CITY COUNCIL
Alma Hernandez, Mayor
Princess Washington, Mayor Pro Tem
Jenalee Dawson, Councilmember
Marlon L Osum, Councilmember
Amit Pal, Councilmember
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A G E N D A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SUISUN CITY COUNCIL,
SUISUN CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY,
AND SUISUN CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 2024
5:00 PM
Suisun City Council Chambers - 701 Civic Center Boulevard - Suisun City, California
.
REVISED AGENDA
5:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
MEETINGS ARE HELD IN-PERSON, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE VIA ZOOM
ZOOM MEETING INFORMATION:
WEBSITE: https://zoom.us/join
MEETING ID:
893 1711 2171
CALL IN PHONE NUMBER: (707) 438-1720
REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BY EMAILING [email protected] (PRIOR TO 4 PM), VIA WEBSITE, OR ZOOM CALL IN PHONE NUMBER (707) 438-1720
(If attending the meeting via phone press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute/mute for public comment.) (Next Ord. No. – 809)
(Next City Council Res. No. 2024 – 01)
Next Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency Res. No. SA2024 - 01) (Next Housing Authority Res. No. HA2024 – 01)
5:00 P.M CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez
1 1.
A closed session will be held, pursuant to Government Code §54957, to conduct an employee evaluation for the position of City Manager.
2. Interim City Manager Update - (Roth: [email protected]).
ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members
CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the closed session agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED SESSION
(In accordance with Section 54956(a), public comments are limited to items on this closed session agenda, and to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the comment period.)
CLOSED SESSION
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION (City Manager Conference Room, City Hall)
7:00 RECONVENE OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez
ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Announcement of Actions Taken, if any in Closed Session.
APPROVAL / REORDERING OF AGENDA
CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the regular meeting agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)
PUBLIC COMMENT
(Request by citizens to discuss any matter under our jurisdiction other than an item posted on this agenda per California Government Code §54954.3. Comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the public comment period, although informational answers to questions may be given and matters may be referred for placement on a future agenda.)
REPORTS (Informational items only.)
2 3.
City Attorney Report - (Taylor/Andrews).
4. Suisun Microtransit Year-End Update - (Solano Transportation Authority).
5. Mayoral Appointments
of Commissions and Committees
- (Heranandez:
[email protected]).
6. Mayoral and Councilmember Appointments to the Public Safety & Emergency Management Community Advisory Committee.
7. Presentation of Proclamation Proclaiming the Month of January 2024 as "Human Trafficking Awareness and Prevention Month" to
Hassan Sabbagh, Executive Director of Nature of Sound and President of the Solano Anti -Human Trafficking Coalition - (Hernandez: [email protected]).
8. Council/Board Member Updates.
City Council
9. Council Adoption of Resolution 2024 - ___; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to Complete the Necessary Environmental Review and Document for a Residential Project South of Railroad Avenue Between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive - (Kearns: [email protected]).
City Council
10. Discussion and Direction on Youth Advisory or Youth Commission - (Lofthus:
[email protected]).
11. Discussion and Direction – Humphrey Drive Open Channel Clean-Up - (Vue:
[email protected]).
12. Discussion of Legal and Practical Constraints on Addressing Homelessness, and possible direction to staff and the City Attorney relating, but not limited to, the drafting of policies or ordinances, and further issues to analyze - (City Attorney Gerli).
13. Discussion and Direction regarding the costs associated with Sea Level Rise - (Bermudez:
[email protected]).
PRESENTATIONS/APPOINTMENTS
(Presentations, Awards, Proclamations, Appointments).
COUNCIL COMMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items requiring little or no discussion may be acted upon with one motion.
PUBLIC HEARING
- NONE
GENERAL BUSINESS
REPORTS: (Informational items only)
3 14.
Mayoral Update - (Hernandez: [email protected]).
15. Non-Discussion Items.
ADJOURNMENT
Public Access To Agenda Documents
A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item for the open session of this meeting, and provided to the City Council, are available for public review at least 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority Meeting at Suisun City Hall 701 Civic Center Blvd., Suisun City. Agenda related writings or documents provided to a majority of the Council/Board/Commissioners less than 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority meeting related to an agenda item for the open session of this meeting will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours. An agenda packet is also located at the entrance to the Council Chambers during the meeting for public review. The city may charge photocopying charges for requested copies of such documents. To the extent feasible, the agenda packet is available for online public viewing on the City’s website: https://www.suisun.com/Government/City-
Council/Agendas The City Council/Agency/Authority hopes to conclude its public business by 10:00 p.m. No new items will be taken up after 10:00 p.m., unless so moved by a majority of the City Council, and any items remaining will be agendized for the next meeting. The agendas have been prepared with the hope that all items scheduled will be discussed within the time allowed.
Accommodations
If you require an accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (707) 421-7302 or [email protected]. The City’s reasonable accommodation policy is available for review on the City’s website at www.suisun.com/government/city-council/, you may request an electronic copy or have a copy mailed to you. Please note that for accommodations that are not readily available, you must make your request as soon as you can prior to the time of the meeting.
Decorum
All participants are expected to conduct themselves with mutual respect. Conduct that disrupts meetings will be addressed in accordance with Section 54957.95 of the Government Code.
Ordinances
Ordinances are city laws contained in the Suisun City Municipal Code. Enacting a new city law or changing an existing one is a two-step process. Government Code 36934 provides, except when, after reading the title, further reading is waived by regular motion adopted by majority vote all ordinances shall be read in full either at the time of introduction or passage; provided, however, that a reading of the title or ordinance shall not be required if the title is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance is made available to the public online and in print at the meeting prior to the introduction or passage.
Certification Of Posting
Agendas for regular and special meetings are posted in accordance with the Brown Act at Suisun City Hall, 701 Civic Center Boulevard, Suisun City, CA. Agendas may be posted at other Suisun City locations including:
4 Suisun City Fire Station, 621 Pintail Drive, Suisun City, CA; Joe Nelson Center, 611 Village Drive, Suisun City, CA;
Harbor Master Office, 800 Kellogg Street, Suisun City, CA.
I, Donna Pock, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Suisun City, declare under penalty of perjury that the above agenda was posted and available for review, in compliance with the Brown Act.
5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
6 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.
AGENDA TRANSMITTAL
MEETING DATE:
January 16, 2024
AGENDA ITEM:
Suisun Microtransit Year-End Report
FISCAL IMPACT:
Transportation Development Act Funds (TDA) are dedicated funds for transit related services. FY 2023-24 Claim of $1.6 million for transit services has no fiscal impact on the General Fund and contains a reconciliation of $208,175.47.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Provide Good Governance, Ensure Public Safety, and Enhance the Environment.
BACKGROUND:
On August 16, 2023, the Suisun City Council Approved partnering with STA for Microtransit Services.
STAFF REPORT:
The Suisun Microtransit program launched on January 3, 2023, and consists of dial- a-ride service available within Suisun City limits, and nine select locations within the City of Fairfield, as well as one fixed route known as the School Tripper.
Based upon the information provided in the Community Based Transportation Plan, City and STA staff recommended a Suisun City Microtransit system of roughly 4,500 annual vehicle revenue hours. The majority of these hours, 3,000, have been dedicated to dial-a-ride, while 1,500 hours have been dedicated for the fixed route service known as the School Tripper, which operates based on the School Schedule.
Since its inception, the Suisun Microtransit program has been popular and has provided 12,177 passenger trips between the months of January 2023 and December 2023. The fixed route service known as the School Tripper has made up the majority of the trips, representing 9,165 of the total 12,177 trips. The monthly ridership information based on mode can be found in the attached power point. At times, the Suisun Microtransit has experienced overcrowding on the School Tripper, so an additional vehicle has been inserted to deal with a large number of patrons. Staff has ordered three additional vehicles; each vehicle offers a larger seating capacity, but these are not anticipated to be received until April/May 2024 so Suisun Microtransit will continue to deploy the additional vehicle to ensure there are no capacity issues.
Staff issued a Request for Qualifications on May 19, 2023, to garner interest from a firm to implement a mobile application so that patrons can request a ride, pay their fare, and track their vehicle from their smartphone. The terms of the RFQ were for a three-year contract with two option years. Staff received 32 questions regarding this project from potential bidders and the questions as well as STA’s responses were posted online on June 7, 2023. STA received four proposals on June 16, 2023, and scheduled all four for interviews during the week of June 26, 2023. The interview panel conducted interviews on three different dates during the week of June 26th and concluded that the Routing Company was the unanimous best apparent bid. Staff is working with the Routing Company and the mobile application will be deployed in February 2024.
7 Additionally, after the first year of operations, staff have been closely monitoring the program budget and there was a total of $208,175.47 that will be returned to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for future allocations. Staff will return to the Council to recommend a budget for FY 2024-25.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
None.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1. Suisun Microtransit Update PowerPoint
PREPARED BY:
Brandon Thomson, Transit Mobility Coordinator
REVIEWED BY:
Kris Lofthus, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PowerPoint Presentation Microtransit Update
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
16 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7
17 18
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
AGENDA TRANSMITTAL
MEETING DATE:
January 16, 2024
AGENDA ITEM:
Council Adoption of Resolution 2024 - ___; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to Complete the Necessary Environmental Review and Document for a Residential Project South of Railroad Avenue Between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There would be no impact to the General Fund. The total cost of the proposed amended scope of work would be $60,701 with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to perform the environmental work and is fully borne by the developer/applicant. Additionally, a ten percent contingency has been added to cover any unforeseen issues.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Develop Sustainable Economy, Provide Good Governance; Ensure Fiscal Solvency.
BACKGROUND:
On October 18, 2022 (with adoption of Resolution 2022-137), the City Council authorized a contract with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to perform the necessary environmental review and document for a residential project South of Railroad Avenue between Humphrey Drive and Olive Avenue. As the project had moved forward and evolved it has become necessary to amend the consultant's scope of work to best reflect the revised project and City staff's needs in processing the project.
STAFF REPORT:
Rincon has provided a proposed scope of work to complete the environmental review process for the project which includes both required and "optional" tasks. Staff is bringing forward the full scope of work to allow staff the flexibility moving forward. The original contract amount was for $49,273. Below is a listing of additional scope items (adding an additional budget of $11,428) which can also be found in Attachment 2 of this staff report:
"Required"
Update the draft CEQA document and provide extended project management with an expanded project area - $6,028
"Optional"
Public Hearing Assistance - $2,000
AB 52 Consultation - $1,700
SB 18 Consultation (required for the project) - $1,700
By authorizing the revised scope of work, the amended contract amount would amount to $60,701 (+ 10% contingency) it will allow the project to move forward smoothly without interruption.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 2024 - ___; A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Suisun City Authorizing the City Manager to Amend a Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to Complete the 19 Necessary Environmental Review and Document for a Residential Project South of Railroad Avenue Between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to Complete the Necessary Environmental Review and Document for a Residential Project South of Railroad Avenue Between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive..
2 .
Rincon Consultants Inc. Scope of Work
3 .
