication requirement of 300 square feet1 of parkland per each new residential unit that is built within a subdivision. At the City’s discretion, the code also provides provisions for the payment of a fee in lieu of dedicating land. The amount of the fee is determined by an appraisal of the property and the application of the appraised per square foot value to 300 square feet per residential unit.
The in-lieu fees are used to acquire land and construct park and trail improvements to meet the City’s per capita parks service standards, which are contained in the City’s General Plan 2040.
The General Plan 2040 establishes a standard of four (4) acres of parkland per 1,000 residents.
The amount of available vacant property suitable for subdivision in San Rafael is very limited, with most new developments being built on in-fill lots. The City’s current program does not apply to new residential construction that is not part of a subdivision, but the new non-subdivision units do increase the demand for park and recreation facilities.
B. City’s Objectives for Updating its Parks Dedication and Fee Program The City’s primary objectives for updating its Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fee program and adopting Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees are as follows:
Require new non-subdivision residential development in the City to mitigate the demand that it generates for parkland and recreational facilities. Ensure that residential development within subdivision projects pay an impact fee to construct facilities in addition to an in-lieu payment for land dedication. 1 Chapter 15.09 of the City of San Rafael Municipal Code.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Ensure that the impact fee requirements on non-subdivision projects are consistent with the provisions of the California Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600 et.seq.). Ensure that the parkland dedication and in-lieu fee requirements for subdivision developments are consistent with the provisions of the Quimby Act (Section 66477 of the California Government Code).
Revise the City’s current parkland dedication requirement and in-lieu fee option for new subdivision residential units to be based on maintaining the City’s current level of service of 1.824 acres of City-operated parks per 1,000 residents. The parkland dedication requirement and in-lieu fee option will be expressed in terms of number of square feet of land per new residential unit and in-lieu fee dollar amount per new residential unit, respectively.
Establish a recreation facility development impact fee to apply to all new subdivision residential units. The amount of the impact fee will be based on the estimated cost to maintain the City’s current per capita service level of park facilities, recreation community center facilities, and cultural facilities. The fee amount will be expressed as a dollar per square foot of livable area of new residential units. Establish a parkland and recreation facility development impact fee to apply to all new non-subdivision residential units. The amount of the impact fee will be based on the estimated cost to maintain the City’s current service levels of parkland, park facilities, recreation community center facilities and cultural facilities. • Establish a bifurcated parkland dedication, in-lieu fee, and development impact fee structure that differentiates between single family detached residential units and multifamily residential units (i.e., units in buildings with two or more units). Establish fee levels that align with current land acquisition, park facility, and recreation community center development costs.
C. Report Background and Legal Context
1. Quimby Act (Section 66477 of the California Government Code) The City’s current program is based on the provisions of the Quimby Act. In summary, the Act requires residential projects that require approval of a tentative map or parcel map to either dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu of dedication, or both. The fees may be used to develop new or rehabilitate existing neighborhood or community parks or recreational facilities within the neighborhood that serves the project. The dedication of land, or the DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 3
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
payment of fees, or a combination of both, cannot exceed the proportionate amount necessary to provide three (3) acres of neighborhood and community park area per 1,000 persons to reside within the subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area within the jurisdiction exceeds the limit, in which case the jurisdiction may adopt a higher standard not to exceed five (5) acres per 1,000 per thousand residents expected to reside within the subdivision. Given that the City of San Rafael currently provides approximately 1.824 acres of parks per 1,000 residents, the City of San Rafael intends to modify parkland dedication requirements for subdivision projects to be equivalent to the current level of service of 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents.
2. The California Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600)
The Mitigation Fee Act (Section 66000 – 66008 of the California Government Code) permits local jurisdictions to adopt parks and recreation development impact fees on new development to fund the associated, additional costs of providing parks and recreation capital facilities.
This Report provides the necessary technical analysis to support a schedule of fees to be established by an Impact Fee Ordinance and/or Resolution. The Mitigation Fee Act allows the City to adopt by Resolution a fee schedule consistent with the supporting technical analysis and findings provided in this Report. The Resolution’s approach to setting the fee allows periodic adjustments of the fee amount as may be necessary over time, without amending the enabling Ordinance.
The technical analysis in this Report estimates the parks and recreation facility fee schedule that will fund new development’s “fair share” contribution to future City investments in parks.
The key requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act that determine the structure, scope, and amount of the proposed fee program are as follows:
Collected for Capital Facility and Infrastructure Improvements. Development impact fee revenue can be collected and used to cover the cost of capital facilities and infrastructure required to serve new development and growth in the City.
However, impact fee revenue cannot be used to cover the operation and maintenance costs of these or any other facilities and infrastructure. Cannot Fund Existing Needs. Impact fee revenue cannot be collected or used to cover deficiencies in existing City capital equipment and facilities. The portion of capital costs required to meet the needs of the City’s existing population must be funded through other sources.
Must be Based on a Rational Nexus. An impact fee must be based on a reasonable nexus, or connection, between new growth and development and the need for a new facility or improvement. As such, an impact fee must be supported by DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
specific findings that explain or demonstrate this nexus. In addition, the impact fee amount must be structured such that the revenue generated does not exceed the cost of providing the facility or improvement for which the fee is imposed. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that the following requirements be satisfied when a public agency establishes, increases, or imposes a fee as a condition of approval of a development project:
a. Identify the purpose of the fee.
b. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put. If the use is financing public facilities, the facilities shall be identified.
c. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fees use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. d. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. e. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
The City can choose to charge parks and recreation development impact fees below the maximum, supportable fee schedule. Such downward adjustments in the fee schedule, if selected, are typically based on policy considerations related to considerations of development feasibility and fee levels in peer cities.
The purpose of this report is to demonstrate that the Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees comply with the Mitigation Fee Act.
3. Assembly Bill (AB) 602
Assembly Bill (AB) 602, enacted by the State of California in 2021, amended Sections 65940.1 and 66019 of, and added Section 66016.5 to the Government Code. AB 602 requires that if a local agency conducts and adopts an impact fee nexus study after January 1, 2022, the local agency shall follow all of the following standards and practices:
a. Before the adoption of a development fee, an impact fee nexus study shall be adopted.
The nexus study contained in this report meets this requirement. b. When applicable, the nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate. This nexus study identifies the City’s current level of park and recreation service at approximately 1.824 developed park acres per 1,000 residents, and three recreation community DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 5
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
centers, and one cultural center per 58,331 residents. The City of San Rafael will maintain this standard and apply it to future residential development. c. A nexus study shall include information that supports the local agency’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code, which are listed above under the rational nexus requirement. This nexus study meets these requirements.
d. If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of fees collected under the original fee. The City of San Rafael does not currently levy development impact fees for park and recreation improvements. The balance of collected parkland dedication in-lieu fees is insufficient to provide the parkland and facilities necessary to serve new development.
e. A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with the requirements to calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionally to the square footage of the proposed units if the local agency makes the following findings:
An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.
The maximum fee amounts supported by this nexus study are calculated proportionally to the square footage of the proposed residential units.
f. Large jurisdictions (i.e., Counties with a minimum population of 250,000 residents and any jurisdictions within such a county) shall adopt a capital improvement plan as a part of the nexus study. This study includes a Parks Development Impact Fee Project List attached as Table 12.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 6
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
g. All studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing. h. Studies shall be updated at least every eight years, beginning on January 1, 2022. i. The local agency may use the impact fee nexus study template developed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code. This nexus study uses the template developed by the Terner Center for the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
This report demonstrates that all fee components comply with AB 602.
4. Existing Facilities Inventory Replacement Cost Method for Establishing Fee Amounts In accordance with the provisions of AB 602, this nexus study uses the “Existing Inventory Method” described in the “Impact Fee Nexus Study Templates” document that was prepared in 2023 by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley for the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Under this approach, the cost of facilities to serve new development is calculated based on the cost to replace the City’s existing inventory of park facilities and the City’s existing population. Dividing the replacement cost of existing inventory by the City’s population yields a park facility replacement per capita cost factor that can then be applied to the average household size of new development to generate a cost per unit. Per the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, the per unit cost estimate is converted into a fee per square foot of livable residential area by dividing the per unit cost by the average square footage of new residences.
The City’s inventory of parkland and recreational facilities is currently comprised of:
106.41 acres of community, neighborhood, and special use parks2 Three recreation community centers; and
One cultural center.
Per the US Census – American Community Survey published in 2023, the City of San Rafael’s population is 58,331. The City’s 106.41 acres of parks is equivalent to approximately 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents, which is significantly less than the General Plan 2040 service standard of 4 acres per 1,000 residents. The replacement cost of the City’s existing inventory of parkland and recreational facilities has been estimated based on cost estimates prepared by City staff, as well as generic community and neighborhood park improvement cost estimates prepared by architects for other cities.
2 The list of parks, park acreage, and facilities offered at each park is provided in Appendix A, Table 1.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 7
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Under this methodology, new development will be required to fund park improvements at the same rate and service level (i.e., 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents) that existing development has provided to date. Thus, new development will not be funding any existing deficiency.
The City has identified the planned park improvements to potentially be funded by future park impact fee revenues (and other sources, as necessary) through the year 2040, which coincides with the time horizon of the City’s General Plan. The Parks Development Impact Fee Project List is provided as Table 12.
D. Findings And Conclusions
1. Quimby Parkland Dedication Requirements for Residential Subdivision Units Table 1 provides the parkland dedication requirements that will apply to all new residential units within subdivisions. As shown, developers will be required to dedicate 206 square feet of parkland per single family detached residential unit and 184 square feet of parkland per multifamily residential unit.
Table 1. Parkland Dedication Requirements for Residential Subdivision Units Sq. Ft. of Park Land per Dwelling Unit
Single Family Detached Units 206 (205.78)
Multi-family Units 184 (184.33)
See Table 5 for detailed calculations.
2. Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee for Residential Subdivision Units Table 2 shows the maximum supported parkland dedication in-lieu fee to apply to residential subdivision projects that do not dedicate improved parkland. The in-lieu fees will be collected at the time that a building permit is issued for the new units.
Table 2. Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee for Residential Subdivision Units Maximum Supported In-Lieu Fee, Per Unit
Single Family Detached Units $12,596
Multi-Family Units $11,282
See Table 10A for detailed calculations.
3. Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units Table 3 shows the maximum supported recreation facility development impact fees to be levied on all residential units built within subdivisions. The maximum fee schedule is based on the cost to replace the City’s existing inventory of park improvements and facilities as quantified in this DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 8
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Report. The impact fees will be collected at the time that building permits are issued for new development.
Table 3. Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Residential Subdivision Units
Maximum Supported Development Impact Fee,
Per Square Foot of Livable Area
Single Family Detached Units $4.50
Multi-Family Units (units in buildings with 2 or
more units) $8.35
See Table 10B for detailed calculations.
4. Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All NonSubdivision Projects Table 4 shows the maximum supported parkland and recreation facility development impact fees to be levied on all non-subdivision residential developments. The maximum fee schedule is based on the nexus findings and technical analysis contained in this Report. The parkland and recreation facility development impact fees will apply to new residential development to fund a share of future parkland and recreation capital facilities investments throughout the City. The impact fees will be collected at the time that building permits are issued for new development.
The calculation of the fee is presented in Section IV of this report.
Table 4. Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Non Subdivision Projects
Maximum Supported
Development Impact Fee Per
Square Foot of Livable Area
Single Family Detached Units $9.98
Multi-Family Units (units in buildings with 2 or more units) $18.50 See Table 10C for detailed calculations.
5. Fee Indexing
Since land and construction costs continue to rise, it is important that the fees be indexed to inflation. The fee schedule should be adjusted annually by a construction cost index, such as the Engineering News Record. Per AB 602, the nexus analysis and fee calculations are required to be updated every eight years.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 9
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
II. DETERMINATION OF QUIMBY PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENT AND IN-LIEU FEES
Under the Quimby Act, the dedication of land for parks, or the payment of fees, or a combination of both, cannot exceed the proportionate amount necessary to provide three (3) acres of neighborhood/community park area per 1,000 future residents of persons of the subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood/community park area within the jurisdiction exceeds the limit, in which case the jurisdiction may adopt a higher standard not to exceed five (5) acres per 1,000 per thousand residents expected to reside within the subdivision. The dedication and fee amounts are to reflect the residential density of the subdivision and the average number of persons per household.
As detailed in Section IV, the City currently provides a service level of 1.824 acres of community, neighborhood, pocket, and special use parks per 1,000 residents. The average household size of single family detached occupied and total single family detached units in the City is 2.62 and
2.59, respectively. The average household size of multi-family occupied units and total multifamily units is 2.36 and 2.32, respectively. While the City currently requires subdivision projects to dedicate 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents or pay an in-lieu fee equivalent to the cost of dedication, the City has decided to modify the dedication requirement to mirror the level of park acreage that the City is currently providing to the residents of San Rafael, which is 1.824 acres.
The formula for calculating the required dedication of parkland square footage per residential unit is as follows:
Average household size times Quimby standard (acres per 1,000 residents) / 1,000 times 43,560 square feet
As shown in Table 5, under the City’s new policy, the land dedication requirement will be 206 square feet per single family detached unit and 184 square feet per multi-family unit.
Table 5. Quimby Land Dedication Requirement
Avg. Household
Size
Quimby Standard
(Acres per 1,000 pop.)
Sq. Ft. of Park Land
per Dwelling Unit
Calculation A B C= (A*B/1000)*43560
Single Family Detached Units 2.59 1.824 206 (205.78)
Multi-family Units 2.32 1.824 184 (184.33)
Note: Formulas may appear to yield slightly different figures than shown due to rounding.
As detailed in Section IV, the estimated cost of acquiring parkland is approximately $2.61 million per acre, or $60 per square foot of parkland. Given a dedication requirement of 206 square feet of parkland per single detached dwelling unit, the calculated maximum fee amount is $12,349 per single family detached unit. It is standard for adopted impact fees to include an allowance for administering impact fees. A typical allowance is 2%, which has been assumed in this DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 10
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
analysis. Including a 2% administrative fee allowance, the maximum in-lieu fee per single family detached residential unit is $12,596 per unit and the maximum in-lieu fee for multi-family units is $11,282 per unit.
Table 6. Maximum Parkland Dedication In-lieu Fee for Residential Subdivisions Units Sq. Ft. of Park
Land per
Dwelling Unit
Cost to acquire parkland per
square foot of parkland based
on existing level of service
Land Dedication InLieu Fee per
Dwelling Unit
Calculation C D E= (C * D)*1.02
Single Family
Detached Units 205.78 $60.00 $12,596
Multi-Family
Units 184.33 $60.00 $11,282
Note: Formulas may appear to yield slightly different figures than shown due to rounding. See Table 10A for detailed calculations.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 11
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
III. MITIGATION FEE ACT NEXUS FINDINGS
This chapter describes the necessary “nexus” between new development in the City of San Rafael and the proposed capital facilities investments, as required under the Mitigation Fee Act – Government Code Section 66000. The park and recreation development impact fees will fund investments in parks and recreation facilities, improvements, and land acquisitions required to maintain existing levels of park facilities in the City – the “fair share” contribution of new development.
Nexus findings address: (1) the purpose of the fee and a related description of the facility for which fee revenue will be used, (2) the specific use of fee revenue, 3) the relationship between the facility and the type of development, (4) the relationship between the need for the facility and the type of development, and (5) the relationship between the amount of the fee and the proportionality of cost specifically attributable to new development. The subsections below describe the nexus findings for the parks and recreation development impact fee.
A. Purpose
The fee will be used to expand the provision of parks and recreational facilities to maintain the current level of service and meet the future sport, health, and recreational needs of residents.
The fee will also ensure that parks and recreation capital facilities in San Rafael keep pace with new growth, while supporting significant accessibility improvements and rehabilitation to existing facilities.
B. Use of Fee
Fee revenue will be used to acquire land for parks and to construct/renovate improvements, such as playing fields, trails, basketball courts, restrooms, community centers, etc.
C. Relationship
New residential development in the City of San Rafael will increase the demand for and use of parks and recreation facilities. To address the impacts of new residential development, parks and recreation development impact fees will be levied on the square footage of additional residential development. Fee revenue will be used to help fund new parks and recreation facilities in response to the increased demand, as well as significant renovations to existing facilities to modernize and enhance accessibility.
D. Need
Each new development will bring new residents to the City and will generate incremental, new demand and use of the City’s parks and recreation facilities. New revenues to fund investments DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 12
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
in additional parks and recreation capital improvements are necessary to maintain the City’s parks and recreation capital facilities service standards and the current level of service.
Additionally, significant reinvestment is needed to existing facilities to enhance accessibility.
E. Proportionality
The maximum, supportable parks and recreation fee schedule has been based on the cost to maintain the current per capita inventory of parkland and recreation facilities. As a result, the fee program cost estimates are directly proportional to the relative increase in new development.
The fees comply with the essential nexus and rough proportionality requirements articulated in the U.S. Supreme Court case Sheetz because they are imposed for the legitimate government land use interest of providing park land and facilities to serve new development and the fees do not exceed the estimated costs of providing the land and facilities for that purpose.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 13
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
IV. DEMAND FOR NEW PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND SUPPORTED IMPACT
FEE AMOUNTS
A. Population and Residential Demand for Park and Recreation Facilities Based on the most recent available Census data as reported in the American Community Survey of 2023, approximately 58,331 people reside in San Rafael. Based on projections prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the City anticipates that the City’s population will reach 66,880 by 2040, which reflects a population growth of 8,549 residents through 2040.
The City’s General Plan 2040 establishes a standard of four (4) acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which reflects the current service level provided by a combination of regional parks, community and neighborhood parks located within the greater San Rafael Planning Area. The application of this service standard to a projected growth of 8,549 residents would indicate that an additional 34.2 acres of parkland would be needed by 2040 to serve the growth in population.
The City has elected to base the adoption of parkland and recreation facility development impact fees on a lower standard of 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents, which reflects the current inventory of parks that are operated by the City of San Rafael. Applying the reduced standard of 1.824 acres of parkland to a projected population growth of 8,549 residents would indicate that an additional 15.6 acres of parkland will be needed by 2040 to meet the needs of new residents.
In addition to parks, new residents also create more demand for recreation facilities that are provided by the City’s three community centers and a historic building that serves as a cultural center.
Table 7. Current and Projected San Rafael Population
2025 2040 Increase
Total Population 58,331 66,880 8,549
Additional Park Acres Needed based on Existing City
Level of Service of 1.824 Acres Per 1,000 Residents 15.6 acres Note: Formulas may appear to yield slightly different figures than shown due to rounding.
B. New Residential Development
Given the limited availability of undeveloped land, the majority of new residential development is occurring on infill sites. Ownership projects are generally comprised of townhomes and small scale condominiums, with a limited number of single family detached units. Unit sizes of new townhomes and condos range from 1,300 to 1,800 square feet per unit, with prices in the $1.1 million to $1.3 million range. Densities range from 10 units to 30 units per acre. There has been considerable activity in the rental market in San Rafael, with a number of applications by projects that are seeking density bonuses and stream-line processing through the provisions of DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 14
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
SB 330. Project heights range from 2 to 13 stories, with two projects at 7 to 8 stories. The average size of rental units is 800 to 900 square feet. The largest pipeline project is the redevelopment of the Northgate shopping center, which is slated to include over 1,400 rental apartments and townhomes. Other significant pending projects include a 210-unit apartment project and a 187-unit apartment project.
