city council agenda regular meeting city of half … · 2016. 10. 15. · city council agenda...

CITY COUNCIL AGENDAREGULAR MEETING

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2016

Adcock Community/Senior Center Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor535 Kelly Avenue Deborah Ruddock, Vice MayorHalf Moon Bay, California 94019 Marina Fraser, Councilmember

John Muller, CouncilmemberDeborah Penrose, Councilmember

7:00 PM

This agenda contains a brief description of each item to be considered. Those wishing to address the CityCouncil on any matter not listed on the Agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the City Council to resolve, may comeforward to the podium during the Public Forum portion of the Agenda and will have a maximum of three minutes todiscuss their item. Those wishing to speak on a Public Hearing matter will be called forward at the appropriate timeduring the Public Hearing consideration.

Please Note: Please Provide a Copy of Prepared Presentations to the City Clerk

Copies of written documentation relating to each item of business on the Agenda are on file in the Office ofthe City Clerk at City Hall and the Half Moon Bay Library where they are available for public inspection. If requested,the agenda shall be available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132.) Information may be obtained by calling650-726-8271.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, special assistance for participation in this meeting canbe obtained by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at 650-726-8271. A 48-hour notification will enable the City to makereasonable accommodations to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

http://hmbcity.com/

MEETING WILL CONCLUDE BY 11:00 PM UNLESS OTHERWISE EXTENDED BY COUNCIL VOTE

1

http://hmbcity.com/

CONVENE REGULAR MEETING

ROLL CALL / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONSGRADUATION OF HALF MOON BAY NET ACADEMY PARTICIPANTS

MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

REPORT OUT FROM RECENT CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS

CITY MANAGER UPDATES TO COUNCIL

PUBLIC FORUM

1. CONSENT CALENDAR

1.A WAIVE SECOND READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

1.B APPROVAL OF MINUTES

SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 REGULAR MEETING

OCTOBER 4, 2016 SPECIAL MEETING

OCTOBER 4, 2016 REGULAR MEETING

1.C WARRANTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2016

STAFF REPORT

ATTACHMENT 1

1.D APPROVAL OF THE PUBLIC AGENCIES RETIREMENT SERVICES (PARS) PUBLICAGENCIES POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TRUST

STAFF REPORT

RESOLUTION

1.E QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER OF FY 2015-2016

STAFF REPORT

ATTACHMENT 12

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31337/CC_Min_2016_09_20_Regular_Meeting.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31587/CC_Min_2016_10_04_Special_Meeting.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31529/CC_Min_2016_10_04_Regular_Meeting.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31544/STAFF_REPORT.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31543/ATTACHMENT_1.pdf


https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31541/RESOLUTION.pdf



1.F LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AND THEMAVERICKS EXPERIENCE SURF SCHOOL

STAFF REPORT

RESOLUTION

2. ORDINANCES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

2.A PDP-16-016, INTRODUCTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE / COASTALIMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE CHILD CAREACT FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE OPERATIONS AND STATE HOUSING LAWS

STAFF REPORT

ORDINANCE

ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 3

2.B HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT’S ASSESSMENTS /ANNUAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017

STAFF REPORT

RESOLUTION

DRAFT ORDINANCE

ATTACHMENT 3

3. RESOLUTIONS AND STAFF REPORTS

3.A PDP-16-016, STUDY SESSION ON POTENTIAL ZONING ORDINANCE / COASTALIMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS TO REDUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSINGCONSTRAINTS IN THE R-2, DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL ZONE

STAFF REPORT

3.B COUNCIL COMPENSATION

STAFF REPORT

ATTACHMENT 1

FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION / POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS 3




https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31576/ORDINANCE.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31578/03.22.2016_PC_Minutes_Final.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31579/04.26.2016_PC_Minutes_Final.pdf



https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/31595/DRAFT_ORDINANCE.pdf





ADJOURNMENT

4

MINUTES CITY OF HALF MOON BAY CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 ADCOCK COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER, 535 KELLY AVENUE

CONVENE REGULAR MEETING/ROLL CALL/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Vice Mayor Ruddock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Councilmembers Fraser, Muller, and Penrose, Vice Mayor Ruddock, and Mayor Kowalczyk (via teleconference) Vice Mayor Ruddock led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

None.

MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

None. CLOSED SESSION REPORT

None.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Fraser reported attending a meeting for Commute.org. Councilmember Penrose stated she attended a Luau benefitting the Adult Day Care Center. Councilmember Muller reported sightings of coyotes on Main and Johnston Streets and cautioned residents to safeguard small animals. CITY MANAGER UPDATES TO COUNCIL City Manager Gonzalez introduced Community Development Director Doughty who presented the Library construction timeline.

5

September 20, 2016

City Council Minutes Page 2 of 4

PUBLIC FORUM

The following individuals addressed the City Council during Public Forum:

Norma Avery

Elizabeth Honneyman David Moore

CONSENT CALENDAR

1.A. WAIVE SECOND READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 1.B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

1.C. WARRANTS OF AUGUST 2016

1.D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE

1.E. GRAND JURY SANITARY DISTRICT REPORT

MOTION Councilmember Penrose moved and Councilmember Muller seconded a motion to

approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried unanimously.

2. ORDINANCES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

None. 3. STAFF REPORTS AND RESOLUTIONS

3.A. PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT FOR HALF MOON BAY LIBRARY MASTER PLAN

Community Development Director Doughty presented the staff report. Councilmembers made comments and asked questions of staff. The following individuals addressed the Council on the item:

James Ruigomez

Brigid O’Farrell

Carol Joyce MOTION

Councilmember Fraser moved and Mayor Kowalczyk seconded a motion to adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council and its affiliated local unions (SMBTC) for construction work on the Half Moon Bay Library Project. The motion carried unanimously.

6

September 20, 2016


3.B. SEWER AUTHORITY MID‐COASTSIDE – RECYCLED WATER PROJECT

Interim Deputy City Manager Gaeta presented the staff report. Vivian Housen was introduced as the subject matter expert. Councilmembers made comments and asked questions of staff.

The following individuals addressed the Council on the item:

Scott Boyd Kathryn Slater‐Carter Harvey Rarback

MOTION Councilmember Penrose moved and Councilmember Muller seconded a motion approving the

execution of a consultant agreement with SRT Consultants, under the following terms and conditions:

1. City agrees to pay the sum of half the total costs for Task 1 ($51,805) and Task 2 ($87,432), as well as half the cost for the optional workshop at the end of Task 2 ($11,630), for a total of $75,434.

2. The SAM Board and member agency staff, CCWD, and OCP be given an opportunity to review the Task 1 Analysis prior to SRT Consultants working on Task 2.

3. The SAM Board be required to approve the Task 1 Analysis and to approve SRT to move forward with the completion of Task 2.

4. Task 2 include a workshop, during which SRT Consultants shall educate the SAM Board and the community on SRT’s analysis, as well as provide an opportunity for the Board and the community to provide feedback.

5. SAM be required to conduct outreach to the community within SAM’s service area so that the public is given ample notice of the meeting time, date and location of the above workshop.

6. SRT be required to address all relevant feedback from the SAM Board and the community in its Task 2 report.

The motion carried unanimously.

FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION / POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS

None.

7

September 20, 2016


ADJOURNMENT Vice Mayor Ruddock adjourned the meeting at 7:57 p.m. in memory of Mark Andermahr.

Respectfully Submitted: Approved:

Maria Buell, Deputy City Clerk Debbie Ruddock, Vice Mayor

8

MINUTES

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY OCTOBER 4, 2016

ADCOCK COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER, 535 KELLY AVENUE CONVENE SPECIAL MEETING PUBLIC FORUM CLOSED SESSION – 6:15 PM CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (2 potential cases) ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kowalczyk adjourned the meeting at 6:57 p.m.


Maria Buell, Deputy City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

9

MINUTES

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY OCTOBER 4, 2016

ADCOCK COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER, 535 KELLY AVENUE

CONVENE REGULAR MEETING/ROLL CALL/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Mayor Kowalczyk called the meeting to order at 7:13 p.m.

PRESENT: Councilmembers Fraser, Muller, and Penrose, Vice Mayor Ruddock, and Mayor Kowalczyk Mayor Kowalczyk led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

SAN MATEO COUNTY LIBRARY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

This presentation was not made as no one from the JPA was in attendance.

MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

None. CLOSED SESSION REPORT

Deputy City Attorney Gallogly stated the City Council met in Closed Session and took no reportable action.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Fraser stated she attended a Village of Coastside event and the first meeting of the Spanish NET Academy held on September 29.

Councilmember Penrose stated she attended a Sewer Authority meeting and joined the Java with Senator Jerry Hill coffee event.

Councilmember Muller stated he attended the Java with Senator Jerry Hill coffee event.

10

October 4, 2016


Vice Mayor Ruddock stated she attended a Sewer Authority Mid‐Coastside meeting, the Java with Senator Jerry Hill coffee event, and a forum sponsored by the Youth Institute of San Mateo County Health & Mental Services. Mayor Kowalczyk stated he was away on business meetings; and therefore, had no report to make.

CITY MANAGER UPDATES TO COUNCIL City Manager Gonzalez reported that City Hall offices will be temporarily moved to the Emergency Operations Center location as well as the Annex and expects completion of all upgrades will be done by Thanksgiving. She also reported on a very successful first session of the Spanish NET Academy held on September 29 and stated the last session would be on October 6. Community Development Director Doughty provided an update on the Library Construction Schedule. PUBLIC FORUM

The following individuals addressed the City Council during Public Forum:

Harvey Rarback

John Ullom

James Benjamin CONSENT CALENDAR

1.A. WAIVE SECOND READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 1.B. ACCEPT THE MAC DUTRA PLAZA REMODEL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

1.C. ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PHASE 1 OF PACIFIC RIDGE SUBDIVISION

1.D. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STORM WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (PHASE II)

1.E. CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR THE 2015 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

1.F. REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT

MOTION Councilmember Muller moved and Councilmember Fraser seconded a motion to approve

the Consent Calendar, with Item No. 1.D. pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. The motion carried unanimously.