Contract Change Order
PREPARED BY:
John Kearns, Principal Planner
REVIEWED BY:
Jim Bermudez, Development Services Director
APPROVED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Authorizing Agreement with Rincon Coonstruction, Inc. to Complete Necessary Environmental Review and Document for Residential Project
2. Rincon Consultants Inc. Scope of Work
3. Olive Tree Ranch Change Order.doc
20 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ON THE CITY’S BEHALF WITH RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. TO COMPLETE THE NECESSARY
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DOCUMENT FOR A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
SOUTH OF RAILROAD AVENUE BETWEEN OLIVE AVENUE AND HUMPHREY DRIVE
WHEREAS, as the development project has moved forward and evolved, it has become clear that the scope of the environmental review must be expanded with Rincon Consultants Inc.; and
WHEREAS, a development application has been received for a residential project on a vacant land located south of Railroad Avenue and between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive that requires environmental review consistent with California state law; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is necessary to hire a firm to complete the environmental document for the project at the full cost of the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City solicited a Request for Proposals (RFP) from environmental firms to complete the work for the project; and
WHEREAS, three proposals were received and thoroughly reviewed and the proposal from Rincon Consultants, Inc. was determined to be the top-ranking proposer due to their approach and timeliness in completing the work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement on the City’s behalf with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to Complete the Necessary Environmental Review and Document for a Commercial Project on a vacant land located south of Railroad Avenue between Olive Avenue and Humphrey Drive in the amount of $60,701 plus a ten percent contingency.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Suisun City held on Tuesday the 16th day of January 2024 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members:
NOES: Council Members:
ABSENT: Council Members:
ABSTAIN: Council Members:
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 16th day of January 2024.
Anita Skinner
City Clerk
21 Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4 4 9 1 5 t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 3 0 3
Oak land , Ca lifo rn ia 94612
510 8 3 4 4 4 5 5 O F F I C E
i n f o @ r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
w w w . r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s January 4, 2024
Project No. 22-13135
John Kearns, Principal Planner
City of Suisun City
701 Civic Center Boulevard
Suisun City, California 94585
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Second Proposal to Add Services for CEQA Documentation for the Olive Tree Ranch Residential Subdivision Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum
Dear Mr. Kearns:
This letter is Rincon Consultants, Inc.’s proposal to provide additional services to our existing agreement in order to incorporate project changes into the addendum based on revised plans received in December 2023.
Scope of Work
1) Update Addendum. Rincon will review the updated plans and incorporate the changes throughout the addendum, including updates in the project description and associated graphics, and throughout the addendum as needed. As the changes are primarily to layout and the number of lots and basic site boundaries are unchanged, this does not include revised technical modeling. 2) Extended Project Management. The project timeline has increased beyond that originally anticipated in our scope of work. To include additional internal coordination, client communication, and ongoing management of the project including administrative and billing tasks, Rincon estimates the need for 6 additional staff hours.
Cost
We estimate an additional $3,323 is needed to complete this revised scope of work, which would bring our authorized budget from $49,273 to $52,596.
This does not include additional funds Rincon requests for an expanded project area ($2,705), or optional tasks from the original proposal in June 2022 ($2,000 per public hearing; $1,700 for AB 52 consultation assistance; $1,700 for SB 18 consultation assistance). 22 City of Suisun City
Olive Tree Ranch Residential Subdivision
Table 1 Cost Summary
Original Contract Value $49,273
Update Addendum & Extended Project Management $3,323
Expanded Project Area $2,705
Optional Tasks from Original Proposal
Public Hearing Assistance (cost per hearing) $2,000
AB 52 Consultation Assistance $1,700
SB 18 Consultation Assistance (required as the project includes a General Plan Amendment) $1,700 The total amount, including assistance at one hearing, AB 52 and SB 18 consultation, the prior request for funds to analyze an expanded project area, and the project updates described in the above scope of work would be an increase in the authorized budget of $11,428, for a total of $60,701.
Without optional tasks from the original proposal, the budget would total $55,301. Including assistance with SB 18 consultation, which would be required for the project as it includes a General Plan Amendment, would bring the total to $57,001.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal to add services. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to assist the City of Suisun City with this project. Please let us know if you have any questions about this proposal or need additional information.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Katherine Green, AICP
Project Manager
Phone: 916-706-1374
Email: [email protected]
Contact for Clarification
Matt Maddox, MESM, AICP
Principal
Phone: 916-706-1374
Email: [email protected]
23 City of Suisun City 701 Civic Center Blvd
Development Services Department Suisun City, CA 94585
CONCTRACT CHANGE ORDER
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Page 1 OF 1
PROJECT: OLIVE TREE RANCH - ENIRONMENTAL
TO: Katherine Green CONTRACTOR: Rincon Consultants, Inc.
You are hereby directed to make the herein described changes from the plans and specifications or do the following described work not included in the plans and specifications on this contract . The work described in this Change Order shall conform to the original Plans and Specifications insofar as the same may apply unless otherwise explicitly modified herein.
NOTE: This change order is not effective until approved by the City Manager.
Change Requested By: John Kearns
I. Description of Change Order:
Consultant to complete added scope of work items to complete environmental review process including preparation of a CEQA document. Please see attached scope of services.
II. Estimated Increase/Decrease:
Original Contract $ 49,273 Previous Changes Orders $ 0.00 This Change Order $ 11,428 Total Contract to Date $ 60,701 By reason of this change order, the time of completion
for all work under this contract will be adjusted as follows:
Add
1 year
Calendar Days
Working Days
III. Authorization
We, the undersigned contractor, have given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree, if this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all materials, except as may be otherwise noted above, and perform all services necessary for the work specified above, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
Contractor: Rincon Consultants, Inc. Date Accepted:
By: Title:
City of Suisun City:
Prepared By:
Project Manager Date
Approval Recommended :
Development Services Director Date
City Manger Approval:
City Manager Date
24 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
AGENDA TRANSMITTAL
MEETING DATE:
January 16, 2024
AGENDA ITEM:
Discussion and Direction on Youth Advisory or Youth Commission.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Unknown at this time.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Provide Good Governance.
BACKGROUND:
There is currently an organization that does not fall under the jurisdiction of the City of Suisun City. The Suisun City Youth Commission is grassroots 501(c)3 determination-exempt public benefit organization created on May 4, 2007, for the benefit of Suisun City Youth and Youth who attend Suisun City Schools and friends. Today, the Suisun City Youth Commission has grown its collaboration within a consortium of youth-oriented public benefit organizations. Together with the consortium, the Suisun City Youth Commission directly contributes to our community's health and sustainable development. The Suisun City Youth Commission fosters peer-to-peer self-development and positive peer and adult relationships through the many opportunities we gain working within a consortium of youth public benefit organizations. Among these organizations are Scouts, Civil Air Patrol, 4-H, Red Cross Clubs, Solano Land Trust, and many more. The Suisun City Youth Commission owns the domain rites to Suisuncityyouthcommission.org.
STAFF REPORT:
There are numerous models to provide youth/teens with civic leadership opportunities and below are some models for the council to discuss or develop their own model if they wish to pursue this endeavor.
1 .
The new Suisun City Police Activities League in conjunction with the California Police Activities League provide a leadership development program that provides an opportunity for PAL members to teach, inspire, and motivate California’s future community leaders. The program brings together PAL youth and officers where officers play a vital role in encouraging youth to become positive role models, enabling them to realize their full potential to lead and influence positive change. Along with the Youth Summit program through National PAL, members have the opportunity to be involved with gaining valuable leadership skills. 2 .
Create a Youth/Teen Advisory that would make recommendations to the Recreation, Parks, Marina, and Arts Commission or to the City Council.
3 .
Create 2 youth/teen seats on the Recreation, Parks, Marina, and Arts Commission as voting members.
4 .
Youth/Teen Roundtable allow for community youth and teens to participate in the future of development for their age groups. Topics discussed can vary from recreation programming, park development, or what businesses they would like to see here in Suisun City. 5 .
Other ideas formulated by members of the City Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss the proposed options and give direction to staff on options determined by Council.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1. Power Point Presentation
25 PREPARED BY:
Kris Lofthus, Deputy City Manager
REVIEWED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
APPROVED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PowerPoint Presentation
26 27
28 29
30 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.
AGENDA TRANSMITTAL
MEETING DATE:
January 16, 2024
AGENDA ITEM:
Discussion and Direction – Humphrey Drive Open Channel Clean-Up
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact from this item is estimated at $109,000 which includes $103,000 for the contractor’s work and an estimated $6,000 for Public Works Maintenance (PWM) crew time support of this project. The Channel Maintenance Fund 190 would be the most likely candidate to cover the costs associated with this project. This fund is currently underfunded in addressing regular and routine maintenance tasks.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Provide Good Governance. Ensure Public Safety. Enhance Environment.
BACKGROUND:
Council requested that staff compile a cost estimate for the one-time clean-up of the Humphry Drive Open Channel. The Humphrey Drive Open Channel (Channel) runs parallel to and along the east side of Humphrey Drive. This Channel outfalls into the bend where McCoy Creek and Laurel Creek meet. This Channel area routinely receives a high volume of illegally dumped items with dumped items and homeless camp debris which is removed by PWM crew regularly.
STAFF REPORT:
Completing a one-time clean-up of the Humphrey Drive Open Channel requires the coordination and organization of multiple tasks. Tasks include: removal of illegally dumped items (PWM), removal of homeless camp debris (PWM), clearing and removal of vegetation (contractor), removal of trees (contractor), and completing any needed repairs to the outfalls on each end of the Channel (PWM and/or contractor).
Staff reached out to a local vendor who has worked on our canals in the past for a quote to perform the required vegetation and tree removal and cleaning. The quote for $103,000 includes the following:
Removal of trash and illegal debris
Removal of approximately 100 +/- trees from the ditch prior to clearing.
Tree trunks and larger limbs will be hauled off site
Remaining debris will be chipped and spread along the access path to the ditch Clear approximately 3800ft. of ditch running along east side of Humphrey Dr. starting at Railroad Ave. south to the end of Humphrey Dr.
Excavate vegetation and approximately 6in. of soil along the full length of ditch Spoils will be disposed of off-site
It is estimated that it will take two days total for PWM crew (three crew members) to complete the project preparation and post-project support needed to allow the contractor to complete their portion of this one-time project. This cost for PWM crew time is estimated at $6,000.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommendation is for Council to discuss and provide direction to staff on this item.
31 DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .
PowerPoint Presentation Humphrey Drive Open Channel Clean-Up Project
PREPARED BY:
Amanda Dum, Management Analyst II
REVIEWED BY:
Nouae Vue, Public Works Director/City Engineer
APPROVED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
PowerPoint Presentation Humphrey Drive Open Channel.pdf 32 33
34 35
36 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.
AGENDA TRANSMITTAL
MEETING DATE:
January 16, 2024
AGENDA ITEM:
Discussion and Direction regarding the costs associated with Sea Level Rise.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Unknown and yet to be determined at this time. Costs referred to in this staff report are professional estimates. The Council’s direction to allocate additional time on this subject will assist with determining true costs to address sea level rise.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Provide Good Governance and Develop Sustainable Economy.
BACKGROUND:
The Bay Area is defined by its relationship to water, with iconic beaches on the outer coasts, vast wetlands and diverse habitats, maritime culture and commerce, and diverse shoreline communities spanning across the Bay, the Delta, and the Outer Coast. Sea level rise adaptation in the Bay Area will require a vivid reimagining of our relationship with the Bay, the Pacific Coast, and the Delta. Critically though, adapting successfully to this uncertain future will require significant amounts of funding that are not available now, nor anticipated to emerge in the near future.