Based on the distribution of the City’s residential inventory between single family detached homes and multi-family homes, new development trends, and the sizes of new residential units, the calculation of park impact fees reflects the assumptions that new singe family detached units will average 2,300 square feet and that new multi-family units will average 1,111 square feet.
C. Parks and Recreation Facility Inventory and Standards In 2023, the City adopted a Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The Master Plan provides a comprehensive assessment of the City’s park system, a needs assessment, goals, plans, and an action plan for undertaking priority projects. As summarized below in Table 8 and detailed in Appendix A, Table 1, the City has a total inventory of 106.41 acres of existing Cityoperated parks. Of the existing acreage, approximately 39% are neighborhood parks, 32% are community parks, and 26% are special use parks. Additionally, the City provides three community centers, including a recreational swim center, and one cultural center.
Table 8. Existing Park and Recreation Facilities Operated by the City of San Rafael Total Acres
Community Parks 33.81
Neighborhood Parks 41.33
Pocket Parks 3.27
Special Use Parks 28.0
All Parks 106.41
Albert J. Boro Community Center 1
San Rafael / Albert Park Community Center 1
Terra Linda Community Center 1
Falkirk Cultural Center 1
Detailed in Appendix A, Table 1 of this report and Tables 6 and 8 of the Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Per the City’s General Plan 2040, descriptions of these types of parks are as follows:
Community Parks are typically 10 acres or larger and include a variety of facilities, such as recreation centers, swimming pools, tennis courts, and multi-use athletic fields. San Rafael’s community parks serve residents throughout the City and beyond.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 15
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Neighborhood Parks are typically between one and ten acres in size and include a range of facilities, such as softball fields, playgrounds, lawn areas, basketball courts, and picnic areas. They are within walking distance of many users. Pocket Parks are less than an acre in size and draw from a small area, such as a one quarter mile radius. Facilities are limited to children’s play structures and lawn areas. Special Use Parks include parks that serve a unique purpose or activity. Examples include Starkweather Park along the Bay, and community gardens.
The City’s inventory of 106.41 acres and population of 58,331 yields a level of service equal to
1.824 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The Park and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee will be based on maintaining this current level of service. For consistency purposes, the parkland dedication requirement and in-lieu fee provisions for subdivision projects will be revised downward from the existing 3 acres per 1,000 residents to 1.824 acres per 1,000 residents.
D. Existing Facilities Inventory Replacement Cost Method for Establishing Fee Amounts In accordance with the provisions of AB 602, this nexus study uses the “Existing Inventory Method” described in the “Impact Fee Nexus Study Templates” document that was prepared in 2023 by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley for the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Under this approach, the cost of facilities to serve new development is calculated based on the cost to replace the City’s existing inventory of park facilities and the City’s existing population. Dividing the replacement cost of existing inventory by the City’s population yields a park facility replacement per capita cost factor that can then be applied to the average household size of new development to generate a cost per unit. Per the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, the per unit cost estimate is converted into a fee per square foot of livable residential area by dividing the per unit cost by the average square footage of new residences.
E. Replacement Cost of Existing San Rafael Parks and Recreation Facilities Table 9 provides an estimate of the value of the City’s current parks and facilities as measured by the estimated cost to replace the parks and facilities. Replacement costs include the cost to acquire the 106.4 acres of parkland, improve the land with park facilities, and rebuild the community centers. As shown on Table 9, the replacement cost of the City’s parkland and recreational facilities is estimated to total $506.82 million. The total replacement cost translates into a per capita value of $8,689, or $8,862 after inclusion of a 2% administration cost allowance.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 16
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Table 9. Replacement Cost of Existing San Rafael Parks and Recreation Facilities - Existing Inventory Method
Community Center and Cultural Facilities
Estimated Replacement Cost Source
SF $/SF
San Rafael Community Center 17,500 $1,943 $34,002,500 City estimate Terra Linda Park and Community Center 5,552 $1,943 $10,787,536 City estimate Albert J. Boro Community Center 14,487 $1,943 $28,148,241 City estimate Falkirk Cultural Facility 5,500 $2,5261 $13,892,450 City estimate Total Replacement Cost of Three Community Centers and One Cultural Facility $86,830,700 Parks
Acres
Land Cost
Per Acre1
Imp. Cost
Per Acre2 Land Cost
Improvement
Costs3
Total Park
Replacement Cost
Community Parks 33.81 $2,613,600 $1,400,000 $88,365,816 $47,334,000 $135,699,800 Neighborhood Parks 42.33 $2,613,600 $1,320,000 $110,633,688 $55,875,600 $166,509,300 Pocket Parks 2.27 $2,613,600 $750,000 $5,932,872 $1,702,500 $7,635,400 Special Parks 28.00 $2,613,600 $1,320,000 $73,180,800 $36,960,000 $110,140,800 Total Replacement
Cost of Parks 106.41 $278,113,200 $141,872,100 $419,985,300 Replacement Cost of Total Inventory of Community Centers and Parks $506,816,000 Per Capita $8,689
Per Capita Replacement Cost With 2% Admin. Cost $8,862
1 Estimate reflects the base replacement cost estimate of $1,943 per square foot of building area plus a 30% premium to account for the additional cost associated with replacing an historical structure. 2 Based on recent land sales in Marin County for residential development with a downward adjustment to $60 per square foot to reflect discount for the variety of entitlement conditions, densities, and market conditions that impact the value of different properties given a range of circumstances. See Appendix A, Table 2. 3 Based on cost analyses prepared by architects for standard park facilities. See Appendix A, Table 3.
Parkland Acquisition Costs – The cost to acquire parkland has been estimated based on recent land sales for residential development in San Rafael and nearby communities. These sales are provided in Appendix A, Table 2. Ten of the thirteen sales were for sites of less than one acre. The remaining three sales included sales of 3.7 acres, 9.5 acres, and 23 acres. Most of the sales are for properties in Downtown San Rafael. The properties vary with respect to the quality of location, entitlements, usability, and other factors. As noted, the average price in 2024 dollars was $125 per square foot of land area, with prices ranging from a low of $15 per square foot to $191 per square foot. Given that the City’s parks are located throughout the City, for purposes of this analysis, a conservative average value of $60 per square foot has been selected for purposes of estimating the average value of city parkland. Applying $60 per square foot to the inventory of 106.41 acres yields an estimated value of $278.11 million for the City’s parkland.
Park Facilities Replacement Costs – The cost of developing park facilities varies significantly, depending on the nature of the facilities. Appendix A, Table 3 provides cost estimates for generic park improvements by type of park that were prepared by architects and engineers for DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 17
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
impact fee studies in other jurisdictions. Based on this information, an average improvement cost of $1.40 million per acre has been assumed for community parks, $1.32 million for neighborhood and special parks, and $750,000 per acre for pocket parks. Applying these replacement cost estimates to the City’s inventory of parks yields a value for city-wide park improvements of $141.87 million.
Community Center and Cultural Center Replacement Cost – The City of San Rafael intends to significantly renovate the San Rafael Community Center and the Terra Linda Park and Community Center over the next five to ten years and has prepared cost estimates for the renovations. Based on the renovation estimates and general construction cost information, the City has estimated replacement costs for each of the three community recreation centers and the Falkirk Cultural Facility, which is a historic complex. As shown on Table 9, the aggregate replacement cost of these facilities is estimated at $86.83 million.
F. Maximum Supported Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Subdivision Projects that Do Not Dedicate Park Land
Table 10A provides the calculation of the Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee for subdivision projects that do not dedicate parkland based on the replacement cost data provided in Table 9. This fee may be paid at either the time that a final map is approved or when building permits are issued. Because the size of units may not be known at the final map stage, a fee paid at that time would be paid on a per unit basis. If the in-lieu fee is paid at the time of building permit, then it could be levied based on the number of livable square feet. The maximum supported parkland dedication in-lieu fee for subdivision units that do not dedicate parkland is $12,596 per single family detached unit and $11,282 per multi-family unit. The maximum fee includes an allowance for a 2% administration fee.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 18
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Table 10A. Calculation of Maximum Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fees for Subdivision Units that Do Not Dedicate Land, to be Paid at Entitlements or Building Permit Land
Total Value of City Inventory of Parks and Park Facilities $278,113,200 Population of City of San Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331
Per Capita Parks and Facilities Replacement cost $4,767.85 Avg. Unit Population, accounting for vacancy (ACS 2023) Single Family Detached Units 2.59
Multi-Family Units (bldgs. with 2+ units) 2.32
Per Dwelling SF Parks and Facilities Replacement Cost
Avg. Unit Livable
SF
Single Family Detached Units 2,300
Multi Family Units 1,111
Maximum Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee for Subdivision Units that Do Not Dedicate Land, Paid at Building Permit Single Family Units in Multi Family
Detached Units Bldgs. 2+DU
Total Value of City Inventory of Parkland $278,113,200 $278,113,200 Population of City of San Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331 58,331 Per Capita Parkland Replacement Cost $4,767.85 $4,767.85 Avg. hhld size 2.59 2.32
In-Lieu Fee Per Unit $12,348.72 $11,061.40
Max. Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee $12,349 $11,061
Max. Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee with 2% Admin. Allowance $12,596 $11,282 G. Maximum Supported Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for Subdivision Units
Table 10B provides the calculation of the Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee for subdivision projects. This fee covers only the cost of park improvements and recreation facilities. This fee will be collected at the time that the units pay building permit fees. The maximum supported recreation facility development impact fee for subdivision projects is $4.50 per square foot of livable area for single family detached units and $8.35 per square foot for multi-family units.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 19
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Table 10B. Calculation of Maximum Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Subdivision Units, to be Paid at Building Permit
Facilities
Total Value of City Inventory of Parks and Park Facilities $228,702,800 Population of City of San Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331
Per Capita Facilities Replacement cost $3,920.78
Avg. Unit Population, accounting for vacancy (ACS 2023) Single Family Detached Units 2.59
Multi-Family Units (bldgs. with 2+ units) 2.32
Per Dwelling SF Parks and Facilities Replacement Cost Avg. Unit Livable SF Single Family Detached Units 2,300
Multi Family Units 1,111
Maximum Recreation Facility Impact Fee for All Subdivision Units, to be Paid at Building Permit Single Family Units in Multi Family
Detached Units Bldgs. 2+DU
Total Value of City Inventory of Park Facilities $228,702,800 $228,702,800 Population of City of San Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331 58,331 Per Capita Facilities Replacement cost $3,920.78 $3,920.78 Avg. hhld size 2.59 2.32
Fee Per Unit $10,154.81 $9,096.20
Avg. Unit Livable SF 2,300 1,111
Max. Facility Impact Fee, per Livable SF before Admin. $4.42 $8.19 Max. Facility Impact Fee, per Livable SF with 2% Admin. Allowance $4.50 $8.35 H. Maximum Supported Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Non-Subdivision Units
Table 10C provides the calculation of the Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee for all non-subdivision projects. The maximum fee covers the demand for both parkland and recreation facility improvements that are generated by new development.
This fee will be collected at the time that building permit fees are paid, unless later payment is required by law. The maximum supported parkland and recreation facility development impact fee for all non-subdivision units is $9.98 per square foot of livable area for single family detached units and $18.50 per square foot for multi-family units.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 20
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Table 10C. Calculation of Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fees for All Non-Subdivision Units, to be Paid at Building Permit Land Facilities
Land and
Facilities
Total Value of City Inventory
of Parks and Park Facilities $278,113,200 $228,702,800 $506,816,000 Population of City of San
Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331 58,331 58,331
Per Capita Parks and
Facilities Replacement cost $4,767.85 $3,920.78 $8,688.62 Avg. Unit Population, accounting for vacancy (ACS 2023) Single Family Detached Units 2.59
Multi-Family Units (bldgs. with 2+ units) 2.32
Per Dwelling SF Parks and Facilities Replacement Cost Avg. Unit Livable SF Single Family Detached Units 2,300
Multi Family Units 1,111
Maximum Parkland and Recreation Facility Impact Fee for All Non-Subdivision Units - to be Paid at Building Permit Single Family Detached Units Multi Family (Bldgs. 2+ units) Land Facilities Total Land Facilities Total
Total Value of City Inventory of
Parkland and Facilities $278,113,200 $228,702,800 $506,816,000 $278,113,200 $228,702,800 $506,816,000 Population of City of San
Rafael (ACS 2023) 58,331 58,331 58,331 58,331 58,331 58,331 Per Capita Total Inventory
Replacement Cost $4,767.85 $3,920.78 $8,688.62 $4,767.85 $3,920.78 $8,688.62 Avg. hhld size (ACS 2023) 2.59 2.59 2.59 2.32 2.32 2.32 Fee Per Unit $12,348.72 $10,154.81 $22,503.53 $11,061.40 $9,096.20 $20,157.60 Avg. Unit Livable SF (New
Units) 2,300 2,300 2,300 1,111 1,111 1,111
Max. Parkland and Facility
Impact Fee, per Livable SF,
before Admin. $5.37 $4.42 $9.78 $9.95 $8.19 $18.14
Max. Facility Impact Fee, per
Livable SF, with 2% Admin.
Allowance
DRAFT
$5.48 $4.50 $9.98 $10.15 $8.35 $18.50
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 21
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
V. Estimated Range and Maximum Amount of Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Revenue through 2040
The maximum amount of revenue that would be generated by the adoption of the maximum parkland and recreation facility development impact fees through year 2040 has been estimated. The estimates have been calculated under the assumption that the City’s population increases by 8,549 over the period and that household sizes remain at 2.59 for single family detached units and 2.32 for multi-family units. The maximum revenue scenario reflects the assumption that 100% of new residential units are not located within subdivisions and they pay full fees for both acquiring parkland and building park facilities (including community centers).
The minimum revenue scenario reflects the assumption that 100% of new residential units are located within subdivisions and that the units pay only park facility impact fees. Both scenarios reflect the assumption that all residential units will be subject to recreation facility development impact fees. However, the City may elect to exempt individual homeowner projects or small projects with fewer units than a threshold to be selected, which would reduce the estimated maximum amount of achievable revenue.
As shown in Table 11, under the maximum revenue scenario, it is estimated that approximately $75.8 million of parkland and recreation facility impact fee revenue would be generated by new development through the year 2040. The minimum amount of impact fee revenue is estimated to be $34.2 million. Based on development trends, it is expected that fee revenue will be in the range of $59.1 million to $67.5 million, which yields an average projection of $63.3 million, or $7,403 per new resident, which is less than the per capita cost to replace the existing inventory of parkland and facilities and maintain the existing level of service.
As discussed in Section VI, the City has prepared a “Parks Development Impact Fee Project List (Table 12). It is estimated that the cost of undertaking the improvements eligible to be funded with development impact fees is $110.2 million, which exceeds the estimated maximum amount of impact fee revenue that could be generated by the adoption of the maximum fee amounts supported by this nexus study.
Therefore, the maximum fee levels established by this nexus analysis are consistent with the requirements of the AB 602 and the California Mitigation Fee Act.
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 22
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Table 11. Estimated Range of Parkland and Recreation Facility Development Impact Fee Revenue through Yr. 2040
100% Non-Subdivision - Land and Facility Fee
100% Subdivision - Land Dedication; Facility Fee
Only
SF,
Detached Multifamily
SF,
Detached Multifamily
SF,
Detached Multifamily
SF,
Detached Multifamily
Population
Growth – 2040 8,549 0 0 8,549 8,549 0 0 8,549
Household Size 2.59 2.32 2.59 2.32 2.59 2.32 2.59 2.32
Units 3,301 0 0 3,685 3,301 0 0 3,685
s.f./ unit 2,300 1,111 2,300 1,111 2,300 1,111 2,300 1,111 Total s.f. 7,591,776 0 0 4,095,052 7,591,776 0 0 4,095,052 Per SF Fee $9.98 $18.50 $9.98 $18.50 $4.50 $8.35 $4.50 $8.35 Implied Revenue
(100%) $75,764,609 $0 $0 $75,764,609 $34,189,091 $0 $0 $34,189,091 Subdivision/ Non Subdivision Scenarios
Max Fee Scenario Min. Fee Scenario
% Of Units that Are Not
Within Subdivision and
Pay Full Impact Fees
% of Total Units That are
within Subdivisions with
Land Dedication
Total
Revenue
Expected
Range
Per New
Resident
100% 0% $75,765,000 $8,862
90% 10% $71,607,000 $8,376
80% 20% $67,450,000
$63,292,000
$7,890
70% 30% $63,292,000 $7,403
60% 40% $59,134,000 $6,917
50% 50% $54,977,000 $6,431
40% 60% $50,819,000 $5,944
30% 70% $46,662,000 $5,458
20% 80% $42,504,000 $4,972
10% 90% $38,347,000 $4,486
0%
DRAFT
100% $34,189,000 $3,999
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 23
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
VI. USE OF FEE REVENUE
The City plans to use parkland and recreation facility development impact fee revenue to 1) acquire parkland and construct new facilities to maintain the current level of service; and 2) undertake significant reinvestment in existing facilities to expand and modernize facilities to best meet the needs of the community. The Parks Development Impact Fee Project List, which identifies planned capital investment to be undertaken during the next 15 years, is provided in Table 12. As shown, the list includes:
Park and Community Center Renovation Projects;
New Amenity Projects;
Improvements to existing Amenities; and
Land Acquisition and Development of New Parks
The Parks Development Impact Fee Project List identifies the location of planned improvements, the anticipated schedule, the estimated total cost of each improvement, and the portion of each improvement’s total cost that is eligible to be funded by parkland and park facility development impact fee revenues. As shown, the projects that are eligible to be funded by park impact fees is estimated to total $110.16 million, which exceeds the total revenues projected to be collected from the park impact fees and parkland dedication in-lieu fees. As such, the City’s Parks Development Impact Fee Project List demonstrates that the City has eligible projects on which to spend the fee revenues. The City will annually review and update the Parks Development Impact Fee Project List, in accordance with Government Code section 66002, to ensure that it continues to reflect the City’s parkland and facilities needs.