1.D. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STORM WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

City Engineer Abbassi presented the staff report to City Council. Councilmembers made comments and asked questions of staff. The following individuals addressed the Council on the item:

James Benjamin

11

October 4, 2016


MOTION Councilmember Fraser moved and Councilmember Penrose seconded a motion to adopt

a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract for development of a Storm Water Capital Improvement Program (Phase II) to Schaaf and Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers for $93,000. The motion carried unanimously.

2. ORDINANCES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 3. STAFF REPORTS AND RESOLUTIONS

3.A. REVIEW AND AFFIRM COUNCIL PRIORITIES

City Manager Gonzalez presented the staff report to City Council.

Councilmembers made comments and asked questions of staff.

The following individuals addressed the Council on the item:

James Benjamin

John Ullom

Paulette Eisen CONSENSUS

By consensus, the Council accepted the report.

3.B. SEWER AUTHORITY MID‐COASTSIDE – RECYCLED WATER PROJECT

City Manager Gonzalez presented the staff report to City Council

Councilmembers made comments and asked questions of staff.

MOTION Vice Mayor Ruddock moved and Councilmember Penrose seconded a motion to authorize

the City’s share of the total cost (25 percent Basis of Design) for the Sewer Authority Mid‐Coastside’s Recycled Water Project, for an amended contract amount of $90,097 with SRT Consultants. The motion carried unanimously. FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION / POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS

Mayor Kowalczyk requested a policy change to add one minute to total time for a public speaker needing translation services.

12

October 4, 2016


ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kowalczyk adjourned the meeting at 8:43 p.m.


Maria Buell, Deputy City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

13

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: October 18, 2016

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: Yulia Carter, Finance Director TITLE: WARRANTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2016 ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Accept the attached warrants list for the month of September 2016. The grand total for all warrants for the month was $1,327,695.74. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Fiscal Sustainability and Inclusive Governance Elements. ATTACHMENT: Check Disbursement List by Check Date

14

City of Half Moon Bay Oct 10, 2016 10:47am Page Check Disbursement List by Check Date Range 09/01/16 to 09/30/16 ___________________________________________________________________________________ w ________________________ -------- _______________ _

Check Vendor Number Number Payee

Check Date

Check Amount Description

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- -040808 3904 APPLE INC 09/13/16 740.76 8/16 IPAD ACCESSORIES 040809 2407 ARAMARK 09/13/16 739.95 7/16 MAT & MOP SVCS 040810 2022 AT&T/CALNET2 09/13/16 3,089.49 6/13·7/12/16 TEL SVCS FY1617 040811 2022 AT&T/CALNET2 09/13/16 175.73 7/13·8/12/16 TEL SVCS 040812 3285 BAY AREA BARRICADE SERVICE INC. 09/13/16 6,023.46 7/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040813 3807 BOLT STAFFING SERVICE, INC. 09/13/16 5,606.40 7/18/16 DIRECT HIRE CONVERSION FEE 040814 3808 BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP 09/13/16 30.35 6/16 TRAVEL REIMBSABLE EXPENSE 040815 668 CA STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE DEPARTMENTA 09/13/16 100.00 9/16 CONFIRM LETTER FEE 040816 3355 ASUNCION GARDENING SERVICE ASUNCION GIJO 09/13/16 1,000.00 6/16 MAl NT SVCS 040817 957 COASTSIDE.NET, INC 09/13/16 66.90 8/16 DOMAIN HOSTING SVCS 040818 2941 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 09/13/16 1,102.38 7/16 BLDG PLAN REVIEW SVCS 040819 2368 DEL GAVIO GROUP 09/13/16 2,609.46 8/16 (9) TASK CHAIRS 040820 3362 EMERSON NETWORK POWER LIEBERT SERVICES, 09/13/16 5,168.80 5/16 SERVER CABINET REPAIRS 040821 202 FEDEX 09/13/16 14.44 8/17116 DELIVERY SVCS 040822 2947 GIBBONS & CONLEY 09/13/16 3,495.25 7/16 lEGAL SERVICES 040823 3836 GLADWEll GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES INC 09/13/16 1,699.11 8/16 RECORDS MGMT CONSULTING SVCS 040824 3835 GRANICUS INC 09/13/16 800.00 9/16 WEB STREAMING AND AGENDA MGMT 040825 1423 THE GRAPHIC WORKS 09/13/16 62.25 9/11/16 CONCERTS IN THE PARK 040826 200 HARRIS COMPUTER SYSTEMS CREATIVE COMPUTE 09/13/16 2,168.70 10/16 FINANCE SOFTWARE SUPPORT 040827 3528 HASSETT HARDWARE 09/13/16 2,222.25 7/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040829 1427 HI LLYARD, INC. 09/13/16 271.89 8/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040830 74 HALF MOON BAY AUTO PARTS 09/13/16 10.89 7/16 VEH MAINT SUPPLIES 040831 82 HALF MOON BAY REVIEW 09/13/16 652.50 7/16 & 8/16 lEGAL NOTICES 040832 3429 HUE & CRY SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. 09/13/16 97.95 9/16 FIRE ALARM MONITORING SVCS 040833 2699 KONICA MINOlTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 09/13/16 2,725.83 7/10·8/10/16 COPIER USAGE 040834 740 MAIL FINANCE A NEOPOST USA COMPANY 09/13/16 466.70 8/16 POSTAGE METER lEASE 040835 3069 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 09/13/16 168.00 9/16 EMP ASSISTED PROG 040836 1538 MUNISERVICES, llC 09/13/16 3.99 3/16 SUTA SVCS TAX QTR MAR16 040837 3901 NETFllE, INC. 09/13/16 3,000.00 7/16-7/17 AGENCY SVCS ANNUAL FEE 040838 3726 NICOLAS LASZKIEWICZ NICHOLAS TRANSLATION 09/13/16 180.00 8/16/16 TRANSLATION SVCS 040839 2725 TIMOTHY D. O'HARA O'HARA'S PEST CONTROL 09/13/16 236.00 8/16 PEST CONTROL SVCS 040839 2725 TIMOTHY D. O'HARA O'HARA'S PEST CONTROL 09/13/16 138.00 7/16 PEST CONTROL SVCS 040840 129 OCEAN SHORE PRINTING CO KEITH THOMPSON 09/13/16 231.60 8/16 EMP BUS CARDS 040841 457 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION 09/13/16 3,453.87 7/16-8/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 040843 3170 PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES PHASE 09/13/16 300.00 5/16 TRUST ADMIN SVCS 040844 3905 BARBARA PO.IELL 09/13/16 432.55 8/16 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSE 040845 3482 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES AUTHORITY 09/13/16 6,382.50 5/16 CDD/PW CONSULTING SVCS 040846 252 RICE TRUCKING-SOIL FARM LLC 09/13/16 873.94 7/16 & 8/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040847 3906 ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY 09/13/16 618.26 7/16 MAINT SVCS 040848 3324 SCAPES, INC. 09/13/16 1,474.75 7/16 MAINT SVCS 040849 3912 SITEIMPROVE, INC 09/13/16 3,442.00 7/1/16-6/30/17 WEBSITE IMPROV 040850 1526 SAN MATEO CO. CONTROLLERS OFFICE 09/13/16 1,386.50 6/16 PARKING CITATION PROCESSING 040851 3746 MALCOLM C SMITH 09/13/16 5,225.00 8/16 PROF SVCS 040852 1760 STEPFORD 09/13/16 6,196.74 7/16-10116 IT SVCS 040853 165 STRAWFLOWER ELECTRONICS, INC. 09/13/16 157.83 8/16 EQUIP SUPPLIES 040854 3900 TRUELOOK, INC. TRUESYSTEMS. INC. 09/13/16 9,999.00 8/16 VIDEO, HOSTING AND SUPPORT 040855 1497 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS INC 09/13/16 409.32 6/16 CITATION PROCESSING SVCS 040856 3616 U.S. HEAlTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP, PC 09/13/16 262.00 8/16 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL SVCS 040857 266 BAY AREA GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC BAGG EN 09/13/16 9,054.60 FY1415-FY1516 CALL GEOTECHNICAL

Reinstated from claim# 68266

CCS.AP Accounts Payable Release 8.3.1 R*APFINVC*FDL By lOUELLA ENRIQUEZ (LOUELLAE) 15

City of Half Moon Bay Oct 10, 2016 10:47am Page 2 Check Disbursement List by Check Date Range 09/01/16 to 09/30/16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- ----------Check Vendor

Number Number Payee Check Date


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------040857 266

040858 677 040859 3782 040859 3782 040859 3782 040859 3782 040860 3757 040861 3798 040862 3894 040863 1189 040864 3879 040865 3911 040866 3399 040867 1283 040868 3913 040869 3868 040870 490 040871 3332 040872 18 040872 18 040873 2407 040874 2022 040875 2022 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040876 16 040877 374 040877 374 040877 374 040878 3285 040879 3626 040880 1826 040881 51 040882 542 040883 3355 040884 3082 040885 3082 040886 3082 040887 3082 040888 2028 040889 3643 040889 3643 040890 55 040891 3189

BAY AREA GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC BAGG EN 09/13/16