The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and Association of Bay Area Governments has developed the Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
(Attachment 1.) which is the regions first report
solely devoted to quantifying the magnitude of the funding required to protect the bay’s shoreline from flooding due to sea level rise and storms by 2050. Fueled by the most robust data to date on what’s been built, what’s planned, and where the gaps are within the region. This report identifies some early steps to help further prepare the region for sea level rise adaptation and identifies some cities and counties that have started to commit dollars to planning, developing project concepts, and even delivering projects. However, recognizing the regional costs are in the billions, the consequences of sea level rise are significant, and the timeline is short. It is important that protections are in place before inundation occurs, and not rely on remediating potential social and economic damage.
STAFF REPORT:
This past year the Environmental and Climate Committee has discussed the local impacts of sea level rise and what the City can do to build a resilient community. In response to their discussion, in August 2023, a broader discussion occurred with staff focusing on solutions such as amendments to development standards and evaluating the risk and cost to the City to address the consequences of sea level rise. It was determined by the Committee that absent a focused evaluation of risk coupled with the associated costs of this risk, it was very difficult to quantify the scope and costs to address this critical issue. Therefore, the Committee requested that staff spend more time assessing what a resiliency program would entail and as best of the limited information, determine costs.
Currently, the best estimation to address sea level rise is in the millions. Based on 29,500 feet or 5.6 miles of shorelines a cost estimate that is derived from the Kellogg Resiliency Project Cost/Budget serves the purpose of offering stakeholders an initial grasp of the potential financial implications associated with the project (Attachment 2.). It serves to facilitate funding acquisition, informs decision- making during project development, and ensuring alignment with budgetary constraints. Moreover, this estimate can also serve as a foundational point for more comprehensive and precise cost assessments. 65 The overall preliminary cost estimate by the engineer, in current monetary terms, stands at approximately $250 million, encompassing the following components:
• Project Management
• Feasibility Analysis
• Preliminary Design
• Community Engagement
• Environmental Compliance
• Engineering Design
• Construction Management, Inspection, and Quality Control • Construction Activities
Staff is requesting approval from the City Council to investigate and determine the cost required to address the issue of rising sea levels. This involves a small amount of staff time spent in contact with engineers and external agency officials. This action aims to explore and verify the costs associated with rising sea levels. It is important to note that taking action will not authorize funds to be redirected from the General Fund.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is seeking City Council approval to explore and validate the costs associated with rising sea levels.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .
Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report. 2 .
Potential Sea Level Rise Construction Methods.
3 .
PowerPoint Presentation
PREPARED BY:
Jim Bermudez, Development Services Director
REVIEWED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
APPROVED BY:
Aaron Roth, Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Sea Level Rise Adaption Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
2. Potential Sea Level Rise Construction Methods.docx
3. PowerPoint Presentation
66 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and
Investment Framework Final Report
Metropolitan Transportation Commission / Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission July 2023
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
67 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and
Investment Framework Final Report Draft
July 2023
Project Staff
Project Manager
Rachael Hartofelis, MTC/ABAG
MTC/ABAG Framework Staff
Nora Bayley, Michael Germeraad, Kate Lyons, Dave Vautin BCDC Framework Staff
Dana Brechwald, Todd Hallenbeck, Daniel Hossfeld,
Viktoria Kuehn, Nicolas Sander
Acknowledgements
Layout Design
Miguel A. Osorio, MTC/ABAG
Consultants
AECOM, Oakland CA; Sperry Capital, Sausalito, CA
Cover Photo Credits
Karl Nielsen, 2017
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Association of Bay Area Governments
Bay Area Metro Center
375 Beale Street, Suite 800,
San Francisco, CA 94105
mtc.ca.gov abag.ca.gov
San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission
Bay Area Metro Center
375 Beale Street, Suite 510,
San Francisco, CA 94105
bcdc.ca.gov
68 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i
0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 0 .1 Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 0 .2 Regional and Local Planning Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 0 .3 Regional Adaptation Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 0 .4 What is the Framework? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
1. Update and Improve Regional Accounting of Anticipated Sea Level Rise Adaptation Projects . . .9 1 .1 Identifying Vulnerability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 1 .2 Creating a Shoreline Adaptation Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 1 .3 Estimating Regional Adaptation Needs Through 2050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 1 .4 Additional Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
2. Update and Characterize Existing Revenue Sources for Sea Level Rise Adaptation . . . . . . . . .17 2 .1 Updating Existing Public Revenue Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
3. Study How New Revenues for Sea Level Rise Adaptation Needs Can Be Raised Most Equitably . .25 3 .1 The Funding Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 3 .2 Exploring Potential Revenue Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 3 .3 . Revenue and Bonding Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3 .4 “Who Pays?”: Initial Understandings of Geographic Balance and Social Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
4. Next Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 4 .1 Additional Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
69 Photo: Karl Nielsen, 2023
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
i Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 70 iSea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Executive Summary
Sea level rise adaptation in the Bay Area will require a vivid reimagining of our relationship with the Bay, the Pacific Coast, and the Delta . From our iconic beaches, urban shorelines, bustling ports, and vast wetlands, no part of our shoreline will remain unchanged . Critically though, adapting successfully to this uncertain future will require significant amounts of funding that are not available now, nor anticipated to emerge in the near future .
The Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework (Framework) has been jointly developed by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and Association of Bay Area Governments . It is the region’s first report solely devoted to quantifying the magnitude of the funding required to protect the bay’s shoreline from flooding due to sea level rise and storms by 2050 . Fueled by the most robust data to date on what’s been built, what’s planned, and where the gaps are, it ultimately yielded the following key findings:
• Protecting all portions of the shoreline that will experience sea level rise and storm surge by 2050 is estimated to cost $110 billion . Some decisions may lower or raise the estimate, such as determining how the region prioritizes protection .
• Of that amount, Bay Area governments can account for just over $5 billion being available through existing federal, state, regional, and local funding programs . This leaves a gap of approximately $105 billion to fill in the next decades . • While the cost of tackling this regional challenge is significant, failing to adapt would result in a much larger deficit .
Even a partial estimate of the cost of inaction is anticipated to be over $230 billion . • Some counties will experience more flooding sooner than others, meaning that adaptation costs are not evenly distributed . Some counties have planned and developed projects more than others, leading to questions about where new funding should go .
• Filling the funding gap will require a mix of funding types and amounts . There is no single “magic bullet” that can fill a $105 billion gap . Parcel taxes and ad-valorem taxes may be feasible options at the regional or county level, but both would need further study to advance equitable outcomes . • Developing equitable adaptation is paramount. How we fill the funding gap can either exacerbate or maintain existing environmental injustices instead of ameliorating them . From who pays to who benefits, some solutions are simply more equitable than others .
• A regional approach is critical. Differences among counties in terms of vulnerability and planning indicate the need for a regional approach for funding and project development to ensure no one is left behind .
Despite these challenges, the Framework identifies some early steps to help further prepare the region for sea level rise adaptation, and many cities and counties have started to commit dollars to planning, developing project concepts, and even delivering projects . However, the challenge is significant, and the timeline is short . It is important that protections are in place before inundation occurs, and not rely on remediating potential social and economic damage .
In the months and years ahead, the following next steps are proposed to tackle this major regional challenge:
• Prioritize sea level rise investments through upcoming regional planning efforts by MTC/ABAG and BCDC, determining which areas require early action .
• Explore opportunities to advance resilience through planned housing and transportation ballot measures.
To the extent possible, integrate policies and programs to support sea level rise adaptation . • Collect and maintain project data through supporting the development of BCDC’s Shoreline Adaptation Project Mapping Program .
• Accelerate advocacy efforts. Use updated data to pursue a larger share of state and federal dollars to protect people, places, and the environment .
• Define lead roles to fund plans and projects. There is no one clear agency tasked with securing and distributing funding, which means that this is not occurring in a timely and organized manner . • Support local and private efforts to develop funding and financing tools .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
71 Page Intentionally Left Blank
72 3Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
0. Introduction
Photo: Karl Nielsen, 2020
0.1 Context
The Bay Area is defined by its relationship to water, with iconic beaches on the outer coasts, vast wetlands and diverse habitats, maritime culture and commerce, and diverse shoreline communities spanning across the Bay, the Delta, and the Outer Coast . Transportation and infrastructure networks wind across the region’s shoreline, connecting us to one another and supporting the region’s vitality .
However, rising sea levels put the region at risk . The Bay Area is already experiencing the early impacts of rising sea level, including more extensive coastal flooding during storms, periodic tidal flooding, and increased coastal erosion .
The California Ocean Protection Council estimates that the region may experience up to 1 .4 feet of permanent sea level rise inundation by 2050, with 3 .4-4 .4 feet projected by 2100, dependent on global emissions1, on top of storm-induced flooding . The impacts to the Bay Area will be significant - while the Bay Area accounts for a third of the California shoreline, two-thirds of the state’s sea level rise impacts are anticipated to be felt in the region2 . 1 Based on the San Francisco projection for 5% exceedance . Ocean Protection Council . (2018) . State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance: 2018 Update . Page 18 . https://www .opc .ca .gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/agenda_items/20180314/Item3_Exhibit-A_OPC_SLR_Guidance-rd3 .pdf 2 Barnard, P ., Erikson, L ., Foxgrover, A ., et al . (2019) . Dynamic Flood Modeling Essential to Assess the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change .
Scientific Reports, 9, 4309 . https://doi .org/10 .1038/s41598-019-40742-z SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
73 4 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission The estimated impacts to the Bay Area through 2050 will be felt throughout the region (see Figure 2) . Over 75,000 households are estimated to be directly at risk from sea level rise impacts, including over 12,000 in the region’s most socially vulnerable communities3, including households in communities like East Palo Alto, San Rafael’s Canal District, and the Alviso neighborhood of San Jose . In addition, an estimated 200,000 jobs are anticipated to be at risk, affecting industries in Benicia, small businesses along the Marin County shorelines, the bustling tourism economy of San Francisco’s Embarcadero, and internationally significant technology campuses lining the San Mateo County shore – among many others .
In addition, over 20,000 acres of the region’s rich wetlands and other critical ecosystems are also at risk of inundation .
As the sea levels rise, many habitats will not have the time or space to migrate upland and adapt . As a result, habitat for nearly a million migratory birds, nurseries for fish and shellfish, and other diverse species may all be affected . In addition, the wetlands help to mitigate flood impacts, enhance water quality, sequester carbon, and provide important recreational opportunities4 .
While there are cost estimates for some potential impacts, much of the impact of sea level rise is difficult to quantify .
For example, the assessed value described below is not available as a market value, meaning that the true cost to parcels at risk in the region cannot currently be quantified . Other impacts are difficult to quantify in terms of dollars at all . For example, it is difficult to put a value on the region’s diverse cultures, communities, and dynamic ecosystems . As such, the “cost of inaction” summaries in the Framework only captures a subset of the potential sea level rise impacts for the Bay Area .
Assets at risk of SLR flooding5:
75k total households, including 12k in the most vulnerable communities . 200k total jobs, and 15k total businesses .