DRAFT
Table 12
Land or
Development
Size (acres of
new park land) Total Cost
New Development
Share of Cost Timing Location
Park & Community Center Renovation Projects
Terra Linda Park Renovation Development existing $5,000,000 $5,000,000 5 years Terra Linda Park Terra Linda Community Center Renovation Development existing $21,000,000 $21,000,000 5 years Terra Linda Community Center Terra Linda Community Garden Renovation Development existing $1,600,000 $1,600,000 5 years Terra Linda Community
Garden
Albert Park Field & Stadium Renovation Development existing $4,500,000 $2,250,000 10 years Albert Park Falkirk Cultural Center Accessibility Improvements Development existing $5,500,000 $5,500,000 10 years Falkirk Cultural Center Sub-total $37,600,000 $35,350,000
New Amenity
Freitas Park North Parcel Development existing $644,500 $644,500 5 years Freitas Park Bernard Hoffman Play Area and Pathway Improvement Development existing $500,000 $500,000 10 years Bernard Hoffman Park Starkweather Park Boat ramp Development existing $1,275,000 $1,275,000 15 years Jean & John Starkweather
Park
Sub-total $2,419,500 $2,419,500
Amenity Improvements
Freitas Park tennis courts and pathway development Development existing $250,000 $187,500 5 years Freitas Park Gerstle Park lower play area improvement project Development existing $1,600,000 $1,600,000 5 years Gerstle Park Oleander Park playground and pathway improvements Development existing $300,000 $300,000 5 years Oleander Park Gerstle Park Pathway Improvements Development existing $700,000 $350,000 5 years Gerstle Park Santa Margarita tennis court, basketball court, play area and pathway improvements Development existing $1,600,000 $1,600,000 5 years Santa Margarita Park Riviera Park Play Area and Pathway Improvement Development existing $400,000 $400,000 10 years Riviera Park Oliver Hartzell Park Play Area and Pathway Improvement Development existing $300,000 $300,000 10 years Oliver Hartzell Park Gerstle Park Tennis Court Improvements Development existing $500,000 $500,000 10 years Gerstle Park Boyd Park Tennis Court Improvements Development existing $700,000 $700,000 10 years Boyd Park Starkweather Park Trail Improvements Development existing $750,000 $375,000 15 years Jean & John Starkweather
Park
Bret Harte Sports Court and Pathway Improvement Development existing $200,000 $100,000 15 years Bret Harte Park Bret Harte Park Play Area Improvement Development existing $500,000 $500,000 15 years Bret Harte Park Victor Jones Sports Court Improvement Development existing $600,000 $600,000 15 years Victor Jones Park Sub-total $8,400,000 $7,512,500
Land Acquisition and Development
Canal Boatyard Development 1.65 $4,126,850 $4,126,850 5 years 620 Canal Street Montecito/Dominican Neighborhood Land 1 $2,613,600 $2,613,600 5 years Montecito/Dominican Development $1,289,000 $1,289,000 5 years
Winward Way Development 6.22 $10,017,580 $10,017,580 10 years Winward Way West End/Fairhills Neighborhood Land 2 $5,227,200 $5,227,200 10 years West End/Fairhills Development $2,578,000 $2,578,000 10 years
Lincoln/San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Land 2 $5,227,200 $5,227,200 10 years Lincoln/San Rafael Hill Development $2,578,000 $2,578,000 10 years
Contempo/Deer Park Neighborhood Land 4 $10,454,400 $10,454,400 15 years Contempo/Deer Park Development $5,156,000 $5,156,000 15 years
Northbridge/Marin Lagoon Neighborhood Land 4 $10,454,400 $10,454,400 15 years Northbridge/Marin Lagoon Development $5,156,000 $5,156,000 15 years
Sub-total $64,878,230 $64,878,230
SUMMARY
$37,600,000 $35,350,000
New Amenity Projects $2,419,500 $2,419,500
Amenity Improvement Projects $8,400,000 $7,512,500
Land Acquisition and Development $64,878,230 $64,878,230 TOTAL $113,297,730 $110,160,230
TOTAL NEW ACREAGE 20.87
y
Renovation Projects
Parks Development Impact Fee Project List
DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 25
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
VII.IMPACT FEES IN NEIGHBORING CITIES, MAXIMUM SUPPORTED FEES, AND
RECOMMENDED FEES
A. Park and Recreation Fees in Neighboring Jurisdictions KMA surveyed the park impact fees levied by the cities within Marin County and other Bay Area jurisdictions. The park and recreation development impact fees of peer jurisdictions are summarized in Table 13. The requirement that can most appropriately be compared across jurisdictions is the “Park Development Impact Fee Amount,” which applies to all nonsubdivision units and funds both parkland acquisition and park facilities. As shown on Table 13, the park impact fee amounts of the selected peer jurisdictions are as follows:
Single Family Detached Multi-Family
Novato $10,354 per DU $10,354 Per DU
Santa Rosa $14,890 to $17,314 per DU $11,169 to $14,415 per DU Vallejo $14,315 per DU $9,808 to $12,907 per DU
San Ramon $23,951 per DU $14,371 per DU
Concord $11,910 to $16,691 per DU $7,055 to $11,470 per DU DRAFT
Table 13. Parkland Dedication and In-lieu Fee Requirements for Residential Subdivisions and Park Facility Impact Fees Select Peer Jurisdictions
Novato Petaluma Santa Rosa 1 Napa Vallejo San Ramon Concord General Plan Parkland
Dedication Standard,
Residential Subdivisions
4.5 acres per 1,000 residents 3.4 acres per 1,000
residents
3.0 acres per 1,000 residents;
Land dedication is required if
GP designates a park within the
proposed subdivision.
2.5 acres per 1,000 residents 4.25 acres per 1,000 residents 4.91 acres per 1,000 residents 5 acres per 1,000 residents Acreage Dedication
Requirements per
Residential Unit,
Subdivision units
SF detached = .0124
SF attached = .0102
Duplex = .0113
Apts. 3 to 4 Du= .0107
Apts. 5+ DU = .0101
SF = .0099
MF = .0067
ADUs = .0034
SF detached = .00825
SF attached = .00813
Duplex = .00798
MF = .00657
Moblie Homes = .00492
SF detached = .007175
SF attached = .00515
Duplex = .005325
MF = .004575
Moblie Homes = .003775
ADU = .0025
SF detached = .01296
SF attached = .01169
Duplex = .01058
MF = .00889
Moblie Homes = .00778
SF = .01577
MF = .01035
VL Density = 0.016000
Low Density = 0.13933
Med. Density = 0.01010
High Density = 0.00950
Downtown, seniors, special needs
= 0.00700
Land Improvements
Required with Land
Dedication (Subdivisions)
Full street imps. , utiliity
connections. drainage, and
fencing.
Required to construct all
public improvements
slated for park and to be
reimbursed for costs
from in-lieu fees.
Full street imps. , utiliity
connections. drainage, and
fencing.
Full street imps. , utiliity
connections. drainage, and
fencing.
Not specified.
Shall have access to
streets.
In-Lieu Fee Conditions
(Subdivisions)
If no park facility designated in
GP for the property; or if
subdivision has 50 or less
parcels
Payment of fee is at
election of applicant if
subdivision contains
less than 50 lots.
All development must pay park
impact fee. If land is dedicated,
a credit is received equal to the
value of the land (as
established by a City
ordinance).
It is at the City's discretion if
land dedication, an in-lieu
fee, or a combination are
required
It is at the City's discretion if land
dedication, an in-lieu fee, or a
combination are required
If no park facility designated in
GP for the property; or if
subdivision has 50 or less
parcelsor if city determines
dedication is not appropriate.
It is at the City's discretion if land
dedication, an in-lieu fee, or a
combination are required
In-Lieu Fee Amount
(Subdivision units)
Required dedicated acreage
per unit times the fair market
value of buildable land.
Equal to park land
acquisition fees
adopted for non-Quimby
Act developments.
All development must pay park
impact fee. If land is dedicated,
a credit is received equal to the
value of the land (as
established by a City
ordinance).
Value of land to be dedicated
+ 20% towards the costs of
all off-site improvements,
whch would have been
dedicated.
In 2009, the in-lieu fee amount reflected
a land value cost of $526,918 per acre.
The 2009 in-lieu fees were as follows:
SF detached = $6,829 per du
SF attached = $6,157 per du
Duplex = $5,575 per du;
MF = $4,680 per du
Mobile home = $4,097 per du. Per
municipal code, in-lieu fees scheduld to
increase annually based on the
engineering News Record Construction
Cost index.
Appraised value of land
dedication requirement
times a factor of 1.02
Set by resolution, varies by
zipcode.
VL /Low Density = $11,910 to
$16,691 per du
Med. Density = $8,170 to $11,470
per du
High Density = $7,055 to $9,914
per du
Dwntn, Senior, SN + $5,233/du to
$7,304 per du
ADU = $4,508 to $8,345 per du
https://netorg850508-my.sharepoint.com/personal/jfranklin_keysermarston_com/Documents/Desktop/Summary of Park Requirements of Select Jurisdictions 04 3 25; 8/11/2025 Page 26 DRAFT
Table 13. Parkland Dedication and In-lieu Fee Requirements for Residential Subdivisions and Park Facility Impact Fees Select Peer Jurisdictions
Novato Petaluma Santa Rosa 1 Napa Vallejo San Ramon Concord Park Development Impact
Fee Amount
Novato levies a fee for
Recreation and Cultural
Facilites.
SF unit = $10,354.03 per du;
MF unit = $10, 354.68 per du
ADU = $5,17.34 per du.
Need to clarify fee obligation
for Subdivision projects.
Fee Amount varies by location
SF detached = $14,890 to
$17,314
SF attached = $13,011 to
$14,415
Duplex = $12,843 to $14,230
MF = $11,169 to $12,375
ADUs > 750 sf / MHs = $8,877 to
$9,939
SF detached = $14,315
SF attached = $12,907
Duplex = $11,686
MF = $9,808
Mobile Homes = $8,588
Developers who dedicate land or pay an
in-lieu fee receive a credit against the
park impact fees
Facility Fees:
Subdiv. SF = $5,300 per du
Subdiv. MF = $3,421.63 per
du
Non Subdiv. SF =
$23,951.43 per du
Non Subdiv. MF =
$14,370.86 per du
Set by resolution, varies by
zipcode.
VL /Low Density = $11,910 to
$16,691 per du
Med. Density = $8,170 to $11,470
per du
High Density = $7,055 to $9,914
per du
Dwntn, Senior, SN + $5,233/du to
$7,304 per du
Park Land Acqusition Fee
SF unit = $2,293 per du;
MF unit = $1,551 per du
ADU = $787per du.
Part of Park Develoment Impact
Fee Amount.
All projects:
SF detached = $6,581
SF attached = $4,723
Duplex = $4,884
MF = $4,196
Mobile Homes = $3,462
ADU = $2,293
Land Dedication In-lieu Fee
for Subdivision projects:
SF = Appraised value of 687
sf of land X 1.02
MF = appraised value of 451
sf of land X 1.02
Park Land development
Impact Fee (Applied to All
Residential Development)
SF unit = $7,585 per du;
MF unit = $5,107 per du
ADU = $2,601 per du.
See Park Development Impact
Fee
All projects:
SF detached = $1,003
SF attached = $720
Duplex = $744
MF = $639
Mobile Homes = $528
Commercial Park Land
Acquisition and
Development Impact Fee,
Per 1,000 SF of Gross
Building Area
Commercial = $1,872
Office = $1,789
Industrial = $1,140
1) All residential developments are required to pay the Park Development Impact Fee. If a project dedicates land, the developer receives a partial credit equal to the value of the dedicated land. The per acre land value credit is established by City Ordinance.
https://netorg850508-my.sharepoint.com/personal/jfranklin_keysermarston_com/Documents/Desktop/Summary of Park Requirements of Select Jurisdictions 04 3 25; 8/11/2025 Page 27 DRAFT
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 28
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\001-003.docx
Appendix A:
Inventory of Parks from Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Recent Residential Land Sales in San Rafael, and
Parkland and Recreational Facility Construction Cost Estimates DRAFT
Appendix A Table 1: City Operated Parks by Type and Recreation Provided Park Name
SizeBallfieldBasketball CourtBocce FacilitiesHandball CourtMulti-Use Turf Field (soccer/foot-ball)Par CoursePlaygroundPoolReservablePicnic AreaRestroomTennis CourtWater Feature Community Park
Albert Park 13.34 x x x x
Pickleweed Park 17.60 x x x x x
Terra Linda Park 2.87 x x x x x
Neighborhood Park
Bernard Hoffman Field 3.80 x
Bret Harte Park 0.46 x x x
Freitas Park 2.69 x x x x x
Gerstle Park 6.00 x x x x x
Loch Lomond 3.00 x x
Los Ranchitos Park 3.00 x x x x
Oleander Park 2.28 x
Peacock Gap Park 4.14 x x x x
Santa Margarita Park 5.00 x x x x x
Sun Valley Park 5.00 x x x x
Victor Jones Park 5.96 x x x x x
Pocket Park
Arbor Park 0.30
Beach Park 0.44 x
Hillview Park 0.26
Munson Park 1.46
Oliver Hartzell Park 0.54 x
Riviera Park 0.27 x
Special Use Park
Boyd Memorial Park 1.75 x x
Falkirk Cultural Center Grounds 3.60
Jean and John Starkweather Shoreline Park 21.30 x
Special Use Park - Community Garden
Canal Community Garden 0.35
Terra Linda Community Garden 1.00
Total 106.41 4 7 2 1 1 1 16 1 7 12 6 1
Source: Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Tables 6 and 8
DRAFT
Appendix A Table 2
Residential Land Sales - Marin County
April 2020 - April 2025; Source: CoStar
Property Address Property City Sale Price Sale Date
Est. 2024 price @3
% per year
Land SF
Gross
2024
Price per
SF Transaction Notes
1515 4th Street San Rafael $4,244,799 11/23/2020 $4,638,406 38,981 $119 Project has been approved for 183 independent living, assisted living and memory care units. 930 Irwin / 543 4th St. San Rafael $2,254,073 4/1/2022 $2,391,346 21,963 $109 Proposed 8-story project with 210 units. SB 330 application. Bankruptcy sale. Site is currently improved with a 11,000 sf office building.
815 B Street San Rafael $4,057,560 23,623 $172 41 unit project completed in 2021. 2024 Assessed land value. Avg. unit size is 856 sf. 1230 5th Avenue San Rafael $6,100,000 7/28/2020 $4,350,920 28,358 $153 SB 330 application for 187 residential units. 12 stories. Property is currently improved with a 11,000 sf building. Value reflects 2024 assessed land value.
555 Northgate Drive San Rafael $8,100,000 3/7/2024 $8,100,000 96,703 $84 Property improved with 23,100 sf office building. Max. permitted density is 43.6 du/acre. Application for 250 units due to density bonus
1580 Lincoln Avenue San Rafael $1,150,000 11/3/2020 $1,256,636 18,391 $68 use at time of sale was a retail garden center. Permitted density of 43.6 units per acre.
Loch Lomond Dr San Rafael $24,950,000 4/15/2021 $27,263,539 159,865 $171 The parties involved in this deal could not be reached for comment.
Per public record, this is the sale of 37 residential lots for $24.95 million or about $674k per lot. Part of the Village at Loch Lomond Marina, News reports that 18 detached homes, 14 townhouses and five condominiums will be built. All will be offered for sale at full market value, not low-income. Permit ready.
1010 Grand Ave (Part of
a 2 Property Sale) San Rafael $1,925,000 10/16/2020 $2,166,604 28,314 $77 The 0.65 Acre land was sold for $1,925,000. The property highlights 3 unique property offering represents several opportunities for either owner
users, value add investors or a possible total redevelopment. Very conveniently located just 3 blocks from the San Rafael Transit (Smart Station) and Highway 101 with just a short walk to all amenities and transportation.
508 3rd Street San Rafael $1,850,000 1//2020 $2,082,191 11,974 $174 Purchased for use as a parking lot. 21 G Street San Rafael $1,425,000 4/1/2018 $1,701,525 10,454 $163 Purchased for development of eight townhomes. 1203 Lincoln Avenue San Rafael $5,000,000 3/1/2017 $6,149,369 32,234 $191 Purchased for developmen tof 36 townhomes. Resold in 2018 for $9.375 million for development of senior care home.
Lucas Valley Rd San Rafael $5,600,000 6/30/2021 $6,119,271 417,305 $15 This land in San Rafael, CA was sold on 6/30/2021 by Bacciocco Enterprises LLC for $5.6M, which is $584,551.15 per acre, to The Oak Senior Living LLC. This land had been designated for an assisted living facility with 126 units for senior living and 5 affordable housing units on the almost 9.6 acres along Highway 101. The Oaks Senior Living Community had been approved by the Marin County Board of Supervisors in 2018. All information for this report was provided by public record at the time of this recording.
14 Skylark Dr Larkspur $126,000,000 2/9/2022 $133,673,400 1,022,095 $131 Confirmed by the seller, this is the sale of the leased fee interest in the property.
The seller retains the lease hold interest.
Average $125
Average, weighted by acreage $107
Median $131
Value Used for Calculating Maximum Fee $60
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\Report Tables 08 18 25; SR APX tbl 2; 8/18/2025 Page 30 DRAFT
Appendix A Table 3
Recreation Facility Construction Cost Estimates Prepared for Other Bay Area Park Development Impact Fee Nexus Studies Year of Study Hhld size Regional Reg. Rec Community Neigh Sources Sonoma County Parks Fee 2020 2.3 15 5 2.5 2.5
Regional Rec. Area improvements $93,700
Community Parks $283,000
Neighborhood parks NA
Regional Rec. Area improvements $137,000
Community Parks $413,000
City of Tracy 2024
15-acre Community Park $1,324,887 3.5 - SF 1 3
5-acre Neighborhood Park $1,251,114 2.8 - 2 to 4
15-acre Community Park $1,400,000
5-acre Neighborhood Park $1,320,000
City of South San Francisco 2015
$981,250
$1,650,000 3.45 - SF
2.98 - 2 to 4
2.53 - 5 to 19
2.04 - 20 to 49
50+ - 1.78
mH - 2.65
Inflated to 2025$
Inflated to 2025$
Inflated to 2025$
3 Improvement
Cost per Acre
Improvements based on recommendations
from Group 4 Architect.
Estimates based on recent park construction
and anticipated costs.
Park Acres Standard Per 1,000 Residents
WRT + 10% design and planning, 10%
construction mgmt. and 15% contingency.
Improvement costs are based on cost of 5
parks (26 acres).
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\file1\Sites\Berkeley\SFWP\19\19089\002\Report Tables 08 18 25; SR APX tbl 3; 8/19/2025 Page 31 DRAFT
Appendix A Table 4
American Community Survey, 2023: City of San Rafael Population, Household, Vacancy and Household Size Data San Rafael
Housing Units Population
Avg. hhld size,
Occupied Units
Total Unit
Suppy
Vacant
Units
Vacancy
Rate
Check
Occ
Avg. hhld size
with vacancy
Total 23,250 58,331 2.51 24,212 2.41
Owner Occ 12,042 28,551 2.37 12,151 109.36 0.90% 12042.00 2.35 1 unit 10,464 25,366 2.42 10,559 95.03 0.90% 10464.00 2.40 2 units to 4 282 656 2.33 285 2.56 0.90% 282.00 2.31
5 or more 920 1,599 1.74 928 8.36 0.90% 920.00 1.72
mobile home 326 829 2.54 329 2.96 0.90% 326.00 2.52
Boat/RV, Van, etc. 50 101 2.02 50 0.45 0.90% 50.00 2.00 Ex. Boat, MH 11,666 27,621 2.37 11,772 105.95 0.90% 11666.00 2.35 Renter Occ. 11,208 29,780 2.66 11,460 252.12 2.20% 11208.00 2.60 1 unit 2,425 8,371 3.45 2,480 54.55 2.20% 2425.00 3.38
2 to 4 units 2,452 5,599 2.28 2,507 55.16 2.20% 2452.00 2.23 5 or more 6,274 15,618 2.49 6,415 141.13 2.20% 6274.00 2.43 mobile home 37 79 2.14 38 0.83 2.20% 37.00 2.09
Boat/RV, Van, etc. 20 113 5.65 20 0.45 2.20% 20.00 5.53 Ex, Boat, MH 11,151 29,588 2.65 11,402 250.84 2.20% 11151.00 2.60 Ttl, Ex. B & MH 22,817 57,209 2.51 23,174 357 22,817 2.47 Occupied Owner and Renter Units Owner and Renter With Vacant Units Supply Pop. hhld size Supply Pop. hhld size
23,250 58,331 2.51 23,611 58,331 2.47
1 unit 12,889 33,737 2.62 13,039 33,737 2.59
2 to 4 units 2,734 6,255 2.29 2,792 6,255 2.24
5 or more 7,194 17,217 2.39 7,343 17,217 2.34
mobile 363 908 2.50 367 908 2.48
Boat 70 214 3.06 71 214 3.02
Total, Ex. B & MH 22,817 57,209 2.51 23,174 57,209 2.47 2+ units 9,928 23,472 2.36 10,135 23,472 2.32
DRAFT
Attachment 4
Market Comparison of Development Impact Fees for Residential Development City of San Rafael, CA
Does not include planning and permitting fees.