CCAG (INPUT REMIT TO ADDRESS EACH TIME) GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC. SCHAFF & WHEELER, CONSULTING CIVIL ENGIN VALl COOPER & ASSOCIATES, INC. WESTERN AUDIO/VIDEO, INC. COASTSIDE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PEYKAN ABBASSI AURELIO ACEVES MARIACHI SAN FRANCISCO MAGDA GONZALEZ KATHY OLER SMCO HUMAN SERVICES CASTRO PARTNERS LLC TEVA SOLUTIONS ABAG POWER PURCHASING POOL AMERICAN DEBRIS BOX SERVICE INC. DBA AME ANDREINI BROTHERS, INC. ANDREINI BROTHERS, INC. ARAMARK AT&T/CALNET2 AT&T/CALNET2 BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA BANKCARD CENTER BARKERBLUE DIGITAL IMAGING BARKERBLUE DIGITAL IMAGING BARKERBLUE DIGITAL IMAGING BAY AREA BARRICADE SERVICE INC. BKF ENGINEERS CA DEPT OF JUSTICE ACCOUNTING OFFICE/CAS COASTSIDE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT CITY OF REDWOOD CITY ASUNCION GARDENING SERVICE ASUNCION GIJO COM CAST COMCAST COM CAST COM CAST COPOWER CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT, INC CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT, INC DEWEY PEST CONTROL DKS ASSOCIATES

09/13/16 09/13/16 09/13/16 09/13/16 09/13/16 09/13/16 09/13116 09/13/16 09/15/16 09/21/16 09/21/16 09/21/16 09/21/16 09/21/16 09/21/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16 09/30/16

CCS.AP Accounts Payable Release 8.3.1 R*APFINVC*FDL

14,261.53 FY1415-FY1516 ON-CALL GEOTECHNICAL Reinstated from claim# 68267

42,134.00 7/16 FY16-17 GAS TAX ASSESSMENT 12,000.00 7/16 LIBRARY TEMP RELOC AND UTILITY 5,927.50 7/16 & 8/16 CITY HALL ANNEX PROJ

17,781.49 7/16 PROJ AND CONST MGMT LIBRARY 20,618.36 8/16 PROJ AND CONST MGMT LIBRARY 12,455.00 7/16 HMB STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN 42,800.00 7/16 ENGINEERING SVCS 13,116.50 7/16 AUDIO SYSTEM COUNCIL MTGS

812.00 9/16 PERMIT FEES LIBRARY 1,212.20 8/16 EMP REIMBURSABLE EXP 1,600.00 9/16 CONCERTS IN THE PARK

182.85 JUL'16-SEPT'16 EMP REIMB EXP 1,800.00 10/16 MILLS ST PARKING LOT RENTAL 3,616.00 7/16 FY1617 CONTRIBUTION

42,468.00 JUL'16-0CT'16 TEMP LIBRARY LEASE 470.00 JUL'16-AUG'16 GAS USAGE

2,678.15 8/29-9/25/16 PORTABLE SVCS 990.00 9/16 PROF SVCS BIKE PADS RETENTION

1,972.00 9/16 PROF SVCS EMER REPAIRS RET 616.96 8/16 MAT & MOP SVCS

3,114.83 7/13 -8/12/16 TEL SVCS 142.80 8/2-9/1/16 TEL SVCS 327.18 8/16 CC CHARGES 133.70 8/16 CC CHARGES 739.74 8/16 CC CHARGE

1,107.18 8/16 CC CHARGE 542.00 8/16 CC CHARGE 77.68 8/16 CC CHARGE

1,689.31 8/16 CC CHARGES 922.46 8/16 CC CHARGE

3.27 8/16 DOCUMENT REPRODUCTION SVCS 42.50 7/16 DOCUMENT REPRODUCTION SVCS 3. 00 7/16 DOCUMENT REPRODUCTION SVCS

74.33 8/16 MAl NT SUPPLIES 4,045.50 7/16 PROF SVCS METZGAR FINAL MAP

64.00 8/16 FINGERPRINTING SVCS 6,064.64 8/16 WATER USAGE

308.00 8/16 FY1617 MEMBERSHIP FEES 1,225.00 7/16 MAINT SVCS

84.75 9/16 CABLE SVCS 60.70 9/16 CABLE SVCS

215.95 9/16 INTERNET SVCS 210.95 9/16 INTERNET SVCS

4,062.60 10/16 DENTAL & VISION PREMIUMS 152.06 8/16 RECORDS STORAGE/RETRIEVAL 128.59 7/16 RECORDS STORAGE/RETRIEVAL

1,080.00 8/16 RODENTS SVCS STREAMS AND CRK 1,015.00 3/16 GYM & LIBRARY EXPANSION

By LOUELLA ENRIQUEZ (LOUELLAE) 16

City of Half Moon Bay Oct 10, 2016 10:47am Page 3 Check Disbursement List by Check Date Range 09/01 /1 6 to 09/30/16 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- ------ ----- ---------------- -- - ----------------------------Check Vendor

Number Number Payee Check Date


----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- - ---------------------------------------------------------040892 320 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 09/30/16 2,951.13 7/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040893 3518 DUDE SOLUTIONS, INC FACILITYDUDE.COM_ 09/30/16 1,820.00 9/1/16-8/31/17 INCIDENT TRACKING 040894 202 FEDEX 09/30/16 22.48 7/21/16 DELIVERY SVCS 040894 202 FEDEX 09/30/16 28.25 8/22/16 DELIVERY SVCS 040894 202 FEDEX 09/30/16 16.20 8/31/16 DELIVERY SVCS 040894 202 FEDEX 09/30/16 40.55 7/14-7/15/16 DELIVERY SVCS 040894 202 FEDEX 09/30/16 34.09 7/27/16 DELIVERY SVCS 040895 3446 FLYERS ENERGY LLC DEPT #34516 09/30/16 495.81 8/16 FUEL USAGE 040896 3836 GLADWELL GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES INC 09/30/16 1,528.60 8/16 RECORDS MGMT CONSULTING SVCS 040897 1423 THE GRAPHIC WORKS 09/30/16 509.15 9/16 SIGNAGE SKATE PARK 040898 200 HARRIS COMPUTER SYSTEMS CREATIVE COMPUTE 09/30/16 2,168.70 11/16 FINANCE SOFTWARE SUPPORT 040898 200 HARRIS COMPUTER SYSTEMS CREATIVE COMPUTE 09/30/16 2,383 . 63 11/16-10/17 ANNUAL LICENSES FEES 040899 2444 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 09/30/16 1,073.65 7/16 & 8/16 MAINT SUPPLIES 040900 3429 HUE & CRY SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. 09/30/16 97.95 10/16 FIRE ALARM MONITORING SVCS 040900 3429 HUE & CRY SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. 09/30/16 235.50 10/16 BURGLAR ALARM MONITORING 040901 740 MAIL FINANCE A NEOPOST USA COMPANY 09/30/16 466.70 9/16 POSTAGE METER LEASE 040902 1206 MARK THOMAS & CO. INC. 09/30/16 1,145.00 7/16 HWY1 TRAFFIC REDUCT & SAFETY 040903 3872 MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL SERVICES ATTN: THOMA 09/30/16 2,520.00 8/16 SEWER RATE STUDY 040904 3479 PARKEON INC 09/30/16 52.50 8/16 PARKING SVCS 040905 3170 PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES PHASE 09/30/16 300.00 7/16 TRUST ADMIN SVCS 040906 137 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 09/30/16 7,221.96 8/16 fLEC SVCS 040907 646 PREMIER TERMITE, INC. DBA FLOORS TO GO & 09/30/16 2,530.00 9/12/16 FLOORING SVCS COMM CTR 040908 29 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER A DIVISI 09/30/16 65.90 8/16 SPRING WATER SVCS 040909 1854 SANDRA RICKEY CITY OF HALF MOON BAY 09/30/16 272.40 9/16 EMP REIMBURSABLE EXP 040910 3144 ROSS ROBERTS "THE GOPHER GUY" 09/30/16 1,100.00 8/16 GOPHER SVCS 04091 1 3324 SCAPES, INC. 09/30/16 1,825.00 8/16 LANDSCAPE MAINT HWY1&HWY92 040912 3914 URSULA SCHNYDER 09/30/16 56.00 9/9/16 SPECIAL EVENT REFUND 04091 3 3101 SHRED-IT SAN FRANCISCO 09/30/16 43.72 8/22/16 SHREDDING SVCS 040914 217 SAN MATEO COUNTY INFORMATION SVCS. 09/30/16 76.00 8/16 MICROWAVE TEL SVCS 040915 216 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ACCOUN 09/30/16 35.00 8/17-8/31/16 SHERIFF'S REVENUE 040916 1760 STEP FORD 09/30/16 2,400.00 10/16 MONTHLY CONTRACT SVCS 040917 3519 SWCA, INCORPORATED SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CO 09/30/16 655.50 9/16 ON·CALL BIOLOGICAL SVCS 040918 1497 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS INC 09/30/16 568.22 8/16 CITATION PROCESSING SVCS 040919 3779 UPIN INC BENCHMARK ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEE 09/30/16 2,945.00 7/16 ASBESTOS TESTING LIBRARY 040920 444 ABAG PLAN CORP. 09/30/16 82,822.00 7/16 GEN LIAB, PROP & AUTO INS 040921 2941 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 09/30/16 17,052.00 7/16 PROF SVCS 040921 2941 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 09/30/16 875.00 7/16 CARTER PARK STAIR REPLACEMENT 040921 2941 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 09/30/16 4,782.50 7/16 NPDES SVCS 040922 3578 DYETT & BHATIA, URBAN & REGIONAL PLANNER 09/30/16 17,140.00 8/16 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE 040923 2014 MOORE IAGOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC . MIG/TRA 09/30/16 29,998.75 7/16 PROF SVCS 040924 3359 PACIFICA COMMUNITY TELEVISION 09/30/16 10,500.00 7/1·9/30/16 COUNCIL TELEVISED SVCS 040925 3482 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES AUTHORITY 09/30/16 15,163.00 7/16 COD AND PW PROF SVCS 040926 216 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ACCOUN 09/30/16 597,720.75 9/16 1ST aTR SHERIFF'S SVCS 040926 216 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ACCOUN 09/30/16 65,784.00 9/16 EMER PREPAREDNESS COORDINATOR 040927 3798 VALl COOPER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 09/30/16 55,650.00 8/16 CITY ENGINEERING SVCS 040928 3894 WESTERN AUDIO/VIDEO, INC. 09/30/16 30,605.00 9/16 DESIGN/ASSEMBLE WL CONF SYSTM

--------------Total 1,327,695.74

CCS.AP Accounts Payable Release 8.3. 1 R*APFINVC*FDL By LOUELLA ENRIQUEZ (LOUELLAE) 17


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: Yulia Carter, Finance Director TITLE: APPROVAL OF THE PUBLIC AGENCIES RETIREMENT SERVICES (PARS) PUBLIC

AGENCIES POST‐EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TRUST ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to terminate the existing agreement with the Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) for administration of the City’s Other Pension Employee Benefits (OPEB); and

2. Enter into a new contract with PARS to administer both the City’s Other Pension Employee Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Plan assets with U.S. Bank as trustee; and

3. Authorize the City Manager, or her designee to appoint the Plan Administrator, transfer funds, elect investment options and take any other actions as required by PARS.