20k vulnerable acres at risk, including depressional wetlands, lagoons, and tidal marshes6 .
Estimates of a Subset of Assets at Risk:
(in 2022 dollars)
$85 billion
Estimated assessed value of parcels at risk.
$151 billion
Estimated value of major roadways at risk7.
3 Defined as moderate, high, or highest social vulnerability by BCDC’s Community Vulnerability Data, which categorizes areas using a number of vulnerability indicators, such as income and race . https://data-bcdc .opendata .arcgis .com/datasets/BCDC::community-vulnerability- bcdc-2020/about
4 Californi a State Coastal Conservancy . (2015) . The Baylands and Climate Change What We Can Do: Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Science Update 2015. Page xxiii . https://www .sfei .org/sites/default/files/biblio_files/Baylands_Complete_Report .pdf 5 Based on 4 .9 feet of inundation . For additional information on the inundation assumption, please see Identifying Vulnerability . 6 BCDC and MTC/ABAG . (2020) . Adapting To Rising Tides Bay Area: Short Report Summary of Regional Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Study . Page 11 . https://www .adaptingtorisingtides .org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/ARTBayArea_Short_Report_Final_March2020_ADA .pdf . 7 Calculated based on 230 miles of vulnerable major class roadways, using a median transportation adaptation cost of $125,000 per foot .
Adaptation assumes only elevation or realignment and not protection in place or multi-benefit solutions . For additional cost assumptions, please see Estimating Regional Adaptation Needs Through 2050 .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
74 5Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
0.2 Regional and Local Planning Efforts
Regional agencies, including the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments (MTC/ABAG), the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), have strengthened the regional focus on sea level rise in recent years, building off long-standing regional efforts from California State Coastal Conservancy, the San Francisco Estuary Institute, the San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP), and others . In 2021 and 2022, major regional planning efforts from MTC/ABAG, BCDC, and SFEP worked closely to align regional priorities on sea level rise .
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments Plan Bay Area 2050 Implementation Plan
2021
A multifaced regional plan that addresses housing, transportation, economic, and environmental challenges . “Adapt to Sea Level Rise” is one of 35 strategies in the Plan .
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Bay Adapt Joint Platform
2021
A Joint Platform of priority actions to advance long-term sea level rise adaptation in the Bay Area . The Joint Platform is made up of nearly two dozen priority actions, and is now advanced to implementation .
San Francisco Estuary Partnership
San Francisco Estuary Blueprint
2022
The Estuary Blueprint is a regional plan to achieve a healthy and resilient San Francisco Estuary . Sea level rise adaptation is embedded in the 25 identified actions .
Local efforts are more varied across the region . A 2021 regional survey on Bay Area Sea Level Rise Adaptation Progress, Gaps, and Needs focused on shoreline jurisdictions reported that 92 percent of respondents indicated they have insufficient resources to adequately plan and prepare for sea level rise, while 45 percent of respondents did not have an adaptation plan at all8 . The local planning disparities emphasize the need for a regional approach . Without regional coordination and support, local jurisdictions with less capacity may not have the resources to either plan for or adapt to sea level rise .
8 BCDC, BayCAN, MTC/ABAG, BARC, SFEI, SFEP . (2021) . Sea Level Rise Adaptation Progress, Gaps & Needs Survey: 2021 Survey of Sea Level Rise Adaptation in the Bay Area . Page 4 . https://www .adaptingtorisingtides .org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/2021-Progress-Gaps-Needs- Survey-Report_final_ADA .pdf
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
75 6 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission
0.3 Regional Adaptation Funding
The recent regional efforts collaboratively identified a number of priority actions for sea level rise, spanning topics from planning to implementation . However, all three efforts identified a high priority action to pursue a regional sea level rise adaptation funding plan .
The action was identified in response to regional analysis, including the Plan Bay Area 2050 Sea Level Rise Needs and Revenue Assessment and BCDC’s Bridging the Gap: Funding Sea Level Rise Adaptation in the Bay Area . Plan Bay Area 2050 estimated that the region may need $19 billion to adapt to two feet of permanent inundation, estimating a $16 billion gap when accounting for projected existing revenue sources9 . Bridging the Gap summarized sea level rise damage estimates for the region, including the Plan Bay Area 2050 estimate and a study by the University of California at Berkeley . The analysis resulted in an estimated regional funding gap of roughly $315 million to $570 million per year to protect against two feet of permanent inundation, with higher estimates projected through 210010 .
However, previous regional studies had not accounted for current and planned adaptation projects, nor thoroughly analyzed potential new revenue sources . In addition, state guidance on planning for sea level rise inundation was updated after the regional studies were completed (for more information on updated state guidance, see 1 .1 Identifying Vulnerability) .
In response to the regional call to action identified in major regional planning efforts, MTC/ABAG and BCDC collaboratively kicked off the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework (Framework) in December 2021 .
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments Plan Bay Area 2050 Implementation Plan
2021
Action 9. “Develop a sea level rise funding plan to support the implementation of projects that reduce sea level rise risks to communities, infrastructure and ecology, prioritizing green infrastructure wherever possible .”
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Bay Adapt Joint Platform
2021
Task 6.1 “Expand understanding of the financial costs and revenue associated with regional adaptation .”
Task 6.2 “Establish a framework for funding plans and projects .” San Francisco Estuary Partnership
San Francisco Estuary Blueprint
2022
Task 3-6 “Milestone – A sea level rise adaptation funding and investment framework for the San Francisco Bay Area .”
9 MTC/ABAG . (2021) . Technical Assumptions Report – Technical Assumptions for the Environmental Element . https://www .planbayarea .org/sites/ default/files/documents/Plan_Bay_Area_2050_Technical_Assumptions_Report_October_2021 .pdf 10 BCDC . (2021) . Bridging the Gap: Funding Sea Level Rise Adaptation in the Bay Area . https://www .adaptingtorisingtides .org/wp-content/ uploads/2021/12/ART_FundingFinancingPaper2021 .12 .20 .pdf SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
76 7Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
0.4 What is the Framework?
Photo: Ben Botkin, 2020
The Framework is a joint effort from MTC/ABAG and BCDC . The Framework was created to help the region prepare for near-term adaptation funding opportunities by improving our advocacy for additional state and federal sources, while informing future discussions for long term adaptation funding approaches at the local and regional scales . The study area includes all nine Bay Area counties, including the San Francisco Bay (Bay), the California Outer Coast (Outer Coast), and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) .
The Framework is centered on regional partnership . Local and regional engagement took place throughout the project to support the development of a regional adaptation project inventory, and to share goals and outcomes . A Technical Advisory Group (TAG) made up of local, regional, and state stakeholders also supported the analysis with local knowledge and subject matter expertise throughout the project .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
77 8 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission The Framework has three focus areas, each of which is detailed as a section in this report:
FOCUS AREAS
FA1. Update and improve regional
accounting of planned,
anticipated, and potential sea
level rise adaptation projects .
FA2. Update and characterize
existing revenue sources for
sea level rise adaptation .
FA3. Study how new revenues for
sea level rise adaptation needs
can be raised most equitably .
OUTCOMES
• Update prior regional
analysis with local projects
from recent planning efforts .
• Estimate the regional sea
level rise adaptation needs
through 2050 .
• Inventory and forecast revenues
for new state and federal
funding programs .
• Characterize how existing
adaptation funds are dispersed
and for what purpose .
• Analyze a range of possible
revenue measures (parcel taxes,
ad-valorem property taxes, and
assessment districts) at different
scales to understand equitable
approaches to close the sea
level rise funding gap .
KEY FINDINGS
$110 billion - Estimated cost of sea
level rise adaptation through 2050
(in Year of Expenditure dollars)
$ 5.5 billion - Estimated existing
revenue forecast through 2050
(in Year of Expenditure dollars)
• Regional and/or local measures
will not be capable of closing
the funding gap .
• For geographic equity, using
multiple types of funding
measures would help to balance
the tax burden .
• Parcel taxes are less socially
equitable than an ad-valorem tax,
as they place a higher burden
on socially vulnerable areas .
In addition to the report, details on Framework assumptions and methodologies can be found in the Technical Appendix. Connections to the Technical Appendix are referenced under relevant headings throughout the report .
Not every heading has a related section in the Technical Appendix .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
78 9Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
1. Update and Improve Regional Accounting of Anticipated Sea Level Rise Adaptation Projects
1.1 Identifying Vulnerability
The Framework assumed a threshold adaptation height to determine the scope of the analysis . The assumption focused on near-term inundation to align with other planning efforts . As such, the Framework relied on 2050 projections for permanent inundation by the California Ocean Protection Council published in 201811, plus an extreme storm surge scenario to meet state guidance recommendations to “Ensure California’s coast is resilient to at least 3 .5 feet of sea level rise by 205012” and to coincide with many local planning efforts13 . The Framework uses 4.9 feet of Total Water Level (TWL) to identify adaptation vulnerability and protection .
Figure 1. Diagram Summarizing 4 .9ft of Inundation
BCDC formally adopted the Ocean Protection Council Guidance in 2018 and it is currently considered “best available science” for regional sea level rise scenarios . The Ocean Protection Council recommended projections for 2050 range from 1 .1-2 .7 feet . The Framework also used regional precedents to support the inundation assumption . In Plan Bay Area 2050, one, two, and three feet of inundation were studied before a final two foot assumption for permanent inundation was used for the final plan . However, the state released updated guidance to plan for a minimum of 3 .5 feet of sea level rise after initial Plan assumptions were set .
Supported by the TAG, the project team determined an approach to sum two values: a sea level rise projection height for the 2050 horizon year and additional height to account for temporary flooding risk from storms . The Framework used the 2018 Ocean Protection Council’s 5% probability for 2050, which projects 1 .4 feet of permanent inundation from sea level rise, combined with a 100 year storm, which is estimated to add 3 .5 feet above MHW . The combined projected permanent inundation plus a 100 year storm is 4 .9 feet TWL . While the sea level rise and storm impacts can at times be separately assessed, the Framework considers shoreline impacts as a whole, recognizing that short term inundation from storms overlaps with long term inundation from sea level rise over time . 11 Ocean Protection Council . (2018) . State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance: 2018 Update . Page 18 . https://www .opc .ca .gov/webmaster/ftp/ pdf/agenda_items/20180314/Item3_Exhibit-A_OPC_SLR_Guidance-rd3 .pdf 12 Ocean Protection Council . (2020) . Strategic Plan to Protect California’s Coast and Ocean 2020-2025 . Page 7 . http://www .opc .ca .gov/ webmaster/ftp/pdf/agenda_items/20200226/OPC-2020-2025-Strategic-Plan-FINAL-20200228 .pdf 13 The guidance was reinforced in: Sea-Level Rise Leadership Team . (2022) . State Agency Sea-Level Rise Action Plan for California . https://www . opc .ca .gov/webmaster/_media_library/2022/08/SLR-Action-Plan-2022-508 .pdf SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
79 10 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission The 4 .9 f oot assumption also allowed the Framework to align with currently available flood data layers . The 150 cm (or 4 .9 f oot) layer in United States Geological Survey Coastal Storm Modeling System mapping data was selected as the best available layer to study vulnerability in the Bay and Outer Coast . The dataset was selected based on how widely it was used in the industry, analytical ease, extensive availability of inundation heights, data resolution, and geographic coverage across the Bay and Outer Coast . Delta Adapts Flood Hazard data from the Delta Stewardship Council was used to represent Delta inundation due to its distinct hydrology . While depth of projected inundation varies in the Delta models due to its hydrology, the Framework used the mapping scenario that had inundation averages closest to the overall 4 .9 foot inundation assumption .