Townhome 8-story Downtown Source
Tenure Ownership Rental
Density 20 235
Average Unit Size 1,250 813
Estimate Average Number of BRs 2.50 1.75
Number of Units in Project 45 200
Estimated Building Permit Value $277,778 $310,223
Appraised Value of Land Per Acre $2,613,600 $2,613,600
Bldg. Permit Fee, San Rafael
(Estimated)
$12,997 $7,177
Peak Hour Trips Generated/Unit 0.93 0.61
Percent of Site Impervious Surface 70% 90%
Meter Size (Unless specified) 5/8" 5/8"
FEE TYPE
Per Unit San Rafael
(current)
San Rafael
(w/ max park fees) Concord Novato Petaluma San Ramon Santa Rosa
1. Traffic Fees $9,618 $9,618 $2,624 $5,537 $12,222 $11,257 $6,821
2. Parks, Open Space and Recreation Fees $7,050 $21,720 $9,820 $16,928 $7,250 $31,172 $14,053
3. Sewer and Water Connection Fees $23,216 $23,216 $36,548 $32,672 $11,979 $28,786 $9,842
4. Public Facilities/Safety Fees $0 $0 $3,719 $1,925 $5,285 $0 $0
5. School Fees $6,463 $6,463 $6,463 $6,463 $6,463 $6,463 $6,463
6. Other Impact Fees $0 $0 $0 $1,614 $0 $3,295 $0
7. Technology Fees $650 $650 $1,365 $1,300 $0 $876 $56
8. General Plan/Zoning/Other Cost
Recovery Fees $4,549 $4,549 $1,389 $1,300 $0 $1,917 $111 Total, Per Unit $51,545 $66,215 $61,927 $67,738 $43,199 $83,765 $37,345 Average, Per Unit
(excluding San Rafael) $58,795
Strategic Economics (SE)
Strategic Economics (SE)
TOWNHOMES (OWNERSHIP/SUBDIVISION*)
City of San Rafael
KMA, Parks Nexus Study, City of San Rafael
City of San Rafael
City of San Rafael
User's Guide for the California
Impervious Surface Coefficients
Strategic Economics (SE)
KMA estimate based on SE sample projects
KMA estimate based on SE sample projects
Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
FEE TYPE
Per Unit San Rafael
(current)
San Rafael
(w/ max park fees) Concord Novato Petaluma San Ramon Santa Rosa
1. Traffic Fees $7,555 $7,555 $2,624 $5,537 $12,222 $11,257 $6,821
2. Parks, Open Space and Recreation Fees $131 $15,041 $6,269 $17,175 $7,250 $31,172 $11,944
3. Sewer and Water Connection Fees $23,216 $23,216 $35,302 $26,672 $11,773 $21,896 $8,527
4. Public Facilities/Safety Fees $0 $0 $3,719 $1,896 $5,285 $0 $0
5. School Fees $4,203 $4,203 $4,203 $4,203 $4,203 $4,203 $4,203
6. Other Impact Fees $0 $0 $0 $1,469 $0 $3,619 $0
7. Technology Fees $359 $359 $754 $718 $0 $640 $13
8. General Plan/Zoning/Other Cost
Recovery Fees $2,512 $2,512 $1,551 $718 $0 $2,141 $25
Total, Per Unit $37,976 $52,885 $54,421 $58,387 $40,733 $74,928 $31,532 Average, Per Unit
(excluding San Rafael) $52,001
Fees in BLUE are charged by the City of San Rafael
*For the San Rafael rates, the townhome project assumes a sub-division. For agencies that do not have sub-division specific fees, their other park impact fees were applied. 8-STORY DOWNTOWN (RENTAL/NON-SUBDIVISION)
Fees in RED are charged by other agencies
Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
____________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:
Disposition:
Agenda Item No: 4.a
Meeting Date: May 18, 2026
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: City Manager
Prepared by: Angela Robinson Piñon, Assistant City
Manager City Manager Approval: __________
TOPIC: SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT SEPARATION AGREEMENT SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A SEPARATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(B)(3) AND 15378
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Separation Agreement between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Sanitation District (District), establishing terms and conditions related to the transition of District operations from City-supported staffing and administrative services to the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA).
BACKGROUND:
The San Rafael Sanitation District (District) is a separate public agency formed under the California Health and Safety Code, Paragraph 4700 et. seq., and the County Sanitation District Act of 1923, and provides sanitary sewer services to portions of the City of San Rafael and the County of Marin. For many years, the City of San Rafael (City) has provided staffing, administrative support, operational coordination, and facility use to assist the District in carrying out its responsibilities.
The District is a member of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA) Joint Powers Authority for wastewater-related services, and has been since 1979. CMSA also provides similar services to the Ross Valley Sanitary District and Sanitary District #2 of Marin County.
The District has determined that transitioning to an operational model would better position it to recruit and retain employees and manage its operations directly. To implement that change, on February 20, 2026, the District authorized a Management and Operations Services Agreement with CMSA, which would assume certain operational responsibilities and hire employees currently assigned to District functions. Prior to the SRSD Board taking action, on February 10, 2026, the CMSA Board authorized entering into the Management and Services Agreement with the District.
As a result of this transition, the City and District have negotiated a Separation Agreement to clearly define responsibilities, timelines, financial obligations, records transfers, property access, and coordination measures associated with the separation.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
ANALYSIS:
The proposed Separation Agreement is the culmination of a policy and operational transition initiated by the District to establish an independent operating structure separate from the City’s longstanding support model.
Historically, the City has provided staffing, administrative support, access to facilities, and operational coordination to assist SRSD in carrying out its sewer collection responsibilities. While this structure has supported service delivery for many years, SRSD has identified organizational recruitment, retention, and management considerations that it believes are better addressed through a dedicated wastewater operations model. The Separation Agreement provides the legal and administrative framework for implementing that transition in an orderly manner.
On February 20, 2026, the SRSD Board took formal action authorizing an Operations and Management Services Agreement with the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA), establishing CMSA as SRSD’s future service provider subject to implementation conditions. This action signaled the District’s intent to proceed with an operational transition and required the City and the District to finalize related separation terms.
The proposed Separation Agreement advances several important City interests:
1. Protects Continuity of Essential Public Services: Wastewater collection and emergency response functions are critical public health services. The agreement requires both parties to use good-faith efforts to avoid service disruptions during the transition, including coordination on records, system access, facilities, and communications.
2. Clarifies Financial Responsibilities: The agreement allocates responsibility for outstanding and transitional financial matters, including pension liabilities, accrued leave payouts, overhead costs through the transition date, and reimbursement of certain District-held replacement funds. Clear delineation of these obligations reduces future disputes and protects the City's fiscal interests.
3. Reduces Ongoing City Administrative Burden: Following the effective date, the City would no longer be responsible for providing payroll, human resources, digital services, and other overhead support to the District, except as specifically required for closeout activities. This will allow City staff to focus more fully on municipal priorities.
4. Minimizes Legal and Operational Uncertainty: Without a formal agreement, transition issues involving property access, record ownership, employee cost allocation, infrastructure use, and liability exposure could remain unresolved. The proposed agreement establishes clear terms, timelines, indemnification provisions, and dispute resolution procedures to minimize uncertainty.
Policy Considerations
Approval of the agreement does not dissolve the District. Rather, it formalizes the end of the City’s administrative support role and recognizes the District’s decision to enter into an operational agreement with CMSA.
Effective Date and Implementation Timing
The Separation Agreement does not become operative immediately upon City Council approval. Instead, the agreement provides that it becomes effective on the same date as the CMSA Management and Operations Services Agreement.
This structure is significant because it links the separation timeline directly to the District’s readiness to transition operations to its new service provider. In practical terms, the City’s current support role would remain in place until CMSA is prepared to assume responsibilities under its separate agreement with the District. This helps avoid operational gaps, staffing uncertainty, or interruptions to critical wastewater SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
collection services.
Using a contingent effective date also benefits both agencies by:
• Ensuring continuity of service until a successor operating model is fully ready to begin; • Providing administrative certainty for payroll, staffing, records transfer, and financial reconciliations;
• Aligning obligations between agreements so the City’s transition responsibilities correspond with CMSA’s commencement of services;
• Reducing the risk of premature separation before operational capacity is in place; and • Allowing coordinated public communication regarding new contacts, responsibilities, and service processes.
Once the CMSA agreement becomes effective, the District must promptly notify the City. This approach reflects a practical transition model that prioritizes uninterrupted public service while providing a clear legal trigger for implementation of all separation terms.
Notice to Affected Bargaining Units
Notice of the proposed San Rafael Sanitation District Separation Agreement was provided to all impacted bargaining units.
Conclusion
Approval of the Separation Agreement is consistent with the City Council’s Three-Year Strategic Plan, specifically Objective F.2.5, which focuses on strengthening the City’s organizational effectiveness, service delivery systems, and long-term operational sustainability. The proposed separation agreement was also included in the City’s fiscal year (FY) 2025-26 Work Plan.
Staff believes the proposed Separation Agreement represents a practical and balanced framework that protects City interests, supports uninterrupted public service, and provides a clear roadmap for implementation of the District’s governance and operations model. For these reasons, the staff recommends approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Approval of the Separation Agreement is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it involves organizational and administrative activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable physical change in the environment. Also, it has been determined that this resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to 14 CCR Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this resolution would have a significant effect on the environment.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
The City and the District will coordinate to ensure the public is informed about service changes, including updated contact information and agency responsibilities following the separation. The City will allow the District to provide sewer-related informational materials at City facilities. Each agency will be responsible for its own outreach efforts and associated costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The agreement is intended to resolve outstanding financial obligations between the parties and to transfer future costs to the District or its new service provider, except where otherwise specified.
Potential fiscal impacts include:
• Reimbursement of administrative and support service costs through the effective date • Payment by the District of unfunded pension liability amounts as determined by the retirement system.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
• Reimbursement of certain District-held replacement funds • City's responsibility for accrued leave payouts pursuant to applicable agreements These aforementioned impacts will be addressed as part of the proposed FY 2026-27 Budget.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Separation Agreement between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Sanitation District (District), establishing terms and conditions related to the transition of District operations from City-supported staffing and administrative services to the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA).
OPTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution approving the Separation Agreement.
2. Direct staff to return with modifications.
3. Decline to adopt the resolution approving the Separation Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Separation Agreement between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Sanitation District 1 RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A SEPARATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT; CEQA DETERMINATION: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(B)(3) AND 15378
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Sanitation District (District) is an independent public agency that provides sanitary sewer services within portions of the City of San Rafael and surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael has historically provided staffing, administrative, and operational support services to the District; and
WHEREAS, the City and District have negotiated a Separation Agreement establishing terms related to facilities, staffing transition, financial obligations, records, property access, public communication, and service continuity; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Separation Agreement is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it involves organizational and administrative activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable physical change in the environment, and it has been determined that this resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to 14 CCR Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this resolution would have a significant effect on the environment; and; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that approving the Separation Agreement is in the public interest and will provide an orderly transition of responsibilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael finds the foregoing recitals true and correct, approves the Separation Agreement between the City of San Rafael and the San Rafael Sanitation District in substantially the form presented to the City Council, Authorizes the Mayor to execute the Agreement, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, and authorizes staff to take all administrative actions necessary to implement the Agreement.
I, LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 18th day of May 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
__________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
1 San Rafael Sanitation District Separation Agreement
Between
City of San Rafael
And
San Rafael Sanitation District
This Agreement between the City of San Rafael (City), a municipal corporation, and the San Rafael Sanitation District (District), a duly organized and existing Sanitation District under the laws of the State of California (State) (collectively referred to herein as Parties):
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the District is a separate public agency formed pursuant to the Health and Safety Code, Paragraph 4700 et. seq., and the County Sanitation District Act of 1923 and provides sanitary sewer services to portions of the City of San Rafael and the County of Marin, and WHEREAS, the District is a member of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA) Joint Powers Authority for wastewater-related services and has been since 1979, and CMSA also provides similar services to the Ross Valley Sanitary District, and the Sanitary District #2 of Marin County, and
WHEREAS, the District intends to execute a Management and Operations Services Agreement for sanitary sewer collection system services of the District with CMSA and does not intend to dissolve or change the roles and responsibilities of the District Board by the separation from the City, and WHEREAS, the City has, pursuant to a CMSA Joint Powers Agreement dated October 15, 1969, and November 5, 1969, as well as subsequent amendments thereto, including but not limited to the First Amendment dated December 17, 1984, and Second Amendment dated March 4, 1985, provided for various services including but not limited to staff and administrative services to the District, and
WHEREAS, the City has also provided certain facilities supporting the District sanitary sewer collection system staffing, operations, and equipment at the Morphew Street Public Works Corporation Yard (Yard), and
WHEREAS, the District has directly purchased and owns all collection system operation furniture, equipment, and materials at the Yard, and
WHEREAS, the District has determined that to improve the District’s ability to hire and retain employees, the District will best be served by separating the District from the City, and WHEREAS, the District has negotiated a separate Management and Operations Services Agreement (CMSA Agreement) with CMSA to hire all City employees who are currently assigned to the District and to provide all sanitary sewer collection system responsibilities and services to the customers of the District following the Effective Date of the CMSA Agreement, and 2 WHEREAS, CMSA has agreed to hire City employees previously assigned to the District as District Manager/Engineer (SRSD), Principal Civil Engineer, Associate Civil Engineer, Assistant Engineer, Inspector (Construction), Operations & Maintenance Manager, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor, Sewer Lead Maintenance Worker, Sewer Maintenance Worker II, Sewer Maintenance Worker I, Administrative Assistant II, and Administrative Analyst upon satisfaction of certain preemployment requirements and acceptance of CMSA's Offers of Employment, and WHEREAS, the City prefers that the District relinquish the space currently utilized at the Public Works Corporation Yard (Yard) within three months of the effective date of this Agreement, and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to identify and memorialize the conditions of the separation of the District from the City, and
WHEREAS, many of the administrative services provided by the City to the District are currently shared with other support activities of the City, and
WHEREAS, the District and the City hereby agree to work cooperatively to minimize the public impacts on City or District services during the separation processes outlined herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and the District hereby agree to the following conditions that shall apply to the separation of the District from the City:
1. Service Continuity. The District and City agree to use good faith efforts to ensure continuity of District operations for minimal disruption to services of either agency during the separation process.
2. Removal of District Property. The District will provide a full list and photographs of District furniture, computers, equipment, and materials owned by the District before removing those items from the Yard. These items will be removed no later than three months after the Effective Date of this Agreement.
3. Storage of District Property. As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the District agrees not to store any equipment on any other City property after six months following the Effective Date of this Agreement, excluding the antennas at the Yard, at the Dollar Ridge and San Pedro Ridge in section 4 below.
4. Licenses. The Parties recognize that it is in each party’s best interest to allow certain equipment, structure, and/or improvements of the other party to remain on the other Party’s property after the Effective Date of this Agreement, and in consideration of the aforementioned interest, the following licenses will be granted:
a. Canal Community Gardens. The District will grant to the City a license to the property located at the southwest corner of Bellam Blvd. and Windward Way, San Rafael (APN 009- 280-08) for the purpose of accessing, constructing, installing, inspecting, repairing, reconstructing, replacing, operating, upgrading, and maintaining the Canal Community Gardens. In the event that the City no longer desires to continue the Canal Community Gardens 3 as determined in the sole discretion of the City, the City will remove the Canal Community Gardens within one month of written notice to the District, and this license shall terminate upon the complete removal of all items related to the Community Garden, including but not limited to the planter boxes, irrigation and vegetables and vegetation, as well as any improvement added by the City on or after the Effective Date of the Agreement so as to restore the lot as depicted in the photograph, attached hereto as Exhibit A, minus the naturally occurring shrubbery as depicted in the photo, unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties in writing. The District and the City will enter into a separate license. b. Infrastructure Towers. The City will grant to the District a license to the properties located at Dollar Ridge (top of Robert Dollar Drive) and San Pedro Ridge (near the Nike missile silo at Bayhills Drive) for the purpose of accessing, constructing, installing, inspecting, repairing, reconstructing, replacing, operating, upgrading, and forever maintaining SRSD’s equipment on the current towers. If the District no longer requires the use of either infrastructure tower, as determined in the sole discretion of the District, the District will remove its equipment on said infrastructure tower, and the license associated with that infrastructure tower shall terminate upon the complete removal of the District’s equipment. c. Antenna. The City grants to the District a license to the Yard for the purpose of accessing, installing, inspecting, repairing, reconstructing, replacing, operating, upgrading, and maintaining the antenna to support District-installed servers at the Yard. Upon removal of the District’s servers, the District shall promptly remove the antenna and, in any event, no later than thirty (30) days after the removal of the servers or six months of the Effective Date of this Agreement, whichever is earlier. This license shall terminate upon complete removal of the antenna.
d. Miscellaneous License. The City grants to the District a license for the purpose of accessing and removing all other District equipment, supplies, documents and things, which are allowed to remain on City property after the Effective Date of this Agreement as set forth in this Agreement.
e. Terms and Conditions for the Licenses Granted by City to District. The licenses described above in sub-sections b-d shall be subject to the following terms and conditions:
i. The City grants the license subject to any and all licenses, leases, easements, conditions, restrictions, covenants, encumbrances, liens and claims of title which may affect the site of the license and the City reserves the right to use the site subject to the license in any manner, provided that such use does not unreasonably interfere with rights granted herein to the District.
ii. The District shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, release, defend with counsel approved by the City, and hold harmless the City its officers, agents, employees and volunteers (collectively, the "City Indemnitees"), from and against any claim, demand, suit, judgment, loss, liability or expense of any kind, including but not limited to reasonable attorney's fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation, (collectively "Claims"), arising out of District or its agents, officials or employee’s use of the applicable site. In the event the City Indemnitees are made a 4 party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the District’s use of the license, the District shall provide a defense to the City Indemnitees or, at the City’s option, reimburse the City Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred in defense of such claims. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, insurance, and shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.