FISCAL IMPACT: The City has previously set money aside and accrued a balance of $1.05 million in the Retirement Stabilization Fund (F64) as of June 30, 2016. It is the City’s intent to transfer fund balance reserves of the fund into the Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust. The City’s estimated initial contribution to the trust for FY 2016‐17 will be $1.05 million on the pension side, in addition to the transfer of OPEB assets of $541,531 (as of 6/30/16) on the OPEB side of the trust. While this contribution reduces the amount of assets available for investment and other purposes, it also serves to lower the City’s unfunded pension liability obligations, and eliminates the need to include previously incurred costs in the City’s annual operating budget. There is no additional budgetary impact associated with the administration of the trust, as the City already utilizes PARS as administrators for the Other Pension Employee Benefits (OPEB) Plan assets in a similar plan, and there will be no additional fees for additional assets. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Fiscal Sustainability Element.

18

PARS Section 115 Trust October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 4

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued Statement No. 68: Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions, which became effective in the 2014‐2015 fiscal year. GASB 68 requires that governmental employers that sponsor Defined Benefit plans (e.g., California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)) must recognize a net pension liability, also known as an unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) on their balance sheet. This is the difference between the City’s total pension liability (Actuarial Accrued Liability) and actual plan assets. CalPERS has also significantly changed the methodology for calculating the City’s Annual Required Contributions (ARC) in regards to amortizing the UAAL by determining the unfunded liability allocation on total accrued liability instead of current payroll. Prior to the availability of the Section 115 Trust option, the City’s only option for reducing the UAAL was to commit additional funds to CalPERS. These additional funds would be subject to the same market volatility risk as the CalPERS investment policy target of 7.5%, and are not accessible to the City for other CalPERS pension expenses. On September 1, 2009, the City entered into an agreement with Phase II Systems, dba Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) to administer the City’s OPEB Post‐Retirement Health Care Plan. According to the FY 2008‐2009 Comprensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the City reported a Net OPEB Obligation (liability) of $55,427. As a result of the City’s efforts in prudent long‐term financial management and PARS’ proven track record of asset investment at reasonable costs, the City reported a completely prefunded OPEB plan in the FY 2014‐2015 CAFR. PARS is an independent retirement plan administration provider that has recently sought and received approval from the IRS in the form of a Private Letter Ruling (PLR) on its newly developed Post‐Employment Benefits Trust Program for pension prefunding similar to OPEB administration. The PARS IRS ruling allows public agencies to safely and securely set aside funds, separate and apart from state or county retirement systems, in a tax‐exempt irrevocable trust to reduce pension liabilities and stabilize pension costs in a Pension Rate Stabilization Program (PRSP). Participating agencies maintain local control of the assets held in the Trust and can determine the appropriate goals and risk tolerance level for the investments, which provides greater flexibility. Over 30 California public agencies have already adopted the pension rate stabilization program through a Section 115 trust to prefund their retirement obligations. The Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust was presented to the Finance Committee on June 21, 2016 and received full support from the Committee.

19


DISCUSSION: Per the most recent Actuarial Valuation of the City’s Miscellaneous pension plan through CalPERS dated June 30, 2015, the funded status of the Plan is as follows:

1. Present Value of Projected Benefits $19,721,512 2. Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability 17,893,046 3. Plan’s Market Value of Assets 14,511,461 4. Unfunded Accrued Liability (#2‐#3) 3,381,585 5. Funded Ratio (#3/#2) 81.1%

Per GASB 68, as described above, the City must recognize the entire Unfunded Accrued Liability (#4) as a liability on the Balance Sheet. The City currently has previously set aside funds (approximately $1.02 million as of June 30, 2016) in the Retirement Stabilization Fund (F64) to mitigate the City’s pension obligation risks. However, these funds are not currently being reported in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) as an off‐set towards the City’s stated pension liability since they are not invested with CalPERS or a similar approved vehicle. Transferring these funds to the Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust Plan would allow the City to properly report the true difference between the City’s pension obligation and pension assets. Using the latest figures described above, the reported liability would be reduced from $3,381,585 to approximately $2,366,220 or by 30%, prior to factoring in investment, contribution, and disbursment activity since June 30, 2015. The return from PARS investments has historically outpaced the returns from the investment vehicles allowed to the City per the CA Government Code (e.g. San Mateo County Pool and LAIF). Participation in the Trust will provide the City with an alternative to sending funds to CalPERS while offering complete local control over assets and ease of administration and portfolio management. PARS has assembled leading professionals to provide the City with the necessary services required under one combination program to prefund both pension and retiree health care liabilities. Once contributions are placed into trust, assets from the trust can only be used for retirement plan purposes. The trust assets can be transferred to CalPERS at the City’s direction at any time, which can help offset future unexpected rate increased. Alternatively, the City could be reimbursed for up to two years of CalPERS contributions. Once approved, the current, existing contract signed in September 2009 with PARS which pertains only to the City’s OPEB assets will be terminated and replaced with the new contract. In summary, investing the pension assets in a separate retirement funding trust has the advantages and expected benefits of:

• Partially offseting Net Pension Liability with accumulated funds and investment earnings reportable in the Financial Statements under GASB 68

20


Providing Pension Volatility Risk Mitigation – contributions from the trust may be

transferred to CalPERS at the City’s discretion to offset fluctuations in the required annual contributions.

• Allowing investment flexibility with Section 115 Trust, as the assets held in an irrevocable trust can be invested compared to restrictions that apply to the general City investments per CA Government Code

• Providing investment security with Section 115 Trust compared to CalPERS high risk investment management and portfolio allocation

• Allowing oversight and local control over assets, fund management selection and monitoring of investment performance

• Increasing flexibility on use of trust assets (i.e., trust assets may be accessed any time as long as the assets are used to fund the City’s pension obligations and defray reasonable expenses associated therewith)

• Providing potential for positive credit rating agency and investor consideration due to the reduction of liabilities on the City’s financial reports

• Offering a low administrative and investment management cost compared to the CalPERS pension program

• Allowing Use of funds for disasters or other emergencies when revenues are impaired due to economic and other conditions

The action requested today will authorize the City’s participation in the Post‐Emplyoment Benefits Trust administered by PARS. The approval of this agreement will not restrict the Council in modifying the future pension benefits administration. The City could establish its own irrevocable trust fund or transfer assets to another trust, for any reason with 30 days notice, as long as the new trust complies with IRS requirements. ATTACHMENT: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to terminate the existing agreement with the Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) for administration of the City’s Other Pension Employee Benefits (OPEB)

21

Resolution No. C‐2016‐____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE PUBLIC AGENCIES POST‐EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TRUST ADMINISTERED

BY PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES (PARS) WHEREAS the City of Half Moon Bay (the “City”) is currently participating in the PARS Public Agencies Post‐Retirement Health Care Plan Trust for the pre‐funding of its retiree health benefits and other post‐employment benefits other than pension benefits (“OPEB”); and WHEREAS the City desires to set aside funds for the purpose of pre‐funding its CalPERS pension obligation that will be held in trust for the exclusive purpose of making future contributions of the City’s required pension contributions and any employer contributions in excess of such required contributions at the discretion of the City; and WHEREAS PARS has made available the Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust (the “Program”) for the purpose of pre‐funding both pension obligations and/or OPEB obligations as specified in the City’s plans, policies and/or applicable collective bargaining agreements; and WHEREAS the City is eligible to participate in the Program, a tax‐exempt trust performing an essential governmental function within the meaning of Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and the Regulations issued there under, and is a tax‐exempt trust under the relevant statutory provisions of the State of California; and WHEREAS the City can manage the pre‐funding of its pension and OPEB obligations in a single trust under this Program, thereby gaining administrative and cost efficiencies; and WHEREAS the City’s adoption and operation of the Program has no effect on any current or former employee’s entitlement to post‐employment benefits; and WHEREAS the terms and conditions of post‐employment benefit entitlement, if any, are governed by contracts separate from and independent of the Program; and WHEREAS the City’s funding of the Program does not, and is not intended to, create any new vested right to any benefit nor strengthen any existing vested right; and WHEREAS PARS requires the governing body of a public agency, by resolution to approve a contract with PARS to participate in Section 115 and delegation of authority to specific staff to request disbursement of funds needed for program costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

1. Adopts the Program to prefund the City’s Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) and pension liabilities, effective October 4, 2016; and

22

2. Appoints the City Manager, or his/her designee as the City’s Plan Administrator for the Program; and

3. The City’s Plan Administrator is hereby authorized to execute the PARS legal and administrative documents on behalf of the City and to take whatever additional actions are necessary to maintain the City’s participation in the Program and to maintain compliance of any relevant regulation issued or as may be issued; therefore, authorizing him/her to take whatever additional actions are required to administer the City’s Program; and

4. Authorizes the Plan Administrator, in accordance with Section 3.3 of the Public Agencies Post‐Retirement Health Care Plan Trust adopted effective September 1, 2009, to withdraw from said trust and direct the transfer of assets held in said trust to the OPEB Account established in the name of the City under the Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust, adopted herewith; and

5. The City Manager is authorized to delegate the Plan Administrator authority to the Finance Director to elect investment options, request disbursements or transfer funds, previously set aside for this purpose into the Public Agencies Post‐Employment Benefits Trust when necessary and prudent.