The Framework analysis focuses on shoreline inundation from sea level rise and storm surge, but does not include stormwater, precipitation, and groundwater rise impacts . However, freshwater inflows from rivers and tributaries are estimated in some locations14 . Groundwater mapping was not available at the regional level at the time of the analysis, though groundwater is accounted for in some local projects analyzed by the Framework . For additional information on sea level rise data assumptions, please see the Technical Appendix .
1.2 Creating a Shoreline Adaptation Inventory
The Framework created a shoreline adaptation project inventory to develop high-level cost estimates for regional adaptation, and to identify adaptation project implementation gaps .
Staff developed a draft inventory from two different sources:
• Locally identified projects: BCDC’s Shoreline Adaptation Project Map (SAPMap) includes regionally identified adaptation projects that are in progress and mapped in the regional database, EcoAtlas15 . • Local project concepts: identified by Framework project staff within local planning documents (e .g . General Plans, Vulnerability Assessments, Climate Adaptation Plans, Local Hazard Mitigation Plans) or through engagement with local jurisdictions . In addition to projects in progress, some early-stage adaptation concepts were also included16 .
Local project concepts were collected to find projects not yet identified in the SAPMap . – Local studies were defined as early-stage project concepts, and were represented separately due to the lack of definition in the project footprints, which would have inflated cost estimates .
BCDC’s Shoreline Adaptation Project Mapping Program
The Shoreline Adaptation Project Map (SAPMap) identifies projects that have a nexus with sea level rise adaptation in the San Francisco Bay . The SAPMap is mapped within the EcoAtlas Project Tracker, a state-wide resource built to provide resources for wetland management . The SAPMap expands the scope of EcoAtlas to include adaptation activities that manage the shoreline, reduce flooding, or adapt to sea level rise, and may include gray, hybrid, or green design adaptation activities . The SAPMap was developed in coordination with the Framework, and will be maintained as a regional resource into the future to support the region’s needs to track progress toward shoreline resilience goals .
The inventory projects span from nearshore, subtidal restoration projects to upland and developed flood protection projects, including some projects along stream channels where the head of tide has influence . Projects were selected based on sufficient design information, including a defined geography, identified adaptation activities (spanning green, hybrid, and gray activities, such as marsh restoration, ecotone levees, and seawalls, respectively), sea level rise design details, and project status . Adaptation activities were also sorted into generalized activity categories, or “archetypes”, to help with estimating unknown costs later in the process . Projects that were too early in the planning stages to meet these data thresholds were generally not included in the inventory . 14 Our Coast Our Future . (2014) . San Francisco Bay – CoSMoS v.2.x Frequently Asked Questions . https://ourcoastourfuture .or g/wp-content/ uploads/2022/02/San-Francisco-Bay_FAQ_2014 .pdf
15 EcoAtlas: San Francisco Bay Adaptation Group . (2022, December) . San Francisco Bay Adaptation . https://www .ec oatlas .or g/groups/303 16 Local adaptation plans by utilities were not included in the scope of the analysis .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
80 11Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Figure 2. (Top to Bottom) Examples of Green, Hybrid, and Gray Infrastructure Green Infrastructure Example
Marsh Restoration: rehabilitating or re-establishing a marsh area to return its natural functions and restore wetland habitat; 100,000 acres of marsh restoration is a goal for the region .
Photo: Kingmond Young
Hybrid Infrastructure Example
Ecotone Levees: creating a gently sloped levee, which can attenuate waves, ecotone levees provide a wetland-upland transition zone habitat and allow marshland to migrate upslope .
Photo: Noah Berger
Gray Infrastructure Example
Seawalls: constructing physical barriers of human-engineered materials in the case of sea walls to deter erosion and inundation17 .
Photo: Mike Gifford, Flickr
When available, cost and funding information was also collected, in addition to design conditions related to sea level rise height and extreme storm events to determine level of protection . In addition to projects, local studies were included when identified by a local jurisdiction .
Outreach on the draft inventory to local agencies was conducted in fall 2022 to verify the details of each project and to identify additional projects, starting and concluding with regional outreach meetings . To review the inventory, interviews were done with local staff across all nine Bay Area counties, including over 90 local contacts, including county staff, local staff, or staff at other agencies that led projects . The outreach began in September 2022 and was completed in December 2022 . With local assistance, the project team was able to update two-thirds of the existing inventory with additional or updated project details, while adding 47 additional projects . In total, approximately 200 projects and study areas were identified, many with multiple sites or adaptation activities .
The Framework assumed the protection of all vulnerable segments of the shoreline in place through 4 .9ft TWL of inundation, including low density areas and agricultural land . Based on the inventory, certain vulnerable shoreline segments were identified as not yet having sufficient project plans in place to provide adequate sea level rise protection . For example, projects that increased sea level rise resilience through means other than direct flood protection, such as providing wave attenuation, sediment accretion, erosion control and groundwater infiltration were kept in the inventory when identified due to their indirect benefits . However, additional flood protection was assumed to protect the developed edge of the shoreline .
To understand the regional funding need, the Framework needed to account for costs in areas with less advanced project planning or implementation . To this end, staff created placeholders to estimate adaptation costs in significantly inundated areas by assuming the protection of the shoreline in place . Placeholders were added in areas with no known project plans, local study areas, and areas where a project was not confirmed to provide sufficient protection to 4 .9 feet TWL, such as the projects with indirect benefits described above, or projects built to withstand a lower inundation height . As such, they may overlap with inventory projects in some locations . Placeholders were developed by determining locations with overtopping and significant flooding . Vulnerable locations were then assigned an appropriate activity archetype by comparing the area to the San Francisco Estuary Institute’s Adaptation Atlas suitability analysis, and the levee information from the Delta Stewardship Council . Green archetypes were assumed wherever possible within the suitability analysis . The placeholders were drawn to address the overtopping 17 MTC/ABAG . (2021) . Plan Bay Area 2050 . Page 100 . https://www .planbayarea .org/finalplan2050 SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
81 12 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and inundation as it related to the shoreline, emphasizing protection in lieu of other regional goals, such as restoration .
To this end, placeholders were identified that could have activity archetype costs applied . For additional information on the placeholder development, please see the Technical Report .
Figure 3. Final Framework Inventory
The Framework inventory uses local projects and study areas along with placeholders to estimate regional adaptation costs . It is not intended to recommend specific adaptation activities in any given location, to prioritize one adaptation area over another, or to supersede or contradict ongoing local adaptation planning . The inventory also does not include managed retreat, or other approaches that strategically plan to not protect the shoreline in place . Inventory projects referenced by the Framework were developed by local jurisdictions and project proponents independently, not by MTC/ABAG or BCDC . However, inventory projects often lacked critical project details; for example, 49 percent of the projects in the inventory did not have flood protection data available from local project sponsors and 20 percent were missing a locally identified project cost . In these circumstances, the project team filled data gaps by estimating or approximating details such as project cost, project type, and flood protection . In addition, the Framework acknowledges that information on inventory projects will change as projects proceed through advanced planning, local engagement, and implementation .
Additionally, the Framework acknowledges that placeholders do not represent recommended projects, and that they were created for the sole purpose of estimating regional adaptation costs . The placeholders have not been proposed, have not undergone local reviews, or been analyzed for consistency with BCDC laws and policies . In future efforts, it is anticipated that placeholders will be replaced by locally identified projects or land use plans .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
82 13Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
1.3 Estimating Regional Adaptation Needs Through 2050
The Framework uses the inventory to develop a regional cost estimate for sea level rise adaptation . Staff utilized two different methods of cost estimation:
• Known costs: project costs identified by local staff or the SAPMap . Known costs were prioritized for inclusion if available . • Activity Archetype estimates: costs estimated if no known project cost data was provided, and for placeholders .
Activity archetype cost estimates were developed based on the adaptation activity, including horizontal levees, marsh restoration, seawalls, or other adaptations and the dimensions, including area or length . The Framework analysis builds on work done in Plan Bay Area 2050, which identified initial activity archetype cost estimates to develop a $19 billion estimate for regional adaptation need . The Framework expanded the Plan Bay Area 2050 activity archetype estimates by adding additional archetypes common to the Bay Area, incorporating recent constructed project costs, and seeking guidance from the TAG to expand and improve activity archetype cost estimates . The final estimates are summarized in Table 2 . Additional detail on the final cost estimates is available in the Technical Appendix .
Table 1. Archetype Cost Estimates for Adaptation Activity Types (in 2022 dollars) Adaptation Activity Archetype Adaptation
Type
Units Lower
Estimate
Mid-Point
Estimate
Higher
Estimate
Elevated Roadway Gray /foot $65,000 $125,000 $199,000
Tidal Gate Gray /unit $7,351,000 $14,175,000 $23,775,000 Seawall Gray /foot $9,000 $18,000 $35,000
Riprap Gray /foot $6,000 $11,000 $19,000
Traditional Levee Gray /foot $3,000 $6,000 $11,000
Ecotone Levee Hybrid /foot $13,000 $18,000 $23,000
Marsh Restoration Green /acre $36,000 $43,000 $50,000
Marsh Sediment Management Green /acre $39,000 $191,000 $342,000 Beach Restoration Green /acre $295,000 $590,000 $1,180,000 Beach Sediment Management Green /acre $407,000 $815,000 $1,629,000 Upland and Creek Restoration Green /acre $594,000 $601,000 $608,000 Polder Restoration Green /acre $20,000 $25,000 $56,000
Restoration Submerged Vegetation Green /acre $67,000 $189,000 $310,000 Activity archetype costs were used to fill cost gaps in the inventory and to assign costs to placeholders, and then summarized along with known costs to develop a regional cost estimate for sea level rise adaptation . When a range of costs was identified for a project for both known or activity archetype costs, staff used the median or mid-point value to summarize regionally18 . An assumed regional cost was also added to account for additional sediment management needs to maintain and manage existing and planned tidal marsh habitat restoration . 18 Studies were not included in the cost estimate unless a known cost was identified .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
83 14 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission The final regional estimate is represented in year-of-expenditure dollars through 2050 . Construction dates were unknown for most projects; as such, the estimate was created by assuming that an equal number of projects will be constructed each year, followed by assuming a 3 percent escalation rate year over year . Partially spent funding, where known, was subtracted from the regional cost estimate, though there may be additional projects with partial funding that were not known at the time of the analysis . Other adaptation strategies not estimated or assumed within the Framework analysis would likely change regional estimates, including adaptation activities without protection (including managed retreat), building code changes, or other local land use policy adjustments that may change a community’s ability to adapt to sea level rise . In addition, future analysis will need to include riverine and groundwater data as it becomes regionally available, as well as additional adaptation project plans, such as those made by utilities .
The total regional cost estimate for sea level rise adaptation through 2050 is $110 billion using the median estimate for all projects . Using the assumptions in Table 1 for gaps and any known project cost ranges, total regional cost estimates were also developed using low and high estimate levels, as shown in Table 2 .