5. City’s Permitting System. Subject to any applicable agreements, including software licenses that the City may have related to OpenGov, the City agrees to allow District staff or CMSA staff, upon hiring by CMSA, to allow log-in access to the City’s permitting system, such as OpenGov or any other system used by the City in the future, as approvers and commenters on San Rafael Permits for Community and Economic Development and Public Works or their successors.
6. Sewer Easements. The City agrees to transfer property rights related to sewer easements as needed to the District. The parties will cooperate in identifying those aforementioned rights and preparing the necessary documents to effectuate such transfer for City consideration and approval. The District will reimburse the City for any third-party costs associated with transferring said property rights to the District.
7. The following terms have been agreed to by the Parties regarding the separation of the District from the City:
a. Unfunded Pension Liability.
i. The District agrees to remit the value of unfunded pension liability, as determined by the Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association (MCERA), at each transferred employee’s proposed new rate of pay at CMSA. ii. Such payment will be made directly to City no later than 60 days following MCERA’s determination of the value of the unfunded pension liability. b. Post Employment Benefits.
i. The City agrees to fulfill any and all its contractual obligations for City retirees who were assigned to the District.
ii. The District agrees that the District beneficiary assets in the Other PostEmployment Benefits (OPEB) trust be retained by the City. c. City Administrative and Support Services. The District is responsible for payment of overhead for human resources, payroll and digital services (“Overhead Services”) through the Effective Date of this Agreement. Any amounts owed by the District (or refund owed by the City) for Overhead Services rendered prior to the Effective Date of the Agreement or after the Effective Date of the Agreement due to the employment of SRSD assigned employees prior to the Effective Date of the Agreement, (e.g., payroll) shall be paid within thirty days following the posting of payroll charges for the pay 5 period which includes the Effective Date of this Agreement, or pay interest on the amount for each day thereafter. . The City will cease to provide Overhead Services, and the District’s obligations to pay for Overhead Services will terminate, following the Effective Date of this Agreement.
d. Unused Vacation and Sick Leave. Upon a City employee’s separation from the City, the City hereby agrees to pay the value of vacation and sick leave balances for those employees in accordance with the City’s applicable MOU and other applicable policies and procedures. The City agrees to provide the District the final aggregate amount of the payouts made to all District assigned employees who separated from the City within five (5) days of the payments.
e. City Reimbursements for Funds held on Behalf of District. The City agrees to reimburse the District, within 60 days of the Effective Date of the agreement,any remaining fund balances held by the City in the following funds as of the Effective Date of this agreement:
i. MERA replacement funds
ii. Computer replacement fund
f. Use of City Vehicle Maintenance Facilities. The District agrees not to utilize the City Vehicle Maintenance Facilities for repairs and maintenance of District vehicles following the Effective Date of this Agreement unless both parties enter into a separate written services agreement.
g. Department of Public Works Record Drawings. The District will be permitted to make electronic copies, at its expense, of all electronic-only record drawings affecting District sanitary sewer assets and facilities. The District will be permitted to remove any hard copy drawings solely related to District. The District agrees to provide the City with at least five business days’ notice of its intent to remove the hard copy drawings and to permit the City to make a copy of the drawings at the City expense.
The City shall complete the copying within 10 business days following the District notice.
h. District Records and Documents. Within six months of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the District shall identify and remove all historical District records and documents associated with the operation of the District and its Board of Directors from City facilities.
i. City GIS System. The City agrees to allow the District to consolidate District GIS data into the City GIS system. The parties agree to enter into a separate written agreement for the management and operation of this GIS application. j. Sanitary Sewer Discharges. The District affirms that it, and not the City, has the role and responsibility under the Sanitation District Act for all responses, protection of the public, and Water of the State documentation, and reporting and cleanup remains with 6 the District following separation from the City for any sewage-related spills or discharges. The District agrees that it will continue to promptly notify City-designated persons when any spill or discharge reaches City storm water assets or Waters of the State of California or impacts City assets or facilities. k. Private Sewer Laterals. The District agrees that it will continue to be the lead agency for private sewer lateral actions and activities impacting the public right-of-way within the District jurisdiction. The City shall be responsible for its sewer laterals from City public facilities, buildings, parks, and other City-owned connections to District sewer mains.
l. Public Outreach. The Parties will work cooperatively to adjust and modify information necessary for the public to understand the changes and impacts, including new contact information and new roles and responsibilities of each agency following the separation. The City agrees to allow the District to provide sewer-related materials for the public at City facilities. Each Party shall be responsible for its own public outreach expenses associated with these changes.
m. Separation Expenses. Each Party will be responsible for its own costs related to this separation that are not otherwise provided for in this agreement.
8. Effective Date of Separation Agreement. This Agreement shall become effective on the date that the CMSA Management and Operations Service Agreement becomes effective (“Effective Date”). Upon the CMSA Agreement becoming effective, the District shall promptly deliver notice to the City that the CMSA Agreement has become effective, although failure to deliver such notice shall not alter the Effective Date of this Agreement.
9. Dispute Resolution. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, the Parties agree to mediate the dispute and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator. Neither Party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be paid equally by the Parties. If a mediated settlement is reached, neither Party shall be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of the settlement and each Party shall bear its own legal costs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this provision does not apply to any claims or lawsuits related to enforcing the District’s obligations set forth in Section 4e.ii.
10. Venue, Attorneys’ Fees. Any suit or action initiated by either Party shall be brought in Marin County, California.
11. Entire Agreement -- Amendments. The terms and conditions of this Agreement represent the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. This written Agreement shall supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No other agreement, promise or statement, written or oral, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be valid or binding, except by way of a written amendment to this Agreement.
7 12. Severability. If any provisions of this Agreement are held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if such remainder would continue to serve the purposes and objectives originally contemplated by the parties.
13. Remedies, Choice of Law. No remedy or election exercised hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.
14. Force Majeure. Any provision, delay, or stoppage which is due to strikes, labor disputes, inability to obtain labor, materials, equipment or reasonable substitutes therefor, acts of God, governmental restrictions or requisitions or controls, judicial orders, enemy or hostile government actions, civil commotion, fire or other casualty, epidemics or pandemics, gubernatorial orders, or other causes beyond reasonable control of the Party obligated to perform hereunder, shall excuse performance by such party for a period equal to the duration of such prevention, delay, or stoppage.
15. Binding Authority of Signatories. Each of the signatories below represents and warrants that he/ she possesses full legal authority to contract for and legally bind his/her respective public entity to this Agreement and all its terms/provisions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day, month, and year first above written.
SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
__________________________________ _______________________ Vice Chair Kate Colin
Mayor, City of San Rafael
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kerry Gerchow, Deputy County Counsel Rob Epstein, City Attorney Exhibit A: Community Garden Photograph
8 EXHIBIT A
Picture of the Community Garden From Approximately 2011 ____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:
Disposition:
Agenda Item No: 4.b
Meeting Date: May 18, 2026
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Finance
Prepared by: Paul Navazio,
Interim City Manager
Shawn Plate, Finance Manager
Van Bach, Accounting Manager
City Manager Approval: ___________
TOPIC: PRELIMINARY CITYWIDE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY CITYWIDE PROPOSED BUDGET AND PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive report related to the Preliminary Citywide Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and provide direction to staff to inform preparation of the Final Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget for adoption at the City Council meeting of June 15, 2026.
SUMMARY:
This report presents the preliminary proposed citywide budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27. This item represents the next step in the development of the City’s FY 2026-27 budget and is intended to provide the City Council with the opportunity to preview the overall proposed budget as well as specific funding recommendations prior to staff preparing the final FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget for adoption by the City Council at their meeting of June 15.
The budget is both a spending plan for the City’s available financial resources and the legal authority for City departments to spend these resources for public purposes. It is through these resources that programs and services are provided, and capital investments are made to meet the needs of the community. As a result, in addition to considering the constraints imposed by current and projected resources available to meet these needs, the annual budget and multi-year capital plan are aligned with the updated City Council Goals and Objectives as well as existing fiscal policies approved by the City Council.
To balance these objectives, the budget supporting ongoing operations and service levels must be funded largely through recurring revenues, while non-recurring expenditures, one-time projects and capital investments are funded through a combination of recurring and one-time funding sources as well as available fund balances identified for specific projects and initiatives.
Another guiding objective of the annual budget development process is to ensure the sustainability of City programs and services through the three to five year planning horizon to PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 2 ensure that service levels and community needs can continue to be met in the future; and that the FY 2026-27 budget does not compromise the City’s long-term fiscal condition.
The Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 All Funds budget reflects expenditure appropriations of $209,638,535, including operations ($181,896,986), capital ($18,421,000) and transfers ($9,320,549). This level of expenditure appropriations, representing an increase of 9.1% over the original FY 2025-26 adopted budget, is supported through a combination of FY 2026-27 revenues ($200,974,890), transfers ($9,320,549) and available fund balances.
The Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 budget supports an authorized staffing level of 419.55 416.15 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions, representing an increase of 3.45 FTE from the level authorized FY 2025-26 Final Budget.
The Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 General Fund budget reflects recommended appropriations of $113,728,073, supporting ongoing General Fund operational expenditures as well as selected one-time funding needs and transfers. This level of appropriations is supported through projected FY 2026-27 revenues of $109,703,266 as well as use of available one-time assigned fund balance of $4,100,00. Expenditures for City programs and services supported by the General Fund are proposed to increase by 1.6% (excluding transfers) over the levels provided for in the FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget.
Overall, the appropriations included in the Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 budget, as presented herein, are within the City’s constitutional GANN spending limit.
This staff report will focus on the following key areas:
1) Update on FY 2025-26 revenues and expenditures through Q3 (March 31, 2026) 2) Preliminary Proposed Budget for FY 2026-27
a) All Funds Summary
b) General Fund
c) Selected Other Funds
3) Proposed Capital Improvement Program Budget for FY 2026-27 City Council Goals and Objectives – In conjunction with the adoption of the FY 2025/26 adopted City Council adopted its Three-year (FY 2025/26 – FY 2027/28) Goals and Objectives organized around strategic policy areas. This strategic policy document serves to guide development of the annual operating and capital budget.
Concurrent with the development of this budget, staff has been developing complimentary FY 2026-27 departmental workplans supporting the Goals and Objectives established through the City Council’ strategic plan. The funding recommendations included in the Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget are intended to ensure that available resources are allocated in support of key initiatives projects aligned with the City Council stated priorities, while maintaining service levels for baseline city programs, services, and operations.
ANALYSIS:
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 3 CURRENT BUDGET – FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 THIRD QUARTER UPDATE All Funds
Table 1 provides current year (FY 2025-26) revenue and expenditure results through the third quarter of the fiscal year, ending March 31, 2026.
• All Funds revenues through the third quarter were recorded at $132.82 million, which represented 66.9% of the amended budget of $198.44 million. • All Funds expenditures and encumbrances for the same period were recorded at $146.52 million, or 71% of the amended FY 2024-25 budget of $232.79 million.
Table 1:
All Funds Revenue and Expenditure Results (through 3/31/26) General Fund
Revenues: The original FY 2025-26 budget, adopted on June 2, 2025, projected $106.39 million in revenues. The Mid-Year Budget Update presented on March 2, 2026, projected year-end General Fund revenues of $107.3 million.
• Revenue results through the third quarter of the fiscal year were recorded at $63.85 million, or 59.7% of the amended budget.
• Based on results through the third quarter, year-end General Fund revenue projections have been updated to $109.39 million, or $2.5 million (1.91%) above the FY 2025-26 amended budget figure. This reflects continued strength in sales tax receipts through the 3rd quarter, exceeding the levels projected following the mid-year update. • Current year revenues continued to show favorable variances in sales tax (including Measure E and Measure R), property transfer tax, and transient occupancy tax.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 4 Expenditures: The FY 2025-26 adopted budget provided expenditure appropriations of $114.03 million. The current amended FY 2025-26 General Fund budget stands at $116.15 million, reflecting encumbered carryforwards and budget amendments approved since July 1, 2025. • Expenditures and encumbrances through the third quarter of the fiscal year were recorded at $88.73 million, or 76.4% of the amended budget.
• Based on these results, General Fund expenditures are projected to end the fiscal year at $117.85 million, or $1.70 million (1.5%) above the amended budget. • Consistent with the results presented in the Mid-Year Budget Update the City is facing a budget deficit of $1.70 million due to the personnel costs trending roughly $2.7 million over budget; non-personnel expenditures continue to trend $1.7 million under budget.
Operating results: Due to better than expected revenue results through the 3rd quarter – buoyed by sales tax receipts – the General fund is expected to end the year with a favorable ($0.80 million variance relative to the amended budget.
Table 2:
FY 2025-26 General Fund Results (through 3/31/26) and Year-End Projections While this forecast suggests a modest level of additional one-time budget capacity, the FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget reflected in this report does not rely on this result, Consideration of allocating any available year-end surplus should be deferred until fiscal year-end when final actual revenue and expenditure results are reported.
Specific funding recommendations related to use of available fund balances are contained in the discussion of the Preliminary Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget.
Adopted Amended Year-To-Date % of Amended
FY 2025-26 FY2025-26 Actuals FY 2025-26 Year-End
Budget Budget (Mar) Encumb. Budget Projection $ %
Revenues $ 106.39 $ 106.89 $ 63.85 59.7% 109.39 $ $ 2.50 2.3% Expenditures $ 114.03 $ 116.15 $ 86.64 $ 2.09 76.4% 117.85 $ $ 1.70 1.5% Net $ (7.64) $ (9.26) $ (22.79) $ (8.46) $ 0.80
FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget Projections
as of 3/31/26
(Dollars in $M)
Year-End
Variance
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 5 PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 CITYWIDE BUDGET
FY 2026-27 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Citywide Budget: The total proposed FY 2026-27 expenditure budget for the City is $209,638,535. These appropriations are supported by FY 2026-27 revenue and other sources projected at $210,295,440, as well as by fund balances retained from previous periods for capital projects and priority initiatives (Attachment 1, Exhibit I). The proposed FY 2026-27 appropriations reflect all new funding appropriations proposed for operations, capital projects and debt service. These appropriations do not include current year funding that is anticipated to be carried-forward from FY 2025-26 through roll-over of year-end encumbrances as well as carry-over of unencumbered capital project funding that will require separate City Council action early in the new fiscal year. General Fund Budget: The proposed FY2026-27 General Fund budget includes recommended appropriations of $113,728,073 representing an increase of $479,226 (0.5%) over the prior year’s adopted budget. The proposed General Fund budget is supported by estimated General Fund revenues ($108,389,440), transfers-in ($1,313,826), and available fund balance ($4,100,000).
Summary of Funding Recommendations
General Fund
The City’s General Fund supports most of the major services to residents and businesses (such as police, fire suppression and prevention, planning, building, library, parks, streets, engineering, traffic enforcement, cultural programs and administration). The General Fund appropriations for FY 2026-27 total approximately $113.73 million. These appropriations comprise $106.15 million of operating expenditures, $7.58 million in transfers to other funds.
Table 3 summarizes the information provided in Exhibit II and presents the proposed FY 2026-27 budget with a comparison to the projected FY 2025-26 budget. The table presents the year-overyear change in revenues and expenses, as these are key metrics.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 6 Table 3:
Comparison of FY 2025-26 Adopted and FY 2026-27 Proposed General Fund Budget Revenues and transfers available to support the FY 2026-27 General Fund budget are projected to be $3.31 million (3.1%) higher than the FY 2025-26 adopted budget. This is mainly due to conservative projected growth in major revenue items such as property tax and transient occupancy tax, revenue growth within sales and transient occupancy taxes.
The Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget operating expenditures within the General Fund represent an increase of $1.61 million (1.5%) over the prior year’s adopted budget. Most of this increase is due to personnel costs consistent with terms of collective bargaining agreements with all of the City’s represented and unrepresented bargaining groups. General Fund personnel costs are anticipated to increase by approximately $1.0 million, while non-personnel costs are increasing by $0.6 million. The FY2026-27 Proposed Budget also includes an estimated $2.85 million in salary savings, based on a 3.5% vacancy factor built into the FY 2026-27 General Fund operating budget.
The FY 2026-27 Proposed budget includes a limited amount of funding augmentations, summarized below. These include funding proposals related to the pending amended Services Agreement with Marinwood Community Services District related to provision of Fire/EMS services, establishing relief staffing within the San Rafael Fire Department to reduce overtime utilization and modest recurring funding allocations to address organizational initiatives and support special events (previously supported via one-time funding allocations). Also included in the budget proposal is a reallocation of contract services funding (formerly supporting the Downtown Streets Team) to hire two Parks Maintenance positions and transition Downtown cleaning and maintenance to services provided in-house.
General Fund
Adopted FY 2025-26 $ Change from
previous year
% Change from
previous year
Baseline
Balancing
Measures
Funding
Augmentations
Proposed FY26-27
Budget
Revenues $ 104,030,362 $ 107,972,440 527,000 $ (110,000) $ 108,389,440 Transfers-In $ 2,360,493 $ 1,113,826 200,000 $ 1,313,826 Total Resources $ 106,390,855 $ 109,086,266 527,000 $ (110,000) 109,703,266 $ 3,312,411 3.1% Expenditures $ 104,538,430 $ 106,632,996 (1,023,000) 535,550 106,145,546 $ 1,607,116 1.5% Transfers-Out $ 8,710,417 3,482,527 4,100,000 7,582,527 $ (1,127,890) -12.9% Total Uses $ 113,248,847 $ 110,115,523 (1,023,000) 4,635,550 113,728,073 $ 479,226 0.4% Net Results $ (6,857,992) $ (1,029,257) 1,550,000 $ 4,745,550 (4,024,807) 109,628,073 Use of Prior Period Funds
Liability Fund - Premiums/Claims 2,500,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 Capital Fund - Future CIP Projects 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Operating Support (Merrydale 50% match) 500,000 500,000 Capital Fund - Paving Streets/Roads 1,000,000
Vehicle Replacement - Replenish Fund 1,000,000
6,000,000 4,100,000 4,100,000 (1,900,000)
Net of Use of Prior Period Funds $ (857,992) $ (1,029,257) $ 75,193 Proposed FY2026-27
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 7 General Fund FY 26-27 New Expenditure Recommendations
In addition, the FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget includes recommended transfers-out from the General Fund to support other funds that have been historically underfunded, support programs and services funded through various special revenue, capital and internal service funds as well as allocation of available General Fund excess fund balance previously assigned for specific purposes, as follows:
Use of Prior Period Funds (Fund Balance):
• Merrydale Interim Shelter Operations $ 500,000
• Liability / Self-Insurance Fund 1,600,000
• Capital Projects Fund 2,000,000
$4,100,000
The appropriations are supported by $109.7 million in projected revenues and transfers from other funds. The $1.31 million of transfers include:
• $650,000 from Gas Tax Fund to reimburse street maintenance personnel costs • $463,826 from Parking Services Fund to cover administrative support costs • $200,000 from the Measure C (Wildfire Prevention) Fund to cover allowable administrative support costs
General Fund Revenue Expense Total (Net)
Recurring
Marinwood - Contribution $ 350,000
Marinwood - Chief Officer $ (110,000)
$ 460,000
SRFD Relief Positions 661,380
(562,830)
98,550
Together San Rafael Initiative(s) 12,000
Employee Recognition (event) 25,000
37,000
Special Events - Sponsorships 50,000
50,000
Downtown - Clean-up/Maint 200,000
Reallocation of Contract Services (200,000)
$ -
$ (110,000) $ 535,550 $ 645,550
One-Time
Merrydale Operating Contrib. $ 500,000
Transfer to Capital Fund (401) 2,000,000
Transfer to Liability Fund 1,600,000
$ 4,100,000
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 8 FY2026-27 General Fund Balancing Measures
In order to address the FY2026/27 baseline General Fund deficit of $1.04 million, as well as support the funding recommendations summarized above, a total of $1.75 million in General Fund balancing measures are included in the Proposed Budget. To include selected citywide proposals ($927,000) as well as departmental expenditure reductions, as follows:
OPEB Pre-funding – a savings of $477,000 is realized through transitioning citywide funding related to Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) from the historical “pay-go” approach to prefunding based on actuarial determined contribution levels which take advantage of funding setaside by the City in the Section 115 Trust Fund established years ago through the CalPERS Employee Retirement Benefit Trust (CERBT) fund.