*****************************************************************

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted on the 18th day of October, 2016 by the City Council of Half Moon Bay by the following vote: AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________________ _____________________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

23


AGENDA REPORT For meeting of: October 18, 2016

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager

FROM: Yulia Carter, Finance Director

TITLE: QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER OF FY 2015‐16

RECOMMENDATION: Accept the attached Quarterly Financial Report for the 4th Quarter of Fiscal Year 2015‐2016.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the acceptance of this report.

BACKGROUND: One of the City Council strategic priorities includes planning for and implementing long‐term financial stability. A key component of this goal includes preparing a quarterly financial report that would provide readers with an executive summary of the City’s current financial conditions as it relates to the annual operating budget. During the FY 2015‐16 budget process, staff committed to implementing the practice of financial reporting on a quarterly basis in the current fiscal year to ensure accountability and transparency in managing public funds. Staff has completed the Fourth Quarter Financial Report which reflects the City’s overall financial position as of June 30, 2016. This report summarizes the activities of the City’s General Fund to provide the Council and the public with an overview of the City’s general fiscal condition, and is not meant to be inclusive of all financial accounting transactions. The General Fund is the primary operating fund of the City and is used to account for most operating activities. ANALYSIS: The Fourth Quarter Financial Report includes an update on the revenues and expenditures for the General Fund for the quarter ended June 30, 2016. The General Fund financial report for the third quarter is prepared on a cash basis. At fiscal year‐end, revenues and expenditures attributed to the 2015‐16 fiscal year and received/paid after June 30, 2016 are accrued. In FY 2015‐16, the City received $15.57 million in revenue (102.7% of budget) due to strong economic conditions, as noted in the report. This is an increase of $795,000 or 5.4% in total General Fund revenue over the prior fiscal year. Of note, Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues are performing higher than projected with a collection percentage of 105.9% of the revised budget, which was already increased during the mid‐year budget review adjustment by $370,000, or 7.1%. Overall, TOT increased approximately 9.1% compared to the prior year due 24

the increased tourism activity and recent initiative by the Chamber of Commerce to promote mid‐week business travel. The City expended $14.65 million in the 2015‐16 fiscal year. This is 92.9% of the revised budget and is primarily due to salary savings from positions not filled during the full fiscal year, as mentioned in the report. The fourth quarter figures are significantly different than prior quarter reports due to the fact that one‐time budgeted operating and capital transfers are made at the end of the year, and contracts for certain departments (such as Community Development and the City Attorney’s Office) were previously overstated due to being encumbered up‐front. The unaudited General Fund balance as of June 30, 2016 is $10.46 million, which is $3.07 million above the $7.39 million projected at budget adoption. This is due to increased revenues and lower than expected general fund expenditures throughout the year as described above, in addition to the 2014‐15 fiscal year ending stronger than originally projected. In general, revenues met or exceeded expectations for the 2015‐16 fiscal year. General Fund expenditures are at or below budget for each department unit. The City continues to experience a healthy and positive economic growth. Please note that the figures presented in this report are unaudited. The City’s annual financial audit will be conducted by an independent firm, Maze and Associates, in November 2016, and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is scheduled to appear on the City Council agenda for acceptance in December 2016. ATTACHMENT: Fourth Quarter Financial Report as of June 30, 2016

25

City of Half Moon Bay Fiscal Year 2015/16

Fourth Quarter Financial Report

P a g e 1 | 2

OVERVIEW

This report summarizes the City’s overall financial position for the fiscal year through June 30, 2016. The focus of this report is the City’s General Fund, and is not meant to be inclusive of all finance and accounting transactions. The intent is to provide the Council and the public with an overview of the state of the City’s general fiscal condition. The General Fund is the primary operating fund of the City and is used to account for most operating activities. The revenue projections and budgets include necessary adjustments for encumbrances, carryovers, and any supplemental appropriations made by the City Council as of June 30, 2016.

GENERAL FUND

General Fund Financial Condition. The General Fund is comprised of revised budgeted operating and one-time revenues of $15,157,218 and operating and one-time expenditures of $15,775,356 for FY 2015-16. Please note that the budget was adjusted during a mid-year review and therefore the amounts may differ from the FY 2015-16 Adopted Budget. Budget amounts also include additions separately approved by the City Council. Expenditures contained in the General Fund account for direct services provided to the citizens of Half Moon Bay including General Government, Police Services, Parks and Recreation, Community Development and Public Works. With the fiscal year complete, General Fund expenditures are at 92.9% of projections, and revenues are at 102.7%. These figures now include budgeted once-a-year operating and capital transfers. Revenues normalize in the fourth quarter as due to the timing of certain key revenues such as franchise fees, property tax, and sales tax. Both expenditures and revenues are explained in more detail below. Please note that the information presented is unaudited.

General Fund Budget YTD Actual Percent

Revenues $15,157,218 $15,573,049 102.7%

Expenditures $15,775,356 $14,650,863 92.9%

The unaudited General Fund balance as of June 30, 2016 is $10.46 million, which is $3.07 million above the projected fund balance at budget adoption due to

increased revenues and lower than expected general fund expenditures throughout the year, in addition to the 2014-15 fiscal year ending stronger than originally projected.

Expenditures. Expenditures ended the fiscal year at about 92.9% of the revised budget, primarily due to salary savings from positions not filled during the full fiscal year. The following chart summarizes year-to-date expenditures:

City Council 279,868 242,140 86.5%

City Manager 670,465 598,047 89.2%

City Attorney 350,000 286,216 81.8%

City-wide 1,643,443 1,458,995 88.8%

City Clerk 478,997 373,300 77.9%

Finance and Risk Management 726,285 563,160 77.5%

Human Resources and Administrative Services

589,791 472,088 80.0%

Public Safety 3,293,624 3,278,657 99.5%

Public Works * 1,105,855 955,550 86.4%

Recreation Services 143,147 142,512 99.6%

Community Development * 2,187,381 1,973,699 90.2%

Capital Outlay 4,306,500 4,306,500 100.0%

Total General Fund 15,775,356 14,650,863 92.9%

Budget YTD Actual % Exp/EncGeneral Fund Expenditures by

Department

* Public works and Community Development departments have been revised from previous Quarterly Financial Reports to more accurately reflect the City’s service functions and departmental organization.

Revenues. The following is a summary of revenues as of the end of the fourth quarter:

Trans. Occupancy Taxes 5,597,500 5,925,605 105.9%

Sales & Use Tax * 3,958,119 3,864,522 97.6%

Property Tax 3,130,061 3,123,236 99.8%

Other Revenue 1,114,763 1,145,909 102.8%

Other Taxes 805,000 808,225 100.4%

Charges for Services 542,275 668,745 123.3%

Inter-Governmental 9,500 36,807 387.4%

Total Revenues 15,157,218 15,573,049 102.7%

Revenues Budget YTD Actual % Rec'd

* Includes Measure J revenues

26

City of Half Moon Bay Fiscal Year 2015/16

Fourth Quarter Financial Report

P a g e 2 | 2

Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT). TOT continues to be the largest source of revenue. TOT for the entire year has been accrued as part of the year-end process and reflects a full twelve months as of June 30, 2016. Therefore, TOT revenues are performing higher than projected with a collection percentage of 105.9% of the revised budget, which was already increased during the mid-year budget review adjustment by $370,000, or 7.1%. Overall, TOT increased approximately 9.1% compared to the prior year due the increased tourism activity and recent initiative by the Chamber of Commerce to promote mid-week business travel.

Sales and Use Tax. Sales and Use Tax is currently the City’s second largest revenue source. This includes revenues received from the half-cent Measure J sales tax passed by the City in November 2012. Since this measure was not renewed by voters in November 2014, Measure J elapsed in March 2016 with the final distribution of Measure J revenues received in the last quarter of this fiscal year.

Sales Tax projections were increased by $186,000 during the mid-year budget process but fell just short of the revised target primarily due to low gas prices, which have a high impact on sales tax revenue. However, Sales Tax revenue remains consistent with the prior fiscal year. The 2016-17 adopted budget has already taken the loss of Measure J into account and the City will experience a significant reduction in this category.

Property Tax. Property Tax is currently the City’s third largest revenue source, although it will likely become the second largest with the sunset of the aforementioned Measure J. The first major apportionment of property taxes was received by the City in December 2015, and the second apportionment was received in April 2016. In January the City received an annual apportionment of Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in the amount of $203,000. This revenue was not originally included in the adopted budget due to uncertain nature of this revenue source, but was added in the mid-year budget adjustment.

Property Tax at $3.1 million is virtually on-target relative to revised budget projections, which were increased by $445,000 (or 16.6%) over the adopted budget due to rising home prices and increased sales.

Other Revenue. The main components of this revenue category are Golf Fees, San Mateo County Sheriff Credit

Reimbursements, and Poplar Beach parking fees. Golf fees are paid on a monthly basis and the City has received close to the projected amount at fiscal year-end. The County Sheriff credit reimbursements now reflect the full four quarters of the fiscal year. This category exceeded projections by 2.8% primarily due to higher than expected motor vehicle fees.

Other Taxes. This category consists of Franchise Tax and Business License Tax. The largest components of franchise fee revenues - payments from PG&E, were remitted in April 2016.