Table 2. Range of Total Regional Cost Estimates (year-of-expenditure dollars) Low Estimate Median/Mid-Point Estimate High Estimate
$ 81 billion $110 billion $ 147 billion
However, this value does not necessarily represent the actual amount of revenues required to adapt . As mentioned previously, the Framework utilizes the conservative assumption of protecting the entirety of the vulnerable shoreline in place, and assumes 4 .9 feet of inundation within the study period, which is significantly higher than 2050 projections for permanent inundation . In addition, many of the projects and placeholders included in the Framework required project costs to be estimated: 63 percent of the total cost estimate came from activity archetype costs, 51 percent of which represented placeholders . Actual project costs may be lower or higher than the estimated costs . The inventory is also snapshot of a moment in time, and adaptation efforts and their costs will continue to develop or shift, especially for projects that are in the early planning or conceptual stages .
1.4 Additional Findings
Figure 4. County Need Estimates by Project Type
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
84 15Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Project Types: Green, Gray, and Hybrid
The analysis has shown that most of the planned projects are “hybrid” in nature, as seen in Figure 4, representing a regional focus on multiple benefits, such as levees paired with marsh restoration . For the purposes of the Framework, the term “hybrid” includes projects that have at least one green and one Gray adaptation activity, without consideration of the percent of the project that uses the activity types . As such, the multiple benefits of hybrid projects may be over-represented in the inventory .
However, Figure 5 illustrates a regional trend toward green, or nature-based projects . When accounting for number of projects, restoration and sediment management activities collectively make up the majority of activities in most counties, as shown . Alameda, San Francisco, and San Mateo counties have a mix of Gray, hybrid, and green projects currently planned, while Marin, Santa Clara, and the North Bay have a greater proportion of green activities . This distinction aligns with the constraints on green projects due to shoreline development in the highly urbanized counties . Additionally, many of Contra Costa and San Francisco’s projects are identified as “Other,” which can represent adaptation activities that are non-physical in nature such as education and capacity building, combinations of activities, or singular activities that the Framework did not categorize as an activity, such as replacing wharfs or docks .
Figure 5. Share of Inventory Projects by Activity by County (Excluding Placeholders) SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
85 16 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Implementation Gaps
Looking across the nine counties (Figure 6), Alameda and Marin counties have the highest cost estimates based on the information gathered . Notably, approximately half of the estimated value across the full Bay Area region comes from “placeholders” created to develop cost estimates, with significant project implementation gaps identified in Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin counties . Figure 6 illustrates the variance from county to county . However, while identifying project implementation gaps is helpful in identifying where projects are still needed, project implementation gaps alone obscure a key nuance between counties . For example, while Marin County appears to have significant project implementation gaps where placeholders have been identified, the county has relatively few planning gaps when accounting for identified studies, meaning they are closer to developing adaptation solutions . By contrast, in Contra Costa County, the placeholder value represents a significant project implementation and planning gap and will require more resources to get to project development .
The differences in level of preparedness across the Bay Area, as illustrated by the level of implementation solutions, will continue to shift over time . The differences can help the region identify where additional support and capacity building may be needed to advance adaptation plans and projects . However, initiatives are already underway which can help ensure that cities and counties are advancing their adaptation efforts in consistent and effective ways, such as BCDC’s Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan . The Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan will develop common sea level rise planning guidelines to facilitate regional coordination across planning efforts and to simplify local planning . It will also provide technical assistance to ensure that the entire Bay Area shoreline has the resources to adapt to sea level rise .
Figure 6. Estimated Cost by Source and by Majority County Share: Locally Identified Projects and Placeholders (in year-of-expenditure dollars through 2050)
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
86 17Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
2. Update and Characterize Existing Revenue Sources for Sea Level Rise Adaptation
2.1 Updating Existing Public Revenue Estimates
The Framework developed a revenue forecast of existing sources that are funding sea level rise adaptation to estimate how much revenue the region can anticipate through 2050 . The Framework built upon past research as part of Plan Bay Area 2050 Sea Level Rise Needs and Revenue Assessment and BCDC’s Bridging the Gap: Funding Sea Level Rise Adaptation in the Bay Area .
The existing revenue forecast identified likely sources of sea level rise adaptation funding at the local, regional, state, and federal levels that exist today, and used a methodology to estimate how much revenue from those sources is expected through the year 2050 . It also estimated how much of that revenue is likely to flow to the nine-county Bay Area, and how much is likely to be eligible for sea level rise needs . The process to develop the existing revenue forecast is illustrated in Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Process to forecast existing revenues for each sea level rise funding source .
Step 1: Identify existing resilience fund sources
The analysis revisited previously identified funding sources, updated the forecast for those funds, and added over 30 new sources created by 2021 and 2022 Federal and State legislation and budget making . In total, the Framework identified 58 local, regional, state, and federal funding sources that may support sea level rise adaptation planning and implementation .
Step 2: Determine approach to forecast each funding source Each funding source was split into ongoing funds or one-time funds . The forecast approach followed the same steps for each category, but the methodology differed to reflect differences in information available as well as how the funding is likely to be raised .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
87 18 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Step 3a: Account for committed funding and understand historic Bay Area awards For one-time funds, administering agency budget documents were used to determine how much money, if any, had already been obligated . For state bonds, annual budget reports were used to confirm remaining funding . A majority of the IIJA, IRA, and California budget actions were one time increases or creations of new programs over the next one to five fiscal years . In those cases, because so much of that funding has yet to be spent, the total value of the program was used .
For ongoing funds, historic awards and allocations to the Bay Area were collected as far back as was possible . The total received by year was then escalated to 2022 dollars . The average across past years, in 2022 dollars, was used to forecast future years . If the funding trend changed significantly at any point, at times a rate of increase was reflected .
Ongoing funding programs that receive annual allocations were forecasted through the year 2050, or in the case of Measure AA, are forecasted through their approval year .
Step 3b: Determine share of funding for the Bay Area
The Framework assumes that the Bay Area only receives a share of State and Federal funding . For some ongoing fund sources, the past Bay Area share was used to assume the region’s future share . For some one-time fund sources, there were specific callouts to Bay Area projects, or Bay Area specific programs which resulted in special assumptions on the Bay Area share . Otherwise, the share of the funding assumed for the Bay Area was calculated using population share in two different ways .
If the funding source specifically focused on sea level rise, coastal, or ocean actions, it was assumed that the Bay Area would receive a share comparable to the nine-county population share of California coastal counties, or comparable to the nine-county population share of US coastal states . The nine county Bay Area accounts for 29 .1 percent of the State of California’s coastal county population, and is 3 .7 percent of the US coastal state population .
If the funding source was more general (e .g . focused on climate adaptation), it was assumed that the Bay Area would receive a share comparable to the nine-county population share of the California state population, or comparable to the nine-county population share of the United States . The nine County Bay Area accounts for 19 .3 percent of the State of California’s population, and 2 .3 percent of the US population .
Step 4: Determine share of funding for sea level rise adaptation Funding amounts were reduced to reflect how much of the overall funding is likely to be awarded to sea level rise adaptation . Many fund sources have broad eligibility . For example, many FEMA programs are focused on reducing risks from any climate impact or natural hazard . The Framework does not assume that all FEMA funds are spent toward sea level rise adaptation, but rather a percentage of funding . In other cases, a fund source, like bonds, may have programmatic categories with specific funding amounts of different goals . For each funding source a sea level rise share was assumed . For flexible funds with very broad programming goals, or funds for which a non-sea level rise adaptation was listed as the primary goal of the program, small shares of overall funding were assumed . For some fund sources with access to historic funding awards in the region, the assumption of the share of sea level rise was informed by past awards .
Step 5: Forecast existing funding sources
For most ongoing programs, it was assumed that the fund source would grow over time to track with inflation . This is not the case for all ongoing funding programs like Measure AA that are a uniform amount over time, or annual allocations that are defined by a flat value . For other ongoing programs, it was assumed that each year the value would increase at a rate of 3 percent, as established in 1.3 Estimating Regional Adaptation Needs Through 2050 .
The total estimate for existing public sea level rise revenues is $5.5 billion through 2050, detailed in Table 3 .
Additional detail will be available in the Existing Revenue Sources Spreadsheet .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
88 19Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Table 3. Existing Revenue Estimate by Funding Source
Funding Level Funding Source Estimated Funding
Timeline
Revenue Estimate
(in millions Year of
Expenditure)
Local Local Adaptation Bonds One-time $520
Local Committed Project Funding Estimate One-time $980
Regional Measure AA Through 2037 $430
State State Bonds One-time $90
State 2021 and 2022 State Budgets One-time $600
Federal NOAA Through 2050 $70
Federal EPA Through 2050 $110
Federal FEMA Through 2050 $970
Federal U .S . Army Corps of Engineers Through 2050 $1,590 Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) One-time $70 Federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) One-time $30
Various Other State and Federal Sources Various $60
Total $5,500
2.2 Characterizing the Funding Landscape
In addition to forecasting total public funding sources, the Framework sought to understand the characteristics of the money as a next step . To this end, the Framework created a “periodic table” of funding sources to help identify patterns, and to support future conversations about how the region can complement and build on existing fund sources . The periodic table visualizes fund sources along with additional characteristics such as the agency, amount forecasted, funding nexus, and other factors, designed as a resource that can be referenced quickly and easily .
The 58 funding sources that made up the $5 .55 billion were characterized by 7 factors . • Fund name describes the grant name or fund source name . • Agency that administers or awards funds .
• Amount forecasted for sea level rise adaptation in the Bay Area . Importantly, this value built off of assumptions in the revenue forecast, as outlined in 2.1 Updating Existing Public Revenue Estimates . Whether a fund is ongoing or one-time was also included and denoted by an asterisk .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
89 20 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Poto: Karl Nielsen, 2021
• Equity priority determined if the funds have an equity requirement, equity priority, or no equity component . For newer fund sources (e .g . 2022 state budget line items), the assumption is based on early program descriptions rather than formal guidelines . The search for each funding source explored whether disadvantaged or environmental justice communities were specifically named in program requirements or priority . • Funding focus was characterized in different ways and determined based on available fund guidelines . Many fund sources are a result of new 2021 and 2022 state and federal action, and as such, there was limited information . When funding guidelines were not available, legislative language was used to understand the anticipated nexus for each fund . In some cases, a fund source description had broad eligibility, but historic fund awards suggested a narrower focus of the funding program .
– Eligible adaptation types described if funds lean green, hybrid, or Gray . The hybrid tag was used for funds that could apply to any adaptation type .
– Eligible activities described if the funding is weighted more toward planning or construction . Planning encompasses other activities like capacity building and engagement . Construction encompasses any implementation phase of a project . Engineering, design, and environmental phases between planning and construction were not explicitly identified . In general, O&M was not often an eligible expense, except in some cases with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) . – Targeted asset class identified if there is an essential focus for the funds (e .g . transportation asset protected, habitat improved, communities adapted) .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
90 21Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report After collecting this information for each fund source, the information was compiled together to visualize the overall funding landscape, as shown in Figure 8 . The “periodic table” design of the figure is in part to organize information in a quick reference table .