Reduction in Citywide Contingency Funds – The FY2026/27 budget proposes a 25% reduction in the unappropriated contingency historically included in past budgets, resulting in a savings of $250,000. This reduction is being proposed in light of efforts made as part of this year’s budget process to address several areas of historical under-funding of baseline operating costs. With funding increased within departmental baseline operating budgets for utilities and internal services charges, this warrants an off-setting reduction in unallocated contingency funding.
MWPA (Measure C) Administrative Costs – The Proposed Budget includes a recommendation to recover allowable administrative overhead costs associated with the City’s implementation of programs funded through Measure C. This recovery is estimated at $200,000, and offsets General Fund support for programmed activities and projects.
Departmental Expenditure Reductions – A total of $823,000 in departmental expenditure reductions are proposed as part of the FY2026/27 budget. These include reductions in contract services totaling $340,000, personnel reductions (including elimination of 2.0 positions) totaling $393,000 and funding re-allocations (to other funds) of $90,000.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 9 Revenue Trends and Assumptions:
Property Tax:
Property-related taxes are currently projected to increase by 3.9 percent over the original FY 2025-26 budget, to a total of $28.9 million. The increase is primarily due to growth in the overall property tax roll as well as an increase in projected property transfer tax. Property tax-related revenues account for 27 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues.
Sales and Transaction & Use Tax:
Overall sales and transaction and use taxes are expected to increase 4.2 percent in comparison to levels assumed in the FY2025-26 budget. FY 2025-26 sales tax revenues have exceeded original projections and staff are budgeting a 2.2 percent increase from current projected FY 2025- 26 level. Sales taxes account for approximately 24 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues.
Revenues from the Measure E Transactions & Use Tax, which applies to most local retail sales, are estimated to increase by 4.2 percent to $15.2 million. Consistent with the direction provided by the City Council in May of 2014, the additional one-quarter percent sales tax revenues provided by Measure E, effective April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2034, are dedicated to funding major construction and improvements to public safety facilities (also referred to as the San Rafael Essential Facilities project). Measure E revenues account for about 14 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues.
Revenues from the Measure R Transactions & Use Tax are projected to generate $5.1 million and represent about 5 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues. Altogether, sales and use taxes comprise 43 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues.
Other General Fund Revenues:
Other revenues (including Business Tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, development fees, permits, and charges for services) are projected to show an increase of 4 percent when compared to the prior year’s budget. The major contributors to this increase in year-over-year revenues are permits and licenses, and charges for services. San Rafael is undergoing a wave of development activity that is projected to result in increased permits, licenses, and service fee revenues as a result.
Expenditure Trends and Assumptions:
The expenditure growth reflected in the FY 2026-27 Proposed budget stems primarily from increased personnel costs of $4.9 million (4.6%) consistent with the terms of the three-year collective bargaining agreements entered into at the start of FY2024-25. These increases are a direct result of a concerted effort to enhance the City’s recruitment and retention efforts in an exceptionally competitive labor market. This increase, while out-pacing revenue growth is accommodated by the favorable impact of the lower MCERA contribution rates for FY2026-27 as well as the budget-balancing measures included in the Proposed Budget.
Contributions to the Marin County Employees Retirement Association (MCERA) are projected to remain relatively flat compared to the previous year as a result of a contribution rate reduction of 5%-7 for FY 2026/27. This contribution rate reduction is due to a combination of factors, including growth in payroll base (impacting contribution rate required to amortized the plan’s fixed unfunded actuarial liability), and favorable investment returns. This decrease in employer contribution rates for FY 2026-27 is offset by increases in pensionable compensation resulting from collective PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 10 bargaining agreements. Pension expenses across all funds are budgeted at $25.4 million representing approximately 23 percent of total citywide personnel budget.
Other Funds Highlights
Special Revenue Funds
These funds have restricted uses based on their respective sources. While several special revenue funds are generally entirely self-supporting, many also require varying levels of contribution from the City’s General Fund in order to support programs, services and projects.
The following section presents FY2026-27 Proposed Budget highlights:
EMS/Paramedic Fund
The Emergency Medical Services/Paramedic Fund has planned expenditures of $10.9 million for the upcoming fiscal year, supported by $10.2 million in revenues of which $5.6 million, or 55 percent, comes from the Paramedic Tax. The balance of the funding of this activity comes primarily from third-party recovery for emergency medical response and transport services. As of April 17, 2023, tax rates have reached their tax ceiling for all participating areas impacted by the Paramedic Services Special Tax.
The FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget reflects the incremental cost of year-two costs of the new consolidated Marin County Fire Dispatch model.
The EMS/Paramedic Fund is projected to retain $2.3 million in unallocated fund balance as of June 30, 2027. This balance serves as an operational reserve. Funds not needed for the operations reserve are used to fund capital improvements that directly support the delivery of emergency medical transport services.
Measure A – Open Space
The Measure A Open Space Program was renewed by voters in June 2022. Funding for this program is primarily provided by a nine-year, county-wide sales tax that is managed by the County of Marin, with the City providing discretionary contributions as needed. A total of $610,000 is being proposed to be expended during the year to fund project initiatives.
Measure D – Library Parcel Tax
Measure D, the successor library parcel tax to Measure C, is scheduled to sunset at the end of the current fiscal year. The FY2026/27 Proposed Budget has been developed assuming passage of Measure K, subject to voter-approval on the June 2, 2026 ballot. Measure K would extend the existing Library Special tax at the current rate, generating $1.2 million in annual revenues supporting Library operations.
A contingency plan has been developed should Measure K fail to receive the 2/3 (66.7%) approval required for passage. This contingency plan contemplates covering six months of lost revenue, as a new revenue measure being contemplated for the November 2026 ballot would necessarily need to account for replacement revenue for Library operations under this scenario.
Recreation Revolving Fund
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 11 The FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget includes appropriations totaling $5.78 million which is supported through recreation program revenues of $2.85 million and an operating transfer from the General Fund of $2.9 million. General Fund support to the Recreation Revolving Fund is increased as a result of Building and Fleet maintenance costs being converted to an internal service fund, with additional costs (previously incurred in the General Fund) now being allocated to all funds, including the Recreation Revolving Fund.
Note – Prior to final budget adoption, staff is proposing to transfer majority of the Recreation Revolving fund revenues and program expenditures into the General Fund, as this fund does not meet the accounting standards required to be treated as a Special Revenue Fund.
Childcare Fund
The Childcare Fund is proposed to include expenditure appropriations of $4.02 million for FY 2026-27 supported by program revenues of $4.05 million. The Childcare Fund generally operates under full-cost recovery. A modest fee increases is again required to maintain full cost-recovery for the fee-supported Childcare program. The proposed budget also includes the addition of 3.0 Childcare positions to support increased enrollment (and funding) at the Glenwood Pre-school site, the request of the San Rafael City Schools district.
Measure C – Marin Wildfire Prevention
Activities supported by the Measure C – Wildfire Prevention Fund are funded by a ten-year parcel tax managed by the Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority, a Joint Powers Authority (MWPA). The City of San Rafael is expected to receive $4.15 million in revenues to support coordinated wildfire prevention including early detection, warning and alerts; reducing vegetation; ensuring defensible space around homes, neighborhoods and critical infrastructure; and improving disaster evacuation routes/procedures. Included in this funding allocation is $1.9 million representing CORE MWPA programs administered by the City of San Rafael and reimbursed by the MWPA.
Other significant funds within the Special Revenue category include Gas Tax and Storm Water Funds. The spending plans for these funds were developed in conjunction with the Capital Improvement Program. Appropriations for new CIP projects are included in the Proposed Budget and discussed in the Capital Improvement Plan section of this report.
Enterprise Funds
Parking Fund
The Parking Fund is a self-sustaining enterprise fund whose revenues are dedicated to parking services. Currently, parking operations are funded via parking fees and fines, and fund balance is the only resource with which to cover capital improvements. The FY 2026-27 Proposed budget for this fund is $4.70 million, inclusive of operating transfers, supported by $5.3 million in revenues. The Parking Fund has generally rebounded from the negative effects of the pandemic and reflects a slight positive fund balance for the new fiscal year.
Internal Service / Capital Equipment Replacement Fund
These funds are used to manage services that are delivered within the organization. For example, computer replacement, employee benefits, workers compensation, general liability, capital PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 12 replacement, technology replacement and vehicle replacement are funded via internal charges to the funds that utilize these respective services.
In conjunction with the development of the FY 2026/27 budget the City’s Building Maintenance and Fleet Maintenance operations have been transitioned from General Fund programs to new Internal Service Fund activities, with costs now being charged to operating programs, including non-General Fund supported activities receiving services.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
The CIP is a multi-year planning tool used to identify and implement the City’s capital needs over a three-year period. As part of the annual budget process, staff updated the multi-year CIP for FY 2026-27 through FY 2028-29. The first year, FY 2026-27, of the updated plan informs the new capital budget appropriations to be included as part of the FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget. See item II. In addition, as part of the fiscal year-end process, which concludes in early Fall, staff will be seeking City Council authorization to carry forward capital project appropriations for projects funded in the current fiscal year 2025-26, to the extent that these funds are required to complete projects currently in process. Funding approved for carry-over into the new fiscal year will supplement the capital project funding approved with the FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget.
The annual update of the multi-year Capital Improvement Plan involves several steps:
1. Starting with the review of the latest Council-approved multi-year capital plan for currently active and previously planned projects, and updating project cost estimates and funding sources, as appropriate.
2. The capital plan is then updated to reflect new projects. These may include projects previously identified as “unfunded,” projects identified through various master plans, projects supporting infrastructure projects being undertaken by other agencies, and projects requested by the broader community.
3. The updated list of capital improvement projects is then evaluated based on established ranking criteria, with the highest-ranked projects being included in the multi-year plan within the constraints of funding availability and staff capacity.
4. Projects that are not reflected in the updated multi-year capital plan are retained on the list of infrastructure needs as either “future year” or “unfunded” projects.
The resulting CIP planning document summarizes the City’s planned capital and infrastructure improvement projects, including estimated cost, funding sources, and ranking scores following analysis and coordination with other City departments to ensure that all department needs are considered and represented.
Project selection and priority are based on City Council priorities and existing planning documents to accommodate high priority needs, which focused on life/safety, maintenance and repair, equity, community, and City Council input, and other factors. The CIP is intended to provide a comprehensive three-year project list for the City’s known capital and infrastructure needs.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 13 The general categories within the CIP are as follows:
• Annual Programs: Annual programs are comprised of a variety of activities, including implementation of smaller projects and small budget projects that need immediate attention, routine projects to maintain City infrastructure, development of concept designs to support the pursuit of grant funding, implementation of pilot projects, and low to medium level planning efforts.
• Building/Facilities: City-owned properties include buildings (e.g., City Hall, libraries, recreation centers, etc.) and facilities (e.g., parking garages and lots). • Parks: Park infrastructure and facilities, including playgrounds, sports fields and courts, recreation equipment, and restrooms.
• Storm Drain: Storm drain systems include conveyance of storm drainage, catch basins, manholes, and the City’s twelve stormwater pump stations. • Transportation: Street improvements, including construction, resurfacing, and maintenance of existing roadways, intersections, connections to transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as bike lanes and sidewalks. This category also includes streetlight, traffic-related, and traffic signal improvements, which include enhancements that increase traffic flow and capacity, improve circulation, and expand bicycle and/or pedestrian thoroughfare beyond the existing facilities in place (e.g., new multi-use pathways and the expansion of existing sidewalks).
Proposed FY 2026-27 Capital Improvement Project Highlights The proposed Capital Improvement projects listed below will be considered by the City Council for adoption at the June 15th City Council meeting.
1. ADA Transition Plan
2. Terra Linda pool house study
3. Falkirk Community Center Window Replacement Phase 1
4. Carnegie Reuse Study
5. Public Works HVAC Repair
6. Beach Park Seawall Assessment
7. Montecito Neighborhood Park Feasibility Study
8. Mahon Creek Enhancement
9. North- South Greenway Gap Closure & Multi-modal Improvements (Mission to Tamalpais/ Fourth Street to Grand Ave)
The following table summarizes the funds that provide the majority of resources available to support the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP):
Table 3: CIP Funding Sources
Fund # Fund Name Description
205 Stormwater Fund Established to fund stormwater maintenance, programs, and improvements throughout the City. Fund 205 receives annual revenues from the City’s Stormwater Activity Fee (Municipal Code Chapter 9.40).
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 14 206 Gas Tax Fund The Gas Tax fund includes revenues from the following sources:
• Senate Bill 1 [SB 1, Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) and Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)] • Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Measure AA and B
SB 1 revenue is collected and subsequently distributed by the State of California based on a percentage tax on each gallon of gas purchased in San Rafael.
208 Childcare Fund Projects identified in the CIP as utilizing Fund 208 are restricted to facility improvements at the City’s childcare centers.
214 Library Revolving
Fund
The Library Revolving Fund consists of donations and grants received to support Library operations, programs, services, and infrastructure. 235 Baypoint Lagoon
Assessment District
The Baypoint Lagoons Lighting and Landscape District fund was formed to protect and enhance wildlife habitat and water quality
in Baypoint (Spinnaker) Lagoon and the adjacent diked salt marsh. 236 Loch Lomond
Assessment District
The Loch Lomond (Melo-Roos) Assessment District fund
was established in 1992 to pay for the repair and maintenance of the stormwater system infrastructure within the area.
240 Parkland Dedication This fund was established to account for long-term developer deposits used to acquire and increase capacity of the City’s park infrastructure. 241 Park Measure A Measure A is a nine-year ¼ percent Transactions and Use Tax managed by the County of Marin and re-approved by voters in June 2022. The tax is restricted to care for existing parks and open spaces, support regional community parks, projects, and programs and to further farmland restoration. The Department of Library and Recreation prepare a Measure A work plan each fiscal year based on the recommendations provided in the 2023 Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan and through consultation with the Parks and Recreation Commission.
246 Traffic Mitigation Fee
Fund
Traffic Mitigation Fees are charged to a developer in connection with the approval of a private land development project with the purpose of offsetting or subsidizing public improvements made necessary by the private development. The City utilizes Traffic Mitigation Fees for circulation-related projects identified in the General Plan. 401 Capital Improvement
Fund
The Capital Improvement Fund is funded primarily through the City’s General Fund and provides discretionary funding support for capital projects that lack a dedicated funding source as well as projects where either a local match or supplemental funding is required. Transfers from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund stem primarily from available year-end fund balances in excess of the City’s reserve policy requirement.
420 Essential Facilities
Fund (Measure E)
The Essential Facilities Fund was established by the City Council in order to allocate one-third ($0.25) of the City’s Measure E ($0.75) Transaction and Use Tax receipts to support capital investments to replace or renovate essential facilities supporting public safety operations. 430 Measure P Fund In November 2024, San Rafael voters passed Measure P, an initiative to fund a new main library and community center at Albert Park. Measure P established a non-ad valorem parcel tax for the purpose of building these facilities, representing a significant investment in the City’s cultural and civic institutions. In addition to a downtown library and community center, the proceeds from Measure P can also be used for improvements and expansion at San Rafael’s branch libraries.
501 Parking Services Projects identified in the CIP as utilizing Parking Services Funds are restricted to parking-related projects, including maintenance and upgrades at City parking garages and parking lots.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 15 611 Building Maintenance
Fund
The Building Maintenance Fund supports routine maintenance and capital projects associated with the City’s buildings, parks and other facilities. The Building Maintenance Fund is an internal revenue fund, which means General Fund monies are the sole source of revenue.
While a portion of the FY 2026-27 CIP budget is grant-funded (approximately $6.5 million), the respective grant match and non-grant funded projects are paid for through Funds 205 (Stormwater), 206 (Gas Tax), 236 (Loch Lomond CDF #10), 241 (Parks Measure A), 246 (Traffic Mitigation Fee), 401(Capital Improvement), 420 (Essential Facilities), 430 (Measure P), and 611 (Building Maintenance). Funds 205, 206, and 611 also have their respective operating budget, which consists of expenses related to maintenance of infrastructure, equipment purchasing, miscellaneous contractual services, and other non-project related work.
The long-term capital and infrastructure operational, maintenance, and improvement needs for City-owned property, parks, roads, and drainage far exceed the available revenues each year.
Therefore, a considerable number of projects are identified as real capital and infrastructure needs (and maintained on the CIP project list) but are categorized as “unfunded”. City staff continue to actively pursue grant funding, congressional earmarks, and other infrastructure funding sources. Many of these funding sources require a local funding match. If the City’s effort to obtain grant funding is successful, the projects with secured funding will be re-evaluated for their ranking on the CIP projects list.
As a part of the annual CIP, the Department of Public Works also recapitulates major projects completed in the prior fiscal years, including but not limited to:
• Downtown Library Modernization
• Peacock Gap Park Playground Improvements
• Pickleweed Park Enhancement & Field Renovation
• Public Safety Center Electronic Sign Replacement
• Electric Vehicle Charging Installation at Public Works Corp Yard • FY 2025-26 Traffic Signal System Backup Battery Installations and Replacements • FY 2025-26 Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Projects pending completion include:
1. Citywide Storm Drain Plan
2. Citywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
3. Welcome Gateways
4. Pickleweed Park Restroom
5. Canal Active Transportation Experience Improvements
6. San Rafael Canal Crossing and Boatyard Park
7. Second Street and Fourth Street Intersection Improvements
8. South Merrydale Road- Civic Center Connector Pathway Summary of FY 2026/27 Proposed Capital Improvement Program Budget Category FY 2026-27
Annual Programs – Capital
Stormwater $600,000
Transportation $4,475,000
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 16 Sub-Total Annual Programs $5,075,000
Buildings / Facilities
Buildings $2,480,000
Essential Facilities $150,000
Recreation $3,700,000
Building Capital Contingency $1,000,000
Sub-Total Buildings / Facilities $7,330,000
Parks $1,130,000
Stormwater $3,666,000
Transportation $2,225,000
Sub-Total Projects $14,351,000
*TOTAL $19,426,000
Funding Sources
General Fund $1,000,000
Stormwater Fund (205) $ --
Grant Funds $3,596,000
Sub-Total Stormwater Fund (205) $3,596,000
Gas Tax Fund (206) $5,691,400
Grant Funds $1,228,600
Sub-Total Gas Tax Fund (206) $6,920,000
Loch Lomond CDF #10 (236) $50,000
Measure A (241) $160,000
Capital Improvement Fund (401) $1,970,000
Project Transfer $325,000
Grant Funds $325,000
Sub-Total CIF Fund (401) $2,620,000
Essential Facilities Fund (420) $150,000
Measure P (430) $1,800,000
Building Maintenance Fund (611) $3,130,000
TOTAL $19,426,000
*Figures exclude operations and maintenance costs.