Business licenses taxes are due in November of each year and are valid from October 1 through September 30 of the following year. The City received the expected amounts for these taxes.

Charges for Services. These include building permits, engineering and planning fees, and police services. Permits and planning fees tend to fluctuate based on the timing of larger projects. The City received an additional $126,470 or 23.3% in service volume in the fiscal year above expectations primarily due to increased accuracy in the City’s cost recovery practice.

Inter-governmental. This revenue category includes vehicle code fines, governmental grants and various cost reimbursements. The State is currently paying State Mandate claims from prior years as funds become available. The City received a number of SB90 State Mandate reimbursements for prior years’ claims, which account for the excess intergovernmental revenue of $27,307 received this year.

SUMMARY

Overall, the City’s continues to experience higher than expected revenue growth which is a positive indicator of the City’s economic growth and healthy fiscal condition. Despite the loss of Measure J revenue, the City’s budget maintains a structural surplus while increasing the level of services for residents and visitors, and will continue to invest in capital projects to strengthen the City’s infrastructure.

27


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager

FROM: Russell Brunson, Administrative Services Manager Carlo Wei, Management Analyst

TITLE: LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AND THE MAVERICKS EXPERIENCE SURF SCHOOL

______________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a License Agreement between the City of Half Moon Bay and the Mavericks Experience Surf School. FISCAL IMPACT: Implementation of the proposed two year License Agreement will have a positive fiscal impact to the City of Half Moon Bay from license revenues of $1,339 per year. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Healthy Communities and Public Safety Elements. BACKGROUND: Chapter 9.75 of the City of Half Moon Bay Municipal Code limits the commercial use of City beaches, parks, and trails through a license agreement or permitting process to ensure:

1. Commercial enterprises are managed in a way that protects public health and safety; 2. Access for residents and visitors is protected; and 3. City resources are used in a financially sustainable manner.

The City issues licenses to surf schools to provide surfing lessons at Surfer’s Beach. The City has existing licenses with two surf schools and each have been informed. Each school will wear different colored vests, and all have the same student to instructor ratio. If approved, the Mavericks Experience would be a third school providing lessons at Surfer’s Beach.

28

License Agreement with the Mavericks Experience October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 2

DISCUSSION: The License Agreement between the City of Half Moon Bay and the Mavericks Experience includes the following requirements:

1. Annual payment of $1,338.82 2. City business license 3. Certificate of Insurance 4. Approved hours of operation 5. Red Cross certification for all instructors 6. Proper ratio and identification of instructors and students 7. Participant waivers approved by the City

The Mavericks Experience has met all requirements for the License Agreement. Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the License Agreement with the Mavericks Experience to provide surf lessons on Surfer’s Beach. ATTACHMENT: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the License Agreement between the City of Half Moon Bay and the Mavericks Experience

29

Resolution No. C‐2016‐ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE MAVERICKS EXPERIENCE SURF SCHOOL

WHEREAS, the city of Half Moon Bay Municipal Code prohibits commercial sale of goods

or services on city beaches except as licensed by the city; and WHEREAS, the Mavericks Experience operates an instructional surf school and seeks to

operate said school on city‐owned Surfer’s Beach; and WHEREAS, the Mavericks Experience has met all requirements to receive a License

Agreement from the City of Half Moon Bay to operate an instructional surf school.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay hereby authorizes the City Manager or her designee to execute a License Agreement with the Mavericks Experience.

***************************************************************************** I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the forgoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted on this 18th day of October, 2016 by the City Council of Half Moon Bay by the following vote: AYES, Councilmembers:




ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _________________________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

30


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: John Doughty, Community Development Director TITLE: PDP‐16‐016, INTRODUCTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE / COASTAL

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE CHILD CARE ACT FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE OPERATIONS AND STATE HOUSING LAWS

______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing and introduce an ordinance amending Title 18 of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code to:

1. Delete “Limited Day Care” and add “Small Family Day Care” and “Large Family Day Care” uses in all Residential, Commercial and Mobile Home Park Zones;

2. Establish Use Regulations for Large Family Day Care in Residential, Commercial and Mobile Home Zones; and

3. Provide for Supportive Housing and Transitional Housing where residential uses are allowed in Commercial Zones.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the introduction of these ordinance amendments. Implementation of the ordinance amendments is consistent with normal Planning Division operations covered by Fiscal Year 2016‐17 operating budget. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Healthy Communities and Public Safety Element of the Strategic Plan. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission reviewed these amendments at public hearings on March 22, 2016 and April 26, 2016 (minutes included as Attachments 3 and 4). All code amendments for Large Family Day Care, Supportive Housing, and Transitional Housing were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission to the City Council. DISCUSSION:

31

PDP‐16‐016, Introduction of Large Family Day Zoning Amendments October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 8

These amendments are intended to bring the City Zoning Ordinance into conformance with the State Child Care Act and state housing laws. Each City is required to maintain consistency with state laws. The text sections within this report that are formatted in italicized text represent areas of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 18 of the Municipal Code) that are recommended to be changed. LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE BACKGROUND: Small and Large Family Day Care facilities have been deemed by the State to be compatible with residential development as accessory residential uses. In 2007 the legislature amended the California Health and Safety Code (Section 1597.465) to expand upon the definitions of Small Family Day Care for eight (8) or fewer children in a provider’s home, and Large Family Day Care for nine (9) to fourteen (14) children in a providers home. The City’s current regulations are preempted by State law. That law requires that Large Family Day Care facilities be permitted in all residential zones. The current Code conflicts with these State laws by defining Limited Day Care as applying to six (6) or fewer persons, when up to eight (8) children are statutorily allowed for Small Family Day Care. Similarly the existing code for Large Family Day Care applies to seven (7) to twelve (12) persons, when State law allows nine (9) to fourteen (14) children for Large Family Day Care. These existing provisions reflected prior State law.

Wherever residential development is allowed within the City, State law dictates that Small and Large Family Day Care uses are to be statutorily allowed as accessory/incidental residential uses. This means that any and all other zoning districts allowing residential development must also allow Small and Large Family Day Care facilities. However, if, for example, a residential use is allowed with approval of a Use Permit (residential uses is allowed in the CD, Commercial Downtown district with approval of a Use Permit), the City can require a Use Permit for the residential use, but not for the Small and Large Family Day care operation within the residence.

Amendments to several different sections of the Zoning Ordinance are necessary to implement State Child care laws. These code amendments include: 1) Adding “new definitions” of Small and Large Family Day Care and deleting conflicting definitions, 2) Replacing the “use classifications” with these newly defined uses, and 3) Amending all the “Use Regulation” tables for every zone where residential use is allowed to also allow for Small and Large Family Day Care as an incidental accessory residential use. For a more detailed code specific outline of these code amendments please refer to Attachment 2 – “Summary of Large Family Day Care Code Amendments.” New Definitions of Small/Large Family Day Care and General Day Care, Chapter 18.02.040 New definitions that are consistent with State law for Small and Large Family Day Care are proposed as follows:

32


Small Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 8 or fewer children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. Large Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 9 to 14 children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. In reviewing the principally permitted uses for Large Family Day Care, it became apparent that it would be beneficial to re‐define General Day Care. The key distinction between Large Family Day Care and General Day Care is that the latter is a commercial use, versus Large Family Day Care which is considered an incidental residential use by definition. Therefore, General Day Care has been re‐defined as a commercial use. The newly proposed definition and revised Use Classification (Sec. 18.03.030(D) for General Day Care is as follows: General Day Care means non‐medical care and supervision, other than family day care,

for children or adults for periods of less than 24 hours per day, including nursery schools, preschools, and day care centers for children or adults licensed by the state of California.

D. Day Care, General. Provision of nonmedical care for seven or more persons on a less than twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools and day‐care centers for children or adults.

Replace Day Care Use Classifications, Chapter 18.03 The Residential Use Classifications for Large Family Day Care and Limited Day Care would be replaced with the new definitions in Section 18.03.030 as follows: B. Day Care, Large Family. Nonmedical care and supervision of seven to twelve persons, inclusive, on a less than twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools, and day‐care centers for children and adults licensed by the state of California. Large Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 9 to 14 children in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. C. Day Care, Limited. Nonmedical care and supervision of six or fewer persons on a less than twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools, and day‐care centers for children and adults licensed by the state of California.

33


Small Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 8 or fewer children in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. Residential Use Regulations, Chapter 18.06.020 Small Family Day Care would be added as an allowable use in all residential zones. The currently noncompliant provisions for “Limited Day Care” would be deleted, and replaced with the newly defined use of Large Family Day Care as an allowable use in all residential zones as follows:

Table A‐1

SCHEDULE OF RESIDENTIAL USES Residential Uses Allowed by Zoning Single‐family All R Districts Two‐family R‐2, R‐3 Multifamily R‐3

Small Family Day Care All R Day Care, Limited Large Family Day Care All R New Large Family Day Care Use Regulations, Chapter 18.06.025 The only statutorily allowed land use regulations that City’s may apply on Large Family Day Care operations are development standards related to: 1) spacing and concentration of facilities, 2) parking, 3) traffic operations in passenger loading/unloading, 4) noise levels, 5) screening of outdoor play areas, and 6) referencing required compliance with regulations administered by other agencies. To this end the following development standards are recommended to be added to Section 18.06.025 “Use Regulations” in a new underlined subsection section “L.” below to have minimally heightened review parameters:

L. Large family day care is allowed incidental to a residential use in all residential zoning districts subject to a determination by the Community Development Director that the large family day care conforms to all of the following:

1. Concentration of Uses. No more than one large family day care shall be permitted within 300 linear feet of the property line of any existing large family day care.

2. Parking. On‐site parking beyond that required for the residential use shall not be required.

3. Passenger Loading. In addition to available on‐street loading, a minimum of one passenger loading space shall be provided on the site during pick‐up and drop‐off periods.