The characterization of funding uncovers a number of key takeaways . • There are almost no funding sources specific to sea level adaptation. Most funding sources have sea level rise adaptation as only a component of how funds can be used, in contrast to other hazards such as wildfire . As such, fund sources have been filtered down significantly to account for sea level rise specifically . • In the past few years there have been many changes. The number of federal agencies with funding has doubled, and many state agencies now have funding to support adaptation . However, new fund sources such as the IIJA and IRA have broad programming goals, which limits the amount of funding that the region can expect to receive . • Only a portion of fund sources have equity goals. No green or Gray fund sources have equity goals identified, but they are a part of many identified hybrid programs . However, most equity goals are a part of one-time fund sources or smaller programs such as NOAA’s National Coastal Resilience Fund and OPR’s Adaptation Planning Grants . FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program is a promising exception of a large new funding source with embedded equity goals .
• The largest regional fund sources are federal programs from FEMA and the USACE. As summarized in Table 4, the USACE and FEMA are estimated to provide approximately half of the region’s forecasted existing revenue through 2050, with the most significant support identified from USACE . It is also important to recognize that FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program is relatively new, and as such has a more uncertain long term funding outlook . • The biggest funding sources tend to fund “gray” adaptation. However, programs such as FEMA’S BRIC program have recently been supporting more hybrid projects . Regional fund sources from Measure AA and the California State Coastal Conservancy also provide significant funding for green adaptation in the Bay Area .
The table is designed to set up future conversations around the properties of existing (and future/desired) funding sources and facilitate an understanding of the relationship between sources that lead to easy or challenging funding combinations . For example, programs with limited funding might be harder to get and less likely to be able to blend with other fund sources, while larger programs may be more accessible for use in adaptation project funding portfolios . Understanding which programs blend well with each fund source, as well as which ones do not, is helpful in understanding the existing landscape and considering desirable attributes for future funding sources and/or a Framework to help organize strategic and coordinated pairings .
Other information about some of these fund sources has been collected by the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR19) and the Bay Area Climate Adaptation Network (BayCAN20) and include attributes that would be beneficial for individuals/staff interested in advancing funding proposals in the short term . Attributes include maximum award size, match requirements, applicant eligibility, schedules, and deadlines . 19 Office of Planning and Research, State Resilience Funding Program Timeline Chart, July 2022 . https://opr .ca .gov/climate/icarp/tac/ meetings/2022-07-18/docs/20220718-Gantt_Chart_Universal .pdf 20 Bay Area Climate Adaptation Network, Funding Tracker, Accessed April 2023 . https://www .baycanadapt .org/fundingtracker SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
91 22 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Figure 8. Sources of Potential Sea Level Rise Funding
Lean Green Projects
CBA D
Regional
Funds 1
State
Funds 2
State
Funds 3
Federal
Funds 4
Federal
Funds 5
Legend
Fund amount, in millions, represents estimated portion likely for sea level rise projects in the San Francisco Bay Area . * Next to fund value designates one-time funds .
Gray boxes/text have broad program goals and/or have smaller amounts anticipated for sea level rise adaptation .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
92 23Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report Lean Gray Projects
F G HE
= Delineats programs with equity priority requirements
= Anticipate 100% of the focus is construction
= Anticipate 100% of the focus is planning
= Anticipate >50% of the focus is construction, but not all = Anticipate >50% of the focus is planning, but not all SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
93 24 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Photo: Karl Nielsen, 2021
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
94 25Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
3. Study How New Revenues for Sea Level Rise Adaptation Needs Can Be Raised Most Equitably
3.1 The Funding Gap
The Framework analysis has also found that estimate for adaptation need pales in comparison to what is at risk . Even just a partial estimate of the cost of inaction of over $200 billion, not including a number of assets that have not been fiscally quantified, shows that with an estimated $110 in estimated adaptation need, regional adaptation actions will be a worthwhile investment .
However, the Framework analysis has identified a significant funding gap of over $104 billion using median estimates, reflecting $110 billion is estimated adaptation need and $5 .5 billion in estimated existing revenue sources through 2050 . The funding gap will require a number of funding, financing, and planning strategies to fill or reduce it .
The region will need to focus on project prioritization to identify which areas should be adapted first, and which areas are suitable for alternative adaptation strategies . Prioritizing adaptation projects regionally will help to ensure that areas with more risk and less resources are protected, and developing priority guidelines for local projects will also be an important step toward long term adaptation goals .
The region will also need to pursue strategies to minimize the impacts of sea level rise, such as discouraging or adapting new developments in highly vulnerable areas to reduce the need for future shoreline protection, facilitating faster permitting and construction of adaptation projects, and identifying alternative strategies for adaptation, such as adaptation without protection .
Finally, increasing regional revenue sources will also be critical, including advocating for additional funds from state and federal sources, leveraging private investment, as well as exploring potential new revenue sources at the local or regional levels .
3.2 Exploring Potential Revenue Sources
The Framework analyzed the potential of three local and regional revenue sources at a high, exploratory level to provide a starting point for future research on potential new revenue sources at the local and regional levels . While many revenue-generating mechanisms were considered for this analysis, which are summarized in in Figure 9, the Framework focused on three that that seemed feasible based on regional precedence . These include parcel taxes, ad valorem (AV) property taxes/general obligation bonds, and assessment districts . Descriptions of each of these revenue-generating mechanisms are provided in Figure 10 .
Figure 9. Types of revenue measures considered by the Framework21 21 Other Districts includes value capture mechanisms such as Community Facility Districts and Tax Increment Financing .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
95 26 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In support of the Framework goals, the analysis of the three revenue-generating mechanisms focused on revenue generation potential, bond issuance potential, and the initial equity implications for “who pays?” . Parcel and AV property taxes were analyzed at both the county and regional scales, whereas assessment districts were analyzed at the district scale using hypothetical case studies across the region . This section provides a summary of findings from this analysis, while further details are provided in the Technical Appendix .
Figure 10. Funding Sources Explored by the Framework
Scale: County and Regional
Regional and county taxes distribute tax burden across wider base Scale: District-based (sub-local)
Regional and county taxes distribute tax burden across wider base Parcel Tax
• Typically, a flat rate property tax: each
parcel charged the same amount
• Does not account for value or size of
the property
Ad Valorem Property Tax/GO Bond
• Property-related tax that
• can be progressive: higher assessed
properties pay more
• Subject to Prop 13 limitations
Assessment District
• Directly tied to specific benefits
• Most feasible in areas with greater resources
and/or more direct impacts of SLR
3.3. Revenue and Bonding Potential
This analysis found that, based on local and regional precedence over the last 10 years, none of these potential revenue measures would likely be capable of addressing the funding gap alone . For example, a hypothetical 30-year regional parcel tax of $25 per parcel has potential to earn an annual revenue of $55 billion per year, which has the potential to support $750 million in bond issuance . Meanwhile, precedent research suggests that Bay Area voters may support a regional general obligation bond issuance between $7 and $13 billion, which would result in an average annual tax of $55 per parcel
22 . However, while the parcel tax and AV property tax are each unlikely to be capable of covering a significant portion of the region-wide funding gap, their bonding potentials would still be able to fund many impactful projects . Both parcel taxes and AV property taxes require a two-thirds approval rate to pass, requiring significant public outreach and support .
An assessment district is different than the parcel and AV property taxes in that it would be formed at a sub-local level . In other words, it would not cover an entire city, county, or region; instead, only a portion of parcels within an area . Other similar types of districts, such as Community Facilities Districts, were not studied within the scope of the Framework due to their more flexible design and variable analysis results . To develop an assessment district, parcel owners would self-organize and vote on whether to pay for an additional property-related assessment that would fund specific improvements or services within their self-defined district . In the context of adaptation, an assessment district could be formed to fund the implementation of an adaptation project (or suite of projects) which would primarily benefit the district itself . As a revenue-generating mechanism, it is a tool that can be deployed at the hyper local level to fund site-specific interventions . Rather than comparing it to a parcel tax or an AV property tax, it may be beneficial to consider the assessment district as a revenue-generating tool that may be paired with a local or regional tax . 22 Gener al obligation bonds are backed by ad valorem taxes, which are a tax on assessed value of a property . The actual tax rate would be between $5 and $14 per $100,000 of assessed value . The estimated average tax rate of $55 per parcel is based on the regional median single-family home value .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
96 27Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
3.4 “Who Pays?”: Initial Understandings of Geographic Balance and Social Equity Both MTC/ABAG and BCDC are committed to advancing social equity in sea level rise adaptation . As such, the Framework generated initial equity findings related to begin to understand “who pays?” in terms of both geographic balance and social equity . The findings are focused on AV property taxes and parcel taxes, as they are scaled to the county and regional levels and impact entire counties . For AV property taxes and parcel taxes, revenues are expected to be higher, and benefits will be dispersed throughout the county or region . Assessment districts generally occur at the sub-local level and only impact a small subset of parcels that have primarily self-selected to participate . The self-organized nature of assessment districts makes it difficult to assess equity implications, as they are specific to the community or district in question . As such, the Framework does not include them in this initial, high-level equity analysis .
Geographic Balance
The geographic analysis sought to understand the relationship of local revenue contribution through AV property tax potential, and the risk of sea level rise inundation . With regards to geographic balance, local revenue contribution and SLR flood risk are not distributed evenly throughout the region . For example, as shown in Figure 11, Alameda, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Counties have the largest property tax base (based on assessed value), indicating that these counties would proportionally contribute more revenue to a regional AV property tax . Findings for a parcel tax are slightly different, because a parcel tax generally applies the same rate to all properties . As such, the number of tax-paying parcels would be more indicative of regional contribution than assessed value .
Figure 11. Geographic Balance for Ad-Valorem Property Taxes by County With both AV property taxes and property taxes, San Mateo and Marin counties have a disproportionate share of regional property value at risk . A regional tax measure provides the opportunity to distribute the costs of paying for SLR adaptation throughout the Bay Area . This ability to distribute costs is particularly important given that SLR will not only impact property owners, but will also impact major regional assets, such as highways, train lines, business districts, ports, etc . Protecting these regional assets will benefit everyone, regardless of whether they live in Contra Costa or San Mateo counties . A key finding of the Framework is that using multiple funding measures, such as AV property taxes or parcel taxes, would help to balance the tax burden geographically.
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
97 28 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Figure 12. Social Vulnerability for Parcel and Ad-Valorem Property Taxes at the Regional Level Social Vulnerability
In terms of social equity, socially vulnerable areas were defined using BCDC’s Community Vulnerability data, which categorizes a community’s ability to plan for, respond to, or recover from natural disasters using a number of vulnerability indicators, such as income and race23 . The analysis sought to understand if socially vulnerable communities would pay a disproportionate share of the tax burden, and to compare those findings across AV property taxes and parcel taxes . As illustrated in Figure 12, the analysis found that with both AV property and parcel taxes, households within socially vulnerable areas would contribute less to a regional tax than their regional share of the population, therefore distributing costs across low socially vulnerable areas and advancing equity.
Additionally, parcel taxes were found to be comparatively less equitably than AV property taxes, as they place a higher tax burden on socially vulnerable areas24. The trend was consistent at both the regional and county scales .