General Fund Balance and Reserves
The FY 2026-27 proposed budget would maintain General Fund reserve levels consistent with the update Reserve Policy approved by the City Council concurrent with adoption of the FY2025- 26 budget. The current policy target reserve level includes 10% for emergencies ($10,648,000) and 5% for economic uncertainties ($5,324,000), as of June 30, 2027.
In addition, the City’s capital reserve is maintained at $1,000,000 consistent with the reserve policy. This reserve serves as a buffer against unanticipated capital projects needed that may require supplemental support from the General Fund.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 17 The FY2026-27 Proposed Budget includes recommendations for allocations of projected excess fund balance expected to be available as of June 30, 2026 consistent with the policy guidelines established in the reserve policy, as follows:
• Payments toward unfunded liabilities, deferred maintenance and asset replacement. • Transfers to other funds, as appropriate, to off-set year-end deficits within those funds. • Allocations to capital projects with shortfalls in funding sources and/or to provide matching funds for grant awards.
• Re-appropriation within the subsequent year’s operating budget to provide for one-time, non-recurring needs.
Based on the projections and recommendations contained in the FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget, the General Fund budget is effectively balanced with ongoing revenues supporting ongoing appropriations. As noted in this report, a significant allocation of available fund balances ($4.1 million) is proposed to be either transferred to various special revenue and capital project funds and or appropriated in the budget year for priority one-time projects and expenses.
STAFFING
Proposed Personnel Changes:
This section of the report seeks Council consideration of recommended personnel actions.
Periodically, the Human Resources Department seeks to establish, reallocate, or delete positions to reorganize or restructure staffing to most effectively and efficiently serve the community and city goals.
During this budget review, Staff is recommending the following:
Fire
• Add one (1) fixed-term Advanced Professional Temp (Wildfire Program Support Specialist) position for a one-year temporary assignment during Fiscal Year 2026/27 to support Wildfire Prevention Program operations.
o This fixed-term position is temporary in nature, funded through Measure C (Fund 242), and is scheduled to sunset at the conclusion of FY 2026/27. o The position will support wildfire inspection coordination, assist with administration of the wildfire prevention hotline and mitigation grant program, track Measure C program documentation, and provide public outreach support related to defensible space compliance in order to maintain current service levels.
• Add three (3) full-time regular Firefighter Paramedic positions to establish a dedicated relief pool within the Fire Department, with one position assigned to each shift. o The addition of these positions is intended to reduce overtime costs associated with minimum staffing requirements, planned leave coverage, training absences, and backfill needs.
o The relief pool will improve staffing stability and operational flexibility by providing dedicated personnel available to fill vacancies across shifts, reducing reliance on mandatory overtime while maintaining emergency response service levels. o These positions will also support employee wellness and fatigue management by decreasing excessive overtime usage and improving schedule predictability for suppression staff.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 18 Department of Public Works
• Convert one (1) fixed-term Junior Engineer position to a full-time regular Junior Engineer position.
o The fixed-term position was originally approved to support increased engineering workload associated with grant-funded and ARPA-funded capital projects. o Public Works has identified an ongoing operational need for continued engineering support within the Capital Improvement Program and Land Development Division.
o Converting the position to a regular full-time role will provide continuity in project delivery, support long-term workload demands, and maintain staffing capacity within the Department.
• Convert three (3) Junior Engineer positions to Assistant Engineer positions. o Public Works has experienced ongoing recruitment challenges for mid-level engineering positions and has historically underfilled vacancies at the Junior Engineer level to support workforce development and succession planning. o Three Junior Engineers are expected to meet the qualifications for Assistant Engineer by FY 2026/27, including the required experience and Engineer-inTraining certification. o These employees currently serve as lead engineers on projects, oversee consultant and contractor work, and have demonstrated strong performance and readiness for advancement.
o The proposed reclassifications support employee development, retention, and continued operational capacity within the engineering division. • Convert one (1) regular Associate Engineer position to a Senior Civil Engineer position o This reclassification will provide front-line supervisory support for the Land Development Division within Public Works and help maintain leadership capacity across the Department’s Capital Improvement, Land Development, and Traffic Engineering divisions.
o The conversion also supports succession planning, project oversight, staff training, and retention in a highly competitive public works engineering market. • Add two (2) regular Parks Maintenance Workers positions for Downtown Maintenance o The addition of these positions will enhance downtown maintenance and beautification efforts following the dissolution of the Downtown Streets Team, which previously provided daily litter and cleanup services. o The positions will support expanded cleaning, pressure washing, graffiti abatement, illegal dumping response, parking garage maintenance, encampment cleanup support, and other high-visibility maintenance needs throughout the downtown corridor.
o Adding dedicated in-house staff will improve service responsiveness, coordination, and operational efficiency while providing a more consistent level of service to residents, businesses, and visitors.
o The proposed staffing model is expected to be more cost-effective than relying solely on contracted services and will support broader citywide maintenance and beautification priorities.
Recreation and Childcare
• Convert vacant Administrative Assistant II position to Administrative Analyst position o The proposed reclassification reflects the evolving operational and administrative needs of the Recreation & Childcare Division and aligns the position with a higher level of analytical, compliance, and program coordination responsibilities.
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 19 o The position will support functions including program and policy administration, grant support and reporting, budget and contract coordination, records management, onboarding and recruitment support, and development of operational procedures and program materials.
o The reclassification will enhance administrative capacity, improve operational efficiency and regulatory compliance, and provide greater support for divisionwide initiatives and cross-departmental coordination. o The additional cost associated with the reclassification is anticipated to be fully absorbed by Childcare Fund 208 with no General Fund impact. • Convert one (1) vacant 0.6 FTE Childcare Supervisor position to one (1) full-time 1.0 FTE Childcare Instructor II position within the Pickleweed Preschool Program (Fund 260). o The proposed conversion will support operational and staffing needs within the preschool program by increasing classroom staffing levels and improving coverage during employee absences.
o The additional staffing capacity will help address increased program demands associated with younger participants, including supervision requirements, diapering support, and staff-to-student ratio needs.
o The revised staffing model is intended to improve workload distribution, operational consistency, and overall workplace support across classrooms. o The position is anticipated to be fully funded through existing and projected Fund 260 revenues, including ongoing state childcare program funding, with no General Fund impact.
• Add three (3) FTE positions for the Glenwood Afterschool Program, including two (2) Childcare Instructor II positions and one (1) Childcare Instructor I position. o The additional staffing is needed to support anticipated enrollment growth at the Glenwood Campus Afterschool Program associated with increased Transitional Kindergarten enrollment for the 2026/27 school year.
o The proposed positions will support expanded program
capacity, maintain required staff-to-student ratios, and ensure adequate supervision and program support across multiple age groups and classrooms. o The staffing expansion will allow the City to continue partnering with San Rafael City Schools to meet growing community demand for afterschool childcare services.
o The additional personnel costs are anticipated to be offset by increased program revenue generated through higher enrollment levels within Fund 208, with no General Fund impact.
City Manager’s Office
• Eliminate one (1) vacant regular Senior Management Analyst assigned to Community Services Division
o This position is being eliminated as part of an organizational restructuring associated with the City Manager’s Office realignment.
o The Community Services Division will now be supported by other positions within both the City Manager’s Office and Community and Economic Development Department, which currently have capacity to absorb and provide ongoing analytical and administrative support.
o This change streamlines administrative support functions across departments, reduces duplication, and aligns staffing resources with current organizational structure and service delivery needs.
Finance Department
PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET / Page: 20 • Eliminate one (1) vacant fixed-term Advanced Professional Temp position o This fixed-term position has remained vacant for approximately three years following the incumbent’s promotion to a regular Finance Manager role. o The position is no longer anticipated to be needed and is recommended for elimination as part of ongoing efforts to align staffing with current organizational structure and workload demands.
FISCAL IMPACT: The preliminary Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget has been prepared for all funds.
Funding sources are sufficient to support the preliminary spending plans presented. There is no fiscal impact associated with acceptance of this report.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive report related to the Preliminary Citywide Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and provide direction to staff to inform preparation of the Final Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget for adoption at the City Council meeting of June 15, 2026.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Summary of FY 2026-27 Preliminary Proposed Budget
a. Exhibit I – FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget (Revenues and Expenditures by Fund) b. Exhibit II – FY 2026-27 All Funds Proposed Budget (Revenues, and Expenditures) with comparison to FY2025-26 Adopted Budget (Revenues and Expenditures by Fund)
c. Exhibit III – FY 2026-27 General Fund Proposed Budget (Revenues, and Expenditures) with comparison to FY2025-26 Adopted Budget d. Exhibit IV – Summary of FY 2026-27 Authorized Staffing (Full-Time Equivalents)
2. Proposed Capital Improvement Program Budget Summary: FY 2026-27 FY2025-26 PROPOSED BUDGET
REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY FUND
EXHIBIT I
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
346,929.00 298,012.00 346,929.00
5/1/2026 Total Total Total
FY 2024-25 PROJECTED BUDGET Est.Actual Operating Operating Capital June 30, 2027 FUND FUND June 30, 2026 and Capital Transfers Total Transfers to Total Projected # NAME Balance Revenue In Resources Budget Budget Other Funds Appropriations Balance GENERAL OPERATING FUNDS:
101 General Fund Available Balance $23,208,204 $108,389,440 $1,313,826 $109,703,266 106,145,546 - 7,582,527 113,728,073 $19,183,397 102 General Plan Special Revenue Fund 2,085,482 656,492 - 656,492 783,749 - - 783,749 1,958,224 SPECIAL REVENUE & GRANT FUNDS:
205 Storm Water Fund 592,636 7,209,325 - 7,209,325 960,000 3,596,000 - 4,556,000 3,245,961 206 Gas Tax 9,825,329 10,076,636 - 10,076,636 3,651,000 6,920,000 650,000 11,221,000 8,680,965 207 Development Services 4,313 8,401 - 8,401 - - - - 12,714 208 Child Care 535,862 4,046,387 - 4,046,387 4,022,481 - - 4,022,481 559,767 210 Paramedic/EMS 3,041,238 10,203,427 - 10,203,427 10,945,176 - - 10,945,176 2,299,489 216 Cannabis 336,452 178,911 - 178,911 148,890 - 319,196 468,086 47,277 217 State Lands Fund 565,586 59,327 - 59,327 - - - - 624,913 222 Recreation Revolving - 2,860,303 2,936,000 5,796,303 5,788,005 - - 5,788,005 8,298 223 Household Haz. Waste Fund - - - - - - - - -
228 Hazardous Materials Fund 55,251 - - - - - - - 55,251 234 Pt. San Pedro A.D. Maintenance Portion 184,181 197,424 - 197,424 195,500 - - 195,500 186,105 235 Baypoint Lagoons L & L Assessment District 236,730 33,961 - 33,961 25,400 - - 25,400 245,291 236 Loch Lomond CFD #10 912,547 58,738 - 58,738 58,000 - - 58,000 913,285 237 Loch Lomond Marina CFD #2 1,381,944 344,799 - 344,799 249,140 - - 249,140 1,477,603 240 Parkland Dedication 380,990 - - - - - - - 380,990
241 Measure A Open Space 240,385 605,906 - 605,906 100,004 510,000 - 610,004 236,287 242 Measure C Wildfire Prevention 1,722,856 4,149,896 - 4,149,896 4,905,294 10,000 200,000 5,115,294 757,458 244 Low and moderate Income Housing Fund 1,941,216 5,591 - 5,591 85,770 - - 85,770 1,861,037 LIBRARY AND FALKIRK:
214 Library Revolving 1,833,253 98,484 - 98,484 166,000 - - 166,000 1,765,737 215 Library Special Assessment Fund 238,237 1,254,168 - 1,254,168 1,275,161 - - 1,275,161 217,244 Library Fund 2,071,490 1,352,652 - 1,352,652 1,441,161 - - 1,441,161 1,982,982 PUBLIC SAFETY:
203 Abandoned Vehicle 72 85,000 105,000 190,000 143,990 - - 143,990 46,082 202 Asset Seizure 3,704 - - - - - - - 3,704
204 Crime Prevention 8,573 - - - - - - - 8,573
230 Youth Services - Police 12,176 15,000 - 15,000 27,176 - - 27,176 - Public Safety Fund 24,525 100,000 105,000 205,000 171,166 - - 171,166 58,359 TRAFFIC AND HOUSING:
243 Affordable Housing in lieu 3,368,336 1,073,389 - 1,073,389 - - - - 4,441,725 245 Housing & Parking In-lieu 400,230 11,712 - 11,712 - - - - 411,942 246 East S.R. Traffic Mitigation 1,783,318 415,317 - 415,317 500,000 400,000 - 900,000 1,298,635 Traffic & Housing Mitigation Funds 5,551,884 1,500,418 - 1,500,418 500,000 400,000 - 900,000 6,152,302 GRANT:
201 A.D.A.. Access Projects - - - - - - - - -
260 Pickleweed Childcare Grant 741,985 858,907 - 858,907 832,846 - - 832,846 768,046 281 Public Safety Grants 657,877 346,447 467,723 814,170 1,332,851 - - 1,332,851 139,196 283 Grant-Other 10,000 3,724,238 500,000 4,224,238 4,233,639 - - 4,233,639 599 Grant Funds 1,409,862 4,929,592 967,723 5,897,315 6,399,336 - - 6,399,336 907,841 SPECIAL REVENUE & GRANT FUND TOTAL 31,015,277 47,921,692 4,008,723 51,930,415 11,436,000 39,646,324 1,169,196 52,251,520 30,694,173
CONSOLIDATED FUNDS
https://cityofsanrafael.sharepoint.com/sites/Finance/Shared Documents/General/Accounting and Budgeting/Budget/26-27/_Department Baseline/_Fund Sums FY27 Draft 2026.05.06 Balancing Plan FY2025-26 PROPOSED BUDGET
REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY FUND
EXHIBIT I
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
346,929.00 298,012.00 346,929.00
5/1/2026 Total Total Total
FY 2024-25 PROJECTED BUDGET Est.Actual Operating Operating Capital June 30, 2027 FUND FUND June 30, 2026 and Capital Transfers Total Transfers to Total Projected # NAME Balance Revenue In Resources Budget Budget Other Funds Appropriations Balance
CONSOLIDATED FUNDS
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS:
Var. Assessment District Projects 306,452 - - - - - - - 306,452 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TOTAL 306,452 - - - - - - - 306,452 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS:
401 Capital Improvement 2,276,942 526,956 2,000,000 2,526,956 489,048 1,350,000 - 1,839,048 2,964,850 405 Open Space Acquisition 129,978 4,035 - 4,035 - - - - 134,013 406 Bedroom Tax 163,213 5,085 - 5,085 - - - - 168,298
407 Parks Capital Projects 21,823 - - - 12,800 - - 12,800 9,023 420 Measure E - Public Safety Facilities 2,841,630 106,505 398,000 504,505 150,000 730,000 - 880,000 2,466,135 430 Measure P - Library Project 4,695,000 6,777,588 - 6,777,588 167,623 1,800,000 - 1,967,623 9,504,965 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND TOTAL 5,433,586 642,581 2,398,000 3,040,581 651,848 2,080,000 - 2,731,848 5,742,320 ENTERPRISE FUND:
501 Parking Services 408,317 5,284,260 - 5,284,260 4,137,439 - 568,826 4,706,265 986,312 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTAL 408,317 5,284,260 - 5,284,260 4,137,439 - 568,826 4,706,265 986,312 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS:
614 Sewer Maintenance - 3,905,733 - 3,905,733 3,905,733 - - 3,905,733 - 621 Vehicle Replacement 15,987,356 4,055,771 - 4,055,771 1,957,826 530,000 - 2,487,826 17,555,301 612 Technology Replacement 2,869,115 3,046,986 - 3,046,986 3,584,201 - - 3,584,201 2,331,901 625 Fire Equipment Replacement 790,695 171,276 - 171,276 131,000 425,000 - 556,000 405,971 611 Building Improvement 10,450,819 4,354,472 - 4,354,472 4,136,607 2,150,000 - 6,286,607 8,518,684 641 Employee Benefits 318,894 2,091,266 - 2,091,266 1,413,289 - - 1,413,289 996,871 631 Liability Insurance 1,391,161 3,096,050 1,600,000 4,696,050 4,780,399 - - 4,780,399 1,306,812 632 Workers Compensation Insurance 2,440,786 3,601,029 - 3,601,029 3,963,847 - - 3,963,847 2,077,967 633 Dental Insurance 705,198 490,400 - 490,400 495,000 - - 495,000 700,598 622 Radio Replacement 465,594 467,728 - 467,728 555,000 - - 555,000 378,322 623 Telephone/Internet 492,154 746,150 - 746,150 725,300 - - 725,300 513,004 642 Employee Retirement 558,245 31,732 - 31,732 4,000 - - 4,000 585,977 643 Retiree Health Benefit OPEB 1,818,148 4,840,409 - 4,840,409 4,430,000 - - 4,430,000 2,228,557 624 Police Equipment Replacement 246,646 231,467 - 231,467 130,000 - - 130,000 348,113 INTERNAL SERVICE FUND TOTAL 38,534,811 31,130,468 1,600,000 32,730,468 30,212,202 3,105,000 - 33,317,202 37,948,077 TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS:
213 Library Fiduciary 565,364 13,461 - 13,461 - - - - 578,825 714 Pt. San Pedro Assessment District 86,045 158,908 - 158,908 152,255 - - 152,255 92,698 TRUST & AGENCY FUND TOTAL 565,364 13,461 - 13,461 152,255 - - 152,255 671,523 -