34


4. Noise. Operation of a large family day care shall conform to the noise limitations of

Municipal Code Chapter 9.23.

5. Screening of Outdoor Play Areas. A solid fence in conformance with the requirements of this Chapter shall be provided to screen outdoor play areas located in the rear yard.

6. Residency. The operator of a large family day care must be a full‐time resident of the dwelling unit in which the day care is located.

7. Garage. No portion of a garage providing “required” parking shall be utilized for the day care.

8. Fire and Building Code Requirements. Large family day care shall conform to the requirements of the State Fire Marshall.

9. State and Other Licensing. Large family day care shall be State licensed and operated according to all applicable State and local regulations.

Commercial Use Regulations, Tables Chapters 18.07.020A and 18.08.020A The Residential Use matrix for the Commercial Zones (C‐D, Commercial Downtown, C‐R, Commercial ‐ Residential, C‐VS, Commercial Visitor Serving and C‐G, Commercial General) would be amended as follows:

Key Residential Uses C‐D Zoning C‐R Zoning

D‐1 Group Residential UP UP

D‐2 Large Family Day Care UPOK UPOK

D‐3 Limited Day Care Small Family Day Care UPOK UPOK

D‐4 Limited Residential Care UP UP

D‐5 Multi‐Family Residential UP UPCC

D‐6 Single‐Family Residential UP OK

Key Residential Uses

C‐VS

Zoning

C‐G

Zoning

D‐1 Group Residential NO OK

D‐2 Large Family Day Care NOOK OK

D‐3 Limited Day Care Small Family Day Care NOOK OK

35


D‐4 Limited Residential Care OK OK

D‐5 Multi‐Family Residential NO UP

D‐6 Single‐Family Residential UP UP

Please note that staff had previously identified (and the Planning Commission recommended approval) a code correction in the use table for “D‐5, Multi‐Family Residential” in a change to a permitted use. Upon closer examination staff believes the existing code can remain without further changes because other parts of the code specify that Multi‐Family Residential is allowed within the C‐VS, Commercial – Visitor Serving zone under certain circumstances. Mobile Home Park Use Amendments, Chapter 18.17.020 D. 3. It is also necessary to amend the MHP, Mobile Home Park Zoning District regulations in subsection 18.17.029(D)3, Accessory Uses and Structures, to allow for Small and Large Family Day Care as follows:

3. Day care, limited residential, Small Family Day Care and Large Family Day Care subject to the regulations set forth at Section 18.06.025(CL).

These recommended code changes are also provided in “Attachment 1, Exhibit E ‐ Proposed Code Amendments to Chapter 18.17 – MHP, Mobile Home Park Use Regulations.” Supportive/Transitional Housing to Replace Limited/General Residential Care, Chapter 18.03 .030 During the code drafting process for the Large Family Day Care amendments staff discovered internal inconsistencies between the definition of “Limited and General Residential Care,” and the recently adopted (September, 2015) definitions for residential housing amendments pertaining to Supportive Housing and Transitional Housing in the Commercial Zones. In particular, the current code provisions for Limited and General Residential Care do not align with the recently adopted and Definitions and Use Classifications for Supportive Housing and Transitional Housing. Therefore, these outdated definitions and use classifications are to be replaced as follows:

“Section 18.03.030(J) ‐ Supportive Housing means housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. F. Residential Care, Limited. Twenty‐four‐hour nonmedical care for six or fewer persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. This classification includes only those services and facilities licensed by the state of California.

36


Section 18.03.030(K) ‐ Transitional Housing means buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six (6) months from the beginning of the assistance.” K. Residential Care, General. Twenty‐four‐hour nonmedical care for seven or more persons, including wards of the juvenile court, in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. This classification includes only those services and facilities licensed by the state of California.

This means that Supportive and Transitional Housing needs to be included where residential uses are allowed in the Commercial Zones (C‐D, Commercial Downtown, C‐R, Commercial – Residential, C‐VS, Commercial – Visitor Serving, and C‐G, Commercial General). For example, the current code is out of conformance with the State Housing Law in this regard because a Use Permit is currently required (for Limited Residential Care) in both the C‐D, Commercial Downtown, and CR, Commercial‐Residential Zoning Districts, which is proposed to be reclassified to Supportive and Transitional Housing as a principally permitted Residential Use. However, the same requirements for allowing residential uses would continue to apply in all of the Commercial Zones, where a Use Permit is often required for a Residential Use. However, the Supportive/Transitional uses and activity within the residence would be allowed per State law. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA) Environmental documentation for the ordinance amendments to address Large Family Day Care, Supportive Housing and Transitional Housing was deemed unnecessary as these amendments are currently applicable to the City and the action being undertaken is an administrative task to bring City regulations into compliance and consistency with State Child Care and Housing Laws. CONCLUSION: The Large Family Day Care code amendments are necessary to bring the City’s code into compliance with State Child Care law. Additional amendments were identified in the code drafting process that highlighted the need for further amendments to allow Supportive and Transitional Housing wherever residential uses are allowed in the Commercial Zones for compliance with State Housing Laws. Minor code corrections and changes are also recommended for clarity and consistency in the residential code regulation format. If the City Council approves these amendments, they would become effective upon Coastal Commission certification of the amendments.

37


ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Ordinance 2. March 22, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 3. April 26, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

38

ORDINANCE NO. C‐2016‐___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AMENDING SECTION 18.020.040 ADDING DEFINITIONS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE, SMALL FANMILY DAY CARE AND GENERAL DAY CARE, AMENDING SECTION 18.03.030 USE CLASSIFICATIONS B., C., D., J. AND K. AND REPLACING WITH NEW USE CLASSIFICATIONS B. LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE, C. SMALL FAMILY DAY CARE, D. GENERAL DAY CARE, J. SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND K. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, ADD SMALL FAMILY DAY CARE AND LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE TO PERMITTED USES IN TABLE A‐1 OF SECTION 18.06.020, ADD SUBSECTION L. (LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE USE REGULATIONS) TO SECTION 18.06.025, ADD LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE AND SMALL FAMILY DAY CARE AS PERMITTED USES IN THE C‐D AND C‐R ZONING DISTRICTS (TABLE 18.07.020A), ADD LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE AND SMALL FAMILY DAY CARE AS PERMITTED USES IN THE C‐VS AND C‐G ZONING DISTRICTS (TABLE 18.08.020A) AND MODIFY SECTION 18.17.020 D. 3 ADDING REFERENCES TO SMALL FAMILY DAY CARE AND LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE. WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay is committed to the maximum public participation

and involvement in matters pertaining to the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan and its Elements, and the Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay Planning Commission, as the Advisory Body to the City Council, conducted a duly noticed public hearings on March 22, 2016 and April 26, 2016 at which time all those in attendance desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to speak; and

WHEREAS, following the close of the public hearing on April 26, 2016, the Planning

Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council amend Title 18 of the Municipal Code as set forth in this ordinance; and

WHEREAS, State Law requires Large Family Day Care to be considered a residential use subject to only those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone; and

WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the importance of bringing zoning regulations

into compliance with State law; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments are exempt from the

California Environmental Quality Act as the amendments are being proposed in response to changes in State law; and

WHEREAS, the City Council considered all written and oral testimony presented in its

consideration of the amendments; and 39

WHEREAS, the procedures for processing the application have been followed as

required by law; and WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments are consistent with the

City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan and Coastal Implementation Program, and 2015‐2023 Housing Element; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Add the following “Definitions” in Section 18.02.040 as follows: Large Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 9 to 14 children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. Small Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 8 or fewer children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away. General Day Care means non‐medical care and supervision, other than family day care, for children or adults for periods of less than 24 hours per day, including nursery schools, preschools, and day care centers for children or adults licensed by the state of California. Section 2. Delete and Replace use classifications in Section 18.03.030 as follows: B. Day Care, Large Family. Nonmedical care and supervision of seven to twelve persons, inclusive, on a less than twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools, and day‐care centers for children and adults licensed by the state of California. B. Large Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and

supervision for 9 to 14 children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away.

C. Day Care, Limited. Nonmedical care and supervision of six or fewer persons on a less than twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools, and day‐care centers for children and adults licensed by the state of California. C. Small Family Day Care means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 8 or fewer children under 18 years of age in the provider’s own home (including

40

children under the age of 10 years who reside at the home) for periods of less than 24 hours per day while the parents or guardians are away.

D. Day Care, General. Provision of nonmedical care for seven or more persons on a less than

twenty‐four‐hour basis. This classification includes nursery schools, preschools and day‐care centers for children or adults.

D. General Day Care means non‐medical care and supervision, other than family day care, for

children or adults for periods of less than 24 hours per day, including nursery schools, preschools, and day care centers for children or adults licensed by the state of California.

F. Residential Care, Limited. Twenty‐four‐hour nonmedical care for six or fewer persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. This classification includes only those services and facilities licensed by the state of California.

(J) ‐ Supportive Housing means housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

K. Residential Care, General. Twenty‐four‐hour nonmedical care for seven or more persons, including wards of the juvenile court, in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. This classification includes only those services and facilities licensed by the state of California.

(K) ‐ Transitional Housing means buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six (6) months from the beginning of the assistance.”

Section 3. Modify the Residential Use Regulations, Section 18.06.020 as follows:

Table A‐1 SCHEDULE OF RESIDENTIAL USES

Residential Uses Allowed by Zoning Single‐family All R Districts Two‐family R‐2, R‐3 Multifamily R‐3

Small Family Day Care All R

Day Care, Limited Large Family Day Care All R Section 4. Add subsection “L.” (Large Family Day Care Use Regulations) to Chapter 18.06.025 as follows:

41

L. Large family day care is allowed incidental to a residential use in all residential zoning districts subject to a determination by the Community Development Director that the large family day care conforms to all of the following:

1. Concentration of Uses. No more than one large family day care shall be permitted within 300 linear feet of the property line of any existing large family day care.

2. Parking. On‐site parking beyond that required for the residential use shall not be required.

3. Passenger Loading. In addition to available on‐street loading, a minimum of one passenger loading space shall be provided on the site during pick‐up and drop‐off periods.

4. Noise. Operation of a large family day care shall conform to the noise limitations of Municipal Code Chapter 9.23.

5. Screening of Outdoor Play Areas. A solid fence in conformance with the requirements of this Chapter shall be provided to screen outdoor play areas located in the rear yard.

6. Residency. The operator of a large family day care must be a full‐time resident of the dwelling unit in which the day care is located.

7. Garage. No portion of a garage providing “required” parking shall be utilized for the day care.

8. Fire and Building Code Requirements. Large family day care shall conform to the requirements of the State Fire Marshall.

9. State and Other Licensing. Large family day care shall be State licensed and operated according to all applicable State and local regulations.

Section 5. Modify Table 18.07.020A for Commercial‐Downtown and Commercial‐Residential districts and and 18.08.020A for Commercial‐Visitor Serving and Commercial‐General districts to include Small and Large Family Day Care as permitted residential uses as follows:

Key Residential Uses C‐D Zoning C‐R Zoning

D‐1 Group Residential UP UP

D‐2 Large Family Day Care UPOK UPOK

D‐3 Limited Day Care Small Family Day Care UPOK UPOK

D‐4 Limited Residential Care UP UP

D‐5 Multi‐Family Residential UP UPCC

D‐6 Single‐Family Residential UP OK

42

Key Residential Uses

C‐VS

Zoning

C‐G

Zoning

D‐1 Group Residential NO OK

D‐2 Large Family Day Care NOOK OK

D‐3 Limited Day Care Small Family Day Care NOOK OK

D‐4 Limited Residential Care OK OK

D‐5 Multi‐Family Residential NO UP

D‐6 Single‐Family Residential UP UP

Section 6. Modify the Mobile Home Park Zoning District Standards, Section 18.17.020 D. 3. as follows:

3. Day care, limited residential, Small Family Day Care and Large Family Day Care subject to the regulations set forth at Section 18.06.025(CL).

Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the thirtieth (30th) day following its final passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay, California, held on the 18th day of October, 2016.

43

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay, California, held on the ____day of November, 2016, by the following vote: AYES,

NOES,

ABSENT,

ABSTAIN,

ATTEST: APPROVED: __________________________ _________________________

Jessica Blair, City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________

Reed Gallogly, Deputy City Attorney

44


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: Yulia Carter, Finance Director TITLE: HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT’S ASSESSMENTS /

ANNUAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016‐2017 ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District (BID) Annual Report for January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015; and

2. Adopt a resolution of intent to continue to levy the BID’s assessment and expand the BID boundaries as described in the staff report; and

3. Set a Public Hearing for introduction of the ordinance for December 6, 2016.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action outside of expenses associated with the renewal of the BID (staff time, postage, and supplies) and staff time to process the collection and pass through of funds to the Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce and Visitors’ Bureau (Chamber) who oversees the BID. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Fiscal Sustainability Element. BACKGROUND: In 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay established a hotel BID to promote lodging at the hotels within the City limits of Half Moon Bay, administer marketing programs that increase overnight lodging in the City, and fund BID‐related activities. The Chamber has been designated as the Managing Agency for BID‐related activities, staffing, and administration. As part of its responsibilities under the California Streets and Highways Code, and as the Managing Agency for the BID, the Chamber is required to submit a report, on an annual basis, which highlights the BID’s activities and estimated expenses for the upcoming year; the amount of surplus or deficit funds to be carried over from the previous year; recommended assessments for the upcoming year; and, any recommended changes to the BID boundaries.

52

Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 3

The City Council reviews the report for completeness and, by affirmative vote, can approve relevant ordinances to change the BID boundaries; adopt a Resolution of Intention to Levy new or increased BID assessments for the next year; and schedule public hearings for approval of any changes to the BID boundaries and/or assessments. DISCUSSION: Annual Hotel BID Report On May 30, 2016, the Chamber submitted the BID’s annual report for calendar year 2015. A review of the BID’s financial activities from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 was included as part of the report and indicates that in 2015, the Hotel BID had a net income of $7,927. For 2016, the report projects income at $197,927 (which will include City Hotel assessments, the City of Half Moon Bay’s annual contribution to the BID of $25,000, and $7,927 net income carried over from 2015). In turn, expenses for 2016 are projected at $184,593. In addition, at the direction of the BID’s Board of Directors, the Chamber continues to maintain $40,000 in a separate BID reserve account to cover necessary expenses in the event of an economic downturn. Five thousand dollars ($5,000) will be added to this reserve account every year from the BID’s general fund account. Expansion of BID Boundaries – Ordinance Adoption

With regard to the boundaries of the BID, no changes were recommended for calendar years 2015 or 2016. However, for calendar year 2017, the Chamber has identified ten (10) commercial lodging establishments operating in the unincorporated coastside areas of San Mateo County as potential members of the BID. The Chamber believes that adding these particular establishments will further its purpose of promoting tourism and lodging on the San Mateo County coastside. As such, the Chamber is recommending an expansion of the BID boundaries, effective January 1, 2017, to include these establishments, as more fully identified in the Chamber’s report.

On September 20, 2016, pursuant to the California Streets and Highways Code, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution consenting to the inclusion of the above establishments and authorizing the City of Half Moon Bay to take necessary steps and actions to collect the assessments imposed on these establishments under the terms of its BID.

In light of the Chamber’s recommendation and the County’s recently adopted resolution, staff recommends the City Council approve an ordinance amending the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code to expand the boundaries of the City’s Hotel BID to include the ten establishments identified in the Chamber’s report.

53

Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District October 18, 2016 Page 3 of 3

New BID Assessments – Council Resolution

With regard to BID assessments, there were no changes recommended in calendar year 2015 and no changes recommended for calendar year 2016. As such, for these two years, the assessment amount remained at $1.00 per rented room, per day of occupancy; the same as it has been since the inception of the BID in 2004. Further, as is currently the process, once collected, the assessments are forwarded to the Chamber for expenditures, as authorized by the BID Board of Directors. Regarding calendar year 2017, the Chamber’s report recommends the levying of assessments for the additional hotels captured by the expansion of the BID boundaries as recommended by the Chamber; with both taking effect on January 1, 2017. The Chamber also recommends the assessment amount remain consistent with that which is already collected from establishments currently included in the existing boundaries of the BID – $1.00 per rented room, per day of occupancy. Accordingly, staff recommends the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention to Levy Assessments notifying all businesses currently in the BID, and those businesses that would be included with the expansion of the BID boundaries, of the City’s intent to levy assessments from the ten additional establishments. The staff further recommends the City Council set a public meeting and a public hearing to discuss and vote on the actions recommended by the Chamber and staff. The public meeting and hearing associated with the above City Council actions is required by the California Streets and Highways Code and, more importantly, gives the businesses and the community an opportunity to voice their opinions, comments, suggestions, and concerns directly to the City Council. Staff recommends setting the public meeting and hearing for October 18, 2016 and December 6, 2016 at 7:00 p.m., respectively ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution continuing the assessment for and expanding the boundaries of the BID 2. Draft Ordinance expanding the boundaries of the BID 3. Chamber’s Hotel BID 2015 Annual Report

54

Resolution No. C‐2016‐____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY, CALIFORNIA, CONTINUING THE ASSESSMENT FOR AND EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HALF MOON

BAY HOTEL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

WHEREAS, in 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay formed the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District (BID) to promote tourism and lodging within the BID’s boundaries; and

WHEREAS, the BID levies an assessment of $1 per day per occupied room to fund the BID’s activities; and

WHEREAS, the BID’s Managing Agent, the Half Moon Bay Chamber of Commerce, recommends the assessment continue and the boundaries of the BID be expanded to include certain commercial lodging facilities located in the unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo; and

WHEREAS, on September 20, 2016, the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County adopted a Resolution, attached hereto as Exhibit A, consenting to the inclusion of certain commercial lodging facilities located in the unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo within the BID, as required by Streets and Highways Code § 36521.5; and

WHEREAS, those certain commercial lodging facilities are identified on Exhibit B, attached hereto; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay agrees with the recommendation of the BID’s Managing Agent, acknowledges and appreciates the Board of Supervisor’s Resolution of Consent, and desires to continue the BID’s assessment and expand the boundaries as shown on Exhibit B. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City of Half Moon Bay shall continue to levy and collect the assessment of the BID, as set forth under Half Moon Bay Municipal Code § 3.100.020(A);

2. The boundaries of the BID are hereby expanded to include those certain commercial lodging facilities as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

55

*****************************************************************

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the forgoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted on the 18th day of October, 2016 by the City Council of Half Moon Bay by the following vote: AYES, Councilmembers:




ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________________ _______________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

56

RESOLUTION NO. 074796

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * *

RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE INCLUSION OF CERTAIN COMMERCIAL

LODGING FACILITIES LOCATED IN THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY OF THE

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO WITHIN THE HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

______________________________________________________________

RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that:

WHEREAS, in 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay formed the Half Moon Bay Hotel

Business Improvement District to promote tourism and lodging on the San Mateo

County Coastside; and

WHEREAS, the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District collects an

assessment of $1.00 per occupied sleeping room per night from commercial lodging

facilities (hotels, motels, inns, bed & breakfasts) which are part of the Half Moon Bay

Hotel Business Improvement District; and

WHEREAS, the lodging facilities shown on Attachment A are located within the

unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo; and

WHEREAS, California Streets and Highway Code Section 36521.5 provides that

a county’s Board of Supervisors may allow commercial lodging facilities located in the

unincorporated territory of the county to be included within a city’s hotel business

improvement district provided that the Board of Supervisors consent to such inclusion