The Framework only studied initial, high-level findings for “who pays?” with regards to geographic and social equity . If a local jurisdiction or the region were to pursue a tax measure to support adaptation, additional research and analysis should be conducted, particularly to ensure that revenue-generation strategies ensure equitable outcomes . With consideration for equity, other important factors to consider are tax design (e .g ., exemptions for certain households), the existing local tax burden, and distribution of funding (e .g ., which projects are funded and who they benefit) .
23 Social vulnerability defined by medium, high, and highest levels of BCDC’s Community Vulnerability Data . https://data-bcdc .opendata .arcgis . com/datasets/BCDC::community-vulnerability-bcdc-2020/about 24 A parcel tax is, generally, a flat tax on all parcels regardless of value, whereas an AV tax is based on assessed value and increases (or decreases) based on property value . By design, higher value properties pay more .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
98 29Sea Level Rise Adaptation Funding and Investment Framework Final Report
4. Next Steps
The Framework builds off of and advances several major regional efforts, and serves as a stepping stone for other local and regional efforts in the future . While specific outputs such as the shoreline project inventory, revenue forecasts, and analysis findings may all inform future work, the Framework has identified six specific next steps for both MTC/ABAG and BCDC, and the region at large .
Cross-Agency Efforts
Better define lead agency roles for sea level rise funding efforts in the Bay Area. While tackling sea level rise requires robust partnerships, the lack of a lead agency to secure additional funding and distribute it equitably hinders the Bay Area’s ability to mitigate climate impacts . Regional agencies currently lack the resources needed to lead in the funding space, and thus they will need the support of elected officials to both identify and support the development of regional leadership in this area .
Engage, educate, and mobilize elected officials to accelerate advocacy at the state and federal levels to secure more funding for the Bay Area by messaging the magnitude of need. The Framework analysis indicated that based on regional precedent, it is unlikely that any single fund source at the local or regional level will be able to close the regional funding gap . As such, the region will need additional funding from the state and federal levels to support sea level rise adaptation . The region has an opportunity to advocate for a larger share of sea level rise adaptation funding due to its relatively high vulnerability and the significance of the potential impacts, as referenced in X . 1 Context .
Through regional plans, prioritize sea level rise investments to reduce the funding gap and better align local and regional planning. MTC/ABAG’s Plan Bay Area 2050+ and BCDC’s Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan are opportunities to explore which resilience projects require early action and which low-density areas might be more appropriate for lower-cost adaptation activities . Plan Bay Area 2050+ will be focused on the initial prioritization of projects, while the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan is expected to develop future prioritization goals through the creation of regional guidelines that encourage local sea level rise adaptation planning and project prioritization within a regional framework . The Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan is anticipated to support the development of prioritized adaptation projects at the local scale, complementing Plan Bay Area 2050+’s efforts to prioritize the identified inventory projects at the regional scale .
Support cities, counties, and the private sector to develop funding and financing tools at multiple scales. In addition to new or increased state and federal funding, private or philanthropic funding, and the potential financing tools identified by the Framework, there are other opportunities for other local revenue sources that can fill the gap . While some jurisdictions have developed measures in this space, such as 2018 bond measures in San Francisco and Foster City to support local infrastructure, communities with less resources will need support to develop appropriate funding tools . These tools can be facilitated by regionally available assistance, information, and support .
MTC/ABAG
Explore how envisioned regional measures can make communities and transportation more resilient. With no regional sea level rise measure on the horizon, it is critical to explore how planned measures for affordable housing and transportation could, to the extent possible, integrate policies or programs to advance more resilient outcomes . With expenditure plans likely to be developed in the coming months for both measures, resilience will be a key lens to consider .
BCDC
Complete and maintain the development of the Shoreline Adaptation Project Mapping Program to ensure that the region has access to the best possible inventory data . The Framework has illustrated the utility of having an inventory of shoreline projects . In addition to assisting with regional cost estimates, inventory data can help the region to understand planning and implementation gaps, to share and learn from best practices, and more .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
99 30 Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission
4.1 Additional Sources
Additional details on Framework assumptions and methodologies can be found in the Technical Appendix .
Other Framework resources are also available for local and regional use, including:
Framework Shoreline Project Inventory Interactive Map: an interactive GIS webmap of the Shoreline Project Inventory including select attributes used in the analysis such as cost, adaptation activity, and project status . Corresponds with the spreadsheet .
• Framework Shoreline Project Inventory Interactive Map: an interactive GIS webmap of the Shoreline Project Inventory including select attributes used in the analysis such as cost, adaptation activity, and project status .
Corresponds with the spreadsheet .
• Framework Shoreline Project Inventory Spreadsheet: a list of the project inventory and placeholders, including select attributes used in the analysis such as cost, adaptation activity, and project status .
Corresponds with the interactive map .
• Estimating Activity Archetype Costs Spreadsheet: a resource of the full activity archetype cost assumptions . • Existing Revenue Sources Spreadsheet: a resource of the full existing revenue sources identified, and the assumptions used in the analysis .
SLR FRAMEWORK - DRAFT 071023
100
Poten?al Sea Level Rise Construc?on Methods
101
102
103
104
105
106
SUISUN CITY MAYOR INFORMATIONAL REPORT
JANUARY 16, 2024
REGIONAL BOARDS / COMMISSIONS /COMMITTEES:
Solano Transportation Authority Board Member (STA)
Solano County Water Agency Board Member (SCWA)
Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA)
SolTrans Board of Directors
Local Agency Formation Commissioner (Alternate) (LAFCO) CAP2 Solano JPA (Solano Regional Homelessness Board)
Solano Economic Development Center Board Member
Napa-Solano Area Agency on Aging
✓ Solano County Mayor’s Committee
✓ City-County Coordinating Committee
Suisun City Committees / Ad-Hoc:
✓ Suisun-Solano Water Authority Executive Committee
Suisun-Solano Water Authority Board
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District Executive Committee
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District Board
Suisun City Environment and Climate Committee Chair
Suisun City / Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District Joint Advisory Committee 30 Acre Parcel Highway 12 and Marina Mixed Use Ad-Hoc Committee City Manager Evaluation 2023 Ad-Hoc Committee
Suisun City Economic Vitality Ad-Hoc Committee
Other:
✓ Bay Adapt Local Electeds Regioonal Task Force
✓ Promotion Ceremony in Honor of Brigadier General Derek M. Salmi at Travis Air Force Base
✓ Suisun City Kwanzaa Celebration
✓ Mayor Mobile Office Hours
✓ Mayor Town Hall
✓ Mayor Newsletter
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bay Adapt Local Electeds Regional Task Force
(December 19, 2023 / Appointed by Supervisor Vasquez)
Link to Agenda: https://www.bcdc.ca.gov/bayadapt/2023/2023-12-19-BayAdpat-local-electeds- regional-task-force-Agenda.pdf
Link to Presentation: https://www.bcdc.ca.gov/bayadapt/2023/2023-12-19-BayAdpat-local-electeds- regional-task-force-Presentation.pdf
• Attended the Bay Adapt Electeds Regional Task Force Meeting. We discussed the following: Briefing and Discussion: Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan Updates and Outreach Plans • I provided a progress report regarding Suisun City’s collaboration with Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District, Sustainable Solano, Greenbelt Alliance, and Solano Land Trust. 107
SUISUN CITY INFORMATIONAL REPORT, Page 2 of 4
• Provided status report on the Kellogg Resiliency Project. • We also reviewed Briefing and Discussion: Implementing SB 272 and the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan.
• We discussed how local governments in San Francisco Bay area can work together to best meet legislation that requires local governments to develop sea level rise plans. • Sea level rise is a topic on our January 16th City Council meeting.
City County Coordinating Committee
(December 20, 2023 / Solano County Mayors Meeting)
• Attended the Mayor’s City Selection Committee meeting. • Approved the Chair and Vice Chair for 2024. The order of cities are set on a rotating basis for who will serve next in these seats. The City of Fairfield will now hold the Chair position and the City of Rio Vista the Vice Chair position.
Solano County Mayor’s Committee
(December 20, 2023 / Solano County Mayors Meeting)
• Attended the Solano County Mayor’s Committee meeting. • Agenda included:
o A. Discussion on Flannery Associates LLC and whether to take a position opposing the new city proposed.
▪ Mayors voted no unanimously stating they would prefer to bring this back to a future agenda once a project proposal had been disclosed.
o B. Discussion on Alameda County and some of their cities having an OR code for citizens to report sideshows and donuts.
▪ Discussion took place on ideas for regional ordinances. o C. Discussion on gas tax distribution
▪ This was discussed and requested to continue on next agenda to include additional information.
Suisun City First Kwanzaa Celebration
(December 28, 2024 / City sponsored event)
• Attended Kwanzaa celebration at the Joseph Nelson Community Center. • The event provided an opportunity to members of the community to learn about Kwanzaa and enjoy food, entertainment, music, vendors, and access to local organizations. • The event included a play with students from the Suisun City Youth Commission led by Mayor Pro Tem Washington.
• In attendance were also Mayor Pro Tem Washington and Councilmember Dawson.
Suisun-Solano Water Authority Executive Committee Meeting (January 2, 2024 / Chair of SSWA Board)
• Attended the SSWA Executive Committee meeting
• Discussed and approved the Agenda for the SSWA Board Meeting • Reviewed the need of a closed agenda item to be included at the next SSWA Board Meeting. • Discussed current projects and provided feedback to staff of additional items to share with the board to provide additional context or clarity.
108
SUISUN CITY INFORMATIONAL REPORT, Page 3 of 4
Promotion Ceremony in Honor of Brigadier General Derek M. Salmi (January 4, 2024 /Solano County Mayor Invitation)
• Attended the promotion ceremony of Travis Air Force Base 60th Air Mobility Wing former Colonel Salmi to his role appointed by the White House as Brigadier General Derek M. Salmi. • The event took place at Travis Air Force Base with limited number of attendees. • Solano County Mayor’s were requested to attend as representatives of the individual cities. • The ceremony included a pinning ceremony, a new flag presentation for General Salmi, speeches, and oath swearing ceremony.
Mayor Mobile Office Hours
(The Office of Mayor Alma Hernandez)
• I launched the 2024 mayor mobile office hours on January 4th, 2024, at La Guagua Latin Café located in the Marina Center.
• I will be hosting community chats throughout Suisun City to make it easier for community members to connect with me.
• The next scheduled Mobile Office Hours Community Chat will take place on Wednesday, January 10th from 10 am to 12 pm at Sunflower Bakery located at 301 Marina Center.
Mayor Town Hall
(The Office of Mayor Alma Hernandez)
• I will be hosting a Mayor Town Hall on a quarterly basis at City Hall to provide updates and engage with community members The Town Hall schedule is as follows (meetings will take place in City Hall Chambers starting at 6pm):
o February 1, 2024
o May 30. 2024
o August 29, 2024
o December 19, 2024
• Additional dates for Town Halls hosted in Spanish and virtually will be forthcoming.
Mayor Newsletter: Weekly Updates
(The Office of Mayor Alma Hernandez)
• This past week I launched a new newsletter called “Weekly Updates”. • The newsletter includes updates to the community regarding meetings and events I attend, information, updates on City Council Meeting’s, answering a Frequently Asked Question, links to upcoming meeting agenda’s, and more.
• Members of the community can sign up to receive these updates at bit.ly/mayorupdates
109
SUISUN CITY INFORMATIONAL REPORT, Page 4 of 4
110