COMBINED FUNDS TOTAL 106,338,538 200,974,890 9,320,549 210,295,440 181,896,986 18,421,000 9,320,549 209,638,535 106,995,443 LESS: INTERFUND TRANSFER (9,320,549) (9,320,549) (9,320,549) (9,320,549) LESS: INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES (24,214,302) (24,214,302) (24,214,302) (24,214,302) NET TOTALS FY 2026-27 106,338,538 176,760,589 - 176,760,589 18,421,000 157,682,684 - 176,103,684 106,995,443 https://cityofsanrafael.sharepoint.com/sites/Finance/Shared Documents/General/Accounting and Budgeting/Budget/26-27/_Department Baseline/_Fund Sums FY27 Draft 2026.05.06 Balancing Plan
ALL FUNDS
FY 20256-27 PROPOSED BUDGET
Revenues and Expenditures
Exhibit II
FY25-26
Adopted Budget
FY26-27
Proposed Budget
%
Change $ Change
REVENUES & OTHER SOURCES
Taxes 100,627,907 $ 112,226,661 $ 11.5% 11,598,754 $
Licenses and Permits 3,118,196 4,141,929 $ 32.8% 1,023,733 Fines and Forfeitures 2,734,000 2,950,265 $ 7.9% 216,265 Use of Money 4,391,369 4,328,812 $ -1.4% (62,557)
Intergovernmental 25,429,289 18,962,997 $ -25.4% (6,466,292) Charges for Services 22,909,953 25,026,525 $ 9.2% 2,116,572 Other Revenues 18,866,779 33,337,702 $ 76.7% 14,470,923 Transfers In 11,175,910 9,320,549 $ -16.6% (1,855,361)
TOTAL SOURCES $ 189,253,404 $ 210,295,440 11.1% $ 21,042,036
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES
Expenditures by Department
Finance 3,463,858 3,504,788 1.2% 40,930
Non-Departmental 7,879,210 6,297,764 -20.1% (1,581,446) City Manager 6,679,835 8,323,665 24.6% 1,643,830
City Clerk 1,029,218 970,332 -5.7% (58,886)
Digital Service 6,602,845 6,845,555 3.7% 242,710
Human Resources 14,521,747 15,790,399 8.7% 1,268,652
Parking 4,153,415 4,119,415 -0.8% (34,000)
City Attorney 1,646,060 1,582,283 -3.9% (63,777)
Community and Economic Development 8,513,344 8,505,058 -0.1% (8,286) Police 32,051,847 34,487,044 7.6% 2,435,197
Fire 40,102,811 44,847,685 11.8% 4,744,874
Public Works 39,465,156 47,104,638 19.4% 7,639,482
Library 5,323,707 5,560,618 4.5% 236,911
Recreation 9,673,475 12,166,133 25.8% 2,492,658
City Council - 212,610 0.0% 212,610
Transfers out 11,175,910 9,320,549 -16.6% (1,855,361)
TOTAL USES $ 192,282,438 $ 209,638,535 9.0% $ 17,356,097 NET OPERATING RESULTS $ (3,029,034) $ 656,905 -121.7% $ 3,685,939
Expenditure Category
FY25-26
Adopted Budget
FY26-27
Proposed Budget
%
Change
Salaries 59,342,173 $ 62,580,745 $
Fringe Benefits 46,436,787 48,089,391
Sub-Total Personnel $ 105,778,960 $ 110,670,136 4.6% $ 4,891,176 Services 38,756,307 43,640,530 12.6% 4,884,223
Supplies 4,025,434 3,909,364 -2.9% (116,070)
Utilities/Communications 2,766,790 3,375,769 22.0% 608,979 Other 4,144,032 160,212 -96.1% (3,983,820)
Debt Service 5,707,156 5,024,710 -12.0% (682,446)
Assets Purchased 11,028,204 18,421,000 67.0% 7,392,796
Internal Service Charges 8,899,645 15,116,264 69.9% 6,216,619 Transfers 11,175,910 9,320,549 -16.6% (1,855,361)
Total Appropriations $ 192,282,438 $ 209,638,535 9.0% $ 17,356,097
GENERAL FUND
FY 2026-27 PROPOSED BUDGET
Revenues and Expenditures
Exhibit III
FY25-26
Adopted Budget
FY26-27
Proposed Budget % Change $ Change
REVENUES & OTHER OPERATIONAL SOURCES
Taxes
Property Tax and related 27,808,576 $ 28,892,530 $ 3.9% 1,083,954 Sales Tax 25,409,165 26,470,766 4.2% 1,061,601
Sales Tax -Measure E 14,609,000 15,220,000 4.2% 611,000 Sales Tax -Measure R 4,870,000 5,073,000 4.2% 203,000
Franchise Tax 4,951,000 4,903,371 -1.0% (47,629)
Business Tax 2,800,000 2,884,000 3.0% 84,000
Transient Occupancy Tax 3,900,000 3,715,035 -4.7% (184,965) Other Agencies
CSA #19 Fire Service 2,881,425 3,057,863 6.1% 176,438
VLF Backfill 7,786,809 8,113,985 4.2% 327,176
Other Agencies (Prop 172, Owner Prop Tax, State Mandate, Other agencies) 1,245,565 1,126,401 -9.6% (119,164) Other Revenues
Permits & Licenses (building, electrical, encroachment, use, alarm) 3,118,196 4,141,929 32.8% 1,023,733 Fine & Forfeitures (traffic, vehicle, etc.) 234,000 350,265 49.7% 116,265 Interest & Rents (investment earnings, rents, etc.) 1,464,558 754,747 -48.5% (709,812) Charges for Services (includes dev't fees and plan review) 2,496,953 2,736,209 9.6% 239,256 Other Revenue (damage reimbursements, misc income) 455,115 949,340 108.6% 494,225 Sub-total: Revenues 104,030,362 $ 108,389,440 $ 4.2% 4,359,078 $
TRANSFERS IN
from Gas Tax 650,000 650,000 0.0% -
from Parking Services Fund - Admin. cost 477,993 463,826 -3.0% (14,167) from Wildfire Mitigation Fund - Admin. Cost - 200,000 0.0% 200,000 from Cannabis Fund - SAFE Team 550,000 - -100.0% (550,000) from Employee Retirement Fund - POB debt payment 682,500 - -100.0% (682,500) Sub-total: Transfers In $ 2,360,493 $ 1,313,826 -44.3% $ (1,046,667) TOTAL SOURCES $ 106,390,855 $ 109,703,266 3.1% $ 3,312,411
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER OPERATIONAL USES
Expenditures by Department
Finance 2,522,312 2,661,485 5.5% 139,173
Non-Departmental 7,761,848 6,297,764 -18.9% (1,464,084) City Manager 5,264,286 4,448,407 -15.5% (815,879)
City Clerk 1,029,218 970,332 -5.7% (58,886)
Digital Service 2,418,449 2,536,054 4.9% 117,605
Human Resources 1,044,641 1,055,183 1.0% 10,542
City Attorney 1,353,983 1,230,964 -9.1% (123,019)
Community and Economic Development 6,644,754 7,054,454 6.2% 409,700 Police 30,870,956 32,516,766 5.3% 1,645,810
Fire 25,981,329 28,859,311 11.1% 2,877,982
Public Works 16,114,681 14,182,761 -12.0% (1,931,920)
Library and Recreation 3,531,973 4,119,457 16.6% 587,484 City Council - 212,610 0.0% 212,610
Sub-total: Expenditures 104,538,430 $ 106,145,546 $ 1.5% 1,607,116 $
OPERATIONAL TRANSFERS OUT
to Recreation Fund - Operating support 2,420,000 2,936,000 21.3% 516,000 to Essential Facilities Fund - Measure E 290,417 398,000 37.0% 107,583 to Liability Fund 2,500,000 1,600,000 -36.0% (900,000)
to Capital Improvement Fund 1,500,000 2,000,000 33.3% 500,000 to Gas Tax 1,000,000 -100.0% (1,000,000)
to Vehicle Replacement Fund 1,000,000 -100.0% (1,000,000) to Grants Fund 648,527 0.0% 648,527
Sub-total: Transfers Out $ 8,710,417 $ 7,582,527 -12.9% $ (1,127,890) TOTAL USES $ 113,248,847 $ 113,728,073 0.4% $ 479,226
NET OPERATING RESULTS $ (6,857,992) $ (4,024,807) $ 2,833,185 Expenditure Category
FY25-26
Adopted Budget
FY26-27
Proposed Budget % Change
Salaries $ 43,976,579 42,957,026 $
Fringe Benefits 32,515,064 32,533,126
Sub-Total Personnel 75,490,152 $ 76,491,643 $ 1.3% 1,001,491 $ Services 10,131,120 10,965,383 -7.6% (834,263)
Supplies 1,076,300 1,523,480 -29.4% (447,180)
Utilities/Communications 997,442 1,603,150 -37.8% (605,708) Other 73,712 1,665,055 -95.6% (1,591,343)
Debt Service 4,772,398 5,440,792 -12.3% (668,394)
Assets Purchased - - 0.0% -
Internal Service Charges 12,602,931 7,850,418 60.5% 4,752,513 Transfers 8,710,417 7,582,527 -12.9% (1,127,890)
Total Appropriations 113,248,847 $ 113,728,073 $ 0.4% 479,226
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
Authorized Positions EXHIBIT V
Final
Proposed
Changes Proposed
Departments 2025-2026 2026-2027 2026-2027
Regular
Community Development 24.00 24.00
Community Services 42.28 3.40 45.68
City Attorney 3.50 3.50
City Clerk 3.00 3.00
City Manager/Council 16.72 (1.00) 15.72
Economic Development (Move to CDD) - -
Finance 10.00 (1.00) 9.00
Fire 83.00 2.00 85.00
Library 21.31 21.31
Management Services 32.63 32.63
Police 93.00 93.00
Public Works 50.00 3.00 53.00
SRSD 17.00 17.00
Sub - Total Regular Positions 396.44 6.40 402.84
Change from previous year
Fixed Term
Community Development - -
City Manager/Council - -
Community Services 0.71 0.71
Economic Development (former RDA) - -
Finance - -
Fire 10.00 10.00
Library - -
Management Services 2.00 2.00
Police 1.00 1.00
Public Works 4.00 (3.00) 1.00
SRSD 2.00 2.00
Sub - Total Fixed-Term Positions 19.71 (3.00) 16.71
Total Budgeted Positions 416.15 3.40 419.55
Authorized, unbudgeted - extended absence/no cost - - - Total Authorized Positions 416.15 3.40 419.55
General Notes:
The above-authorized positions are presented as full-time equivalent employees (FTE's) based on various workweek hours as negotiated in employee agreements. The totals by department reflect a combination of full-time or permanent part-time, or fixed term positions that are entitled to all or pro-rated benefits in accordance with the negotiated agreements for employees or individuals who are under contract. The totals reflected above, or in the detail department program sections, do not include temporary or seasonal employees that are utilized for short-term or specific reasons during the year. https://cityofsanrafael.sharepoint.com/sites/Finance/Shared Documents/General/Accounting and Budgeting/Budget/26-27/0-City Council 26-27/_Authorized Positions FY26-27 CIP Funding Tables
Annual Programs
CATEGORY PROGRAM TITLE FUND Updated FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 Transportation Bridge Maintenance Program 206 $ - $ 75,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Transportation City-Led Sidewalk Repair / ADA Improvements Program (Non-Reimbursable) 206 / 401 $ 300,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Storm Drain Corrugated Metal Pipe Repair & Replacement Program 206 / 401 $ 425,000 $ 600,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Transportation Pavement Management Program 206 $ 1,200,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Transportation Public Hillside and Roadway Stability Program 206 $ 57,000 $ 300,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Transportation Road Safety Implementation Program 206 $ 390,000 $ 600,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTAL $ 2,372,000 $ 5,075,000 $ 4,750,000 $ 4,750,000 CIP Funding Tables
Buildings / Facilities
PROJECT
NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUND PRIOR YEARS' APPROPRIATION Updated FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 ESTIMATED TOTAL TO FY 2028-29 C441142210 A.J. Boro Community Center: HVAC & Roof Repair 611 $ 84,000 $ 20,000 $ 1,900,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ 2,254,000 C661145010 Pickleweed Preschool Replacement Portables 611 $ 108,000 $ 1,218,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 1,576,000 C661142810 Pickleweed Branch Library Redesign 214 / G $ 252,000 $ 2,223,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,475,000 C44F26BF04 City Hall Building Envelope Maintenance Upgrades 611 $ - $ 75,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ 275,000 C44F26BF06 City Hall Layout Assessment 420 $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ 150,000 C44F26BF11 Measure P: Main Library and Community Center 430 $ - $ 326,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,305,000 $ 1,363,000 $ 4,794,000 G350MERRY 350 Merrydale Interim Housing 283 / 401 $ - $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 C44F27BF01 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan 206 / 401 $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 250,000 C44F27BF02 Terra Linda Pool House Study & Design 611 $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ 50,000 C44F27BF03 Falkirk Window Replacement - Phase 1 611 $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ 200,000 C44F27BF04 Carnegie Re-Use Planning Process 611 $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ 30,000 C44F27BF05 111 Morphew - HVAC Repair 611 $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ 500,000 -- Building and Facilities Capital Contigency 401 $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 BF28-01 A.J. Boro Community Center: Settlement Assessment 611 $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 $ - $ 75,000 BF28-02 Citywide Buildings and Facilities Plan 611 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ 300,000 BF28-03 City Hall Security & Locking Upgrades 420 $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 450,000 $ 600,000 BF28-04 Fire Station 54 & 55 Technology / Radio Upgrades 420 $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000 $ - $ 80,000 TOTAL $ 4,862,000 $ 7,330,000 $ 2,160,000 $ 1,813,000 $ 16,609,000 Parks
PROJECT
NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUND PRIOR YEARS' APPROPRIATION Updated FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 ESTIMATED TOTAL TO FY 2028-29 C44F26P004 Pickleweed Park Enhancement (Restroom Only) 401 / G $ - $ - $ 650,000 $ - $ - $ 650,000 C44F26P003 Welcome Gateways 401 $ - $ 165,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 265,000 C44F27P001 Peacock Gap Park & Freitas Park Tennis Court Resurfacing 241 $ 400,000 $ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ 450,000 C44F27P002 Boyd Park Water System Repair 241 $ 130,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 130,000 C44F27P003 Beach Park Seawall Assessment 241 $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ 30,000 C44F27P004 Montecito Neighborhood Park Feasibility Study 241 $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ 50,000 C44F27P005 Mahon Creek Path Enhancement 401 $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 250,000 P28-01 Boyd Park Historic Cistern Assessment and Repair 241 $ - $ - $ - $ 130,000 $ - $ 130,000 TOTAL $ 165,000 $ 1,130,000 $ 130,000 $ - $ 1,955,000
CIP Funding Tables
Storm Drain
PROJECT
NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUND PRIOR YEARS' APPROPRIATION Updated FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 ESTIMATED TOTAL TO FY 2028-29 C441133410 San Quentin Pump Station Reconstruction 205 $ 8,328,000 $ 180,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,508,000 C441142110 390 Canal Pump Station Generator Replacement 205 / G $ 177,000 $ 8,000 $ - $ 600,000 $ - $ 785,000 C441145610 Canal Pump Station Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-002) 205 / G $ 180,000 $ - $ - $ 815,000 $ - $ 995,000 C441143510 Citywide Storm Drain Plan 205 $ 348,000 $ 8,000 $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ 606,000 C441145610 N. Francisco Pump Station Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-108) 205 / G $ 161,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 161,000 C441145610 Redwood Hwy Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-129) 205 / G $ 183,000 $ 301,000 $ 2,009,000 $ - $ - $ 2,493,000 C441145610 Rossi Pump Station Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-143) 205 / G $ 107,000 $ 293,000 $ 1,587,000 $ - $ - $ 1,987,000 C441145610 San Quentin Pump Station Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-110) 205 / G $ 261,000 $ - $ - $ 1,865,000 $ - $ 2,126,000 C441145610 Kerner Pump Station Trash Capture (MCSTOPPP SR-004) 205 / G $ 235,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 235,000 X44F26SD01 Large Trash Capture Device Feasibility Study (MCSTOPPP SR-095, SR-152, SR-153) 205 / G $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - C44F26SD02 Storm Drain Maintenance Environmental Compliance and Permitting 205 $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 C44F27SD01 Loch Lomond Community Facilities District (CFD) 10 Basin Safety Improvement 236 $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ 150,000 $ - $ 200,000 C44F27SD02 San Quentin Pump Station Post Construction Monitoring 401 $ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 60,000 SD28-01 Cayes Pump Station Short-Term Improvements 235 / 401 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ 700,000 $ 900,000 SD28-02 Montecito Pump Station Rehabilitation Design 401 $ - $ - $ - $ 900,000 $ - $ 900,000 SD29-01 Canal Pump Station Short-Term Improvements 401 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000 $ 600,000 TOTAL $ 860,000 $ 3,666,000 $ 4,800,000 $ 1,320,000 $ 12,298,000 CIP Funding Tables
Transportation
PROJECT
NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUND PRIOR YEARS' APPROPRIATION Updated FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 ESTIMATED TOTAL TO FY 2028-29 C441144610 Canal Neighborhood Active Transportation Enhancement 206 / G $ 1,284,000 $ - $ - $ 4,740,400 $ - $ 6,024,400 C441146210 Canal Neighborhood ADA Pathways 206 / G $ - $ - $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ 120,000 C441145710 Citywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update 206 $ 267,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 307,000 C441147210 San Rafael Canal Crossing and Boatyard Park 206 / G $ 50,000 $ 1,875,000 $ 30,000 $ - $ 2,350,000 $ 4,305,000 C441140910 Second St and Fourth St Intersection Improvements 206 / G $ 312,000 $ 3,817,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 4,129,000 C441146310
South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector Pathway (aka Rafael Meadows Safe Crossing Pathway) 206 / G $ 88,000 $ 470,000 $ 100,000 $ 3,000,000 $ - $ 3,658,000 X44F26T001 Canal St Powerline Undergrounding - Medway Rd to Spinnaker Point Dr 206 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,400,000 $ - $ 2,400,000 C44F26T002 Lincoln Ave from Second St to Paloma Ave Safety Improvements 206 / G $ - $ 793,000 $ - $ 2,800,000 $ - $ 3,593,000 C44F26T003 Second St Utility Undergrounding (Phase 2) - West St to Marquard Ave 206 $ - $ 256,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 256,000 C44F26T004 Third St Rehab Post Construction PGE Meter Upgrades 206 $ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 C441135210 Lincoln Ave Bridge Preventive Maintenance 206 / G $ 28,000 $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 278,000 C44F27T002 Fourth St and West Crescent Dr Intersection Improvements 206 $ - $ 35,000 $ 750,000 $ - $ - $ 785,000 C44F27T003
San Rafael North-South Greenway Gap Closure & Multi-modal Improvements - Mission Ave to Tamalpais Ave/Fourth St to Grand Ave (LRSP) 206 / G $ - $ - $ 975,000 $ - $ 4,469,000 $ 5,444,000
T28-01 Mission Ave at City Hall/Downtown Library Sidewalk & Crosswalk Improvements 206 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ 300,000 T28-02 Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement 206 / G $ - $ - $ - $ 730,000 $ 7,830,000 $ 8,560,000 T28-03 BPMP Rank-1: Project D-1 Downtown East-West connection: Feasibility study 246 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ - $ 200,000 T28-04 Francisco Blvd West Multi-Use Pathway Replanting 206 $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ 300,000 $ 350,000 T28-05 Vision Zero Action Plan 206 $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ 150,000 T28-06 Woodland Ave Safe Routes Project (Laurel Dell Elementary School) 206 / G $ - $ - $ - $ 591,000 $ - $ 591,000 T29-01 Downtown Grade Separation Feasibility Study 246 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000 $ 350,000 T29-02 Fourth St Multi-modal Improvements - E Street to Tamalpais (LRSP) Design 206 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 500,000 T29-03 Multi-Use Path Civic Center SMART Station to Northgate 206 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 500,000 T29-04 Second Street Multi-Modal Improvements (LRSP) - Shaver St to Grand Ave (LRSP) Design 206 $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 550,000 TOTAL $ 7,336,000 $ 2,225,000 $ 14,961,400 $ 16,799,000 $ 43,400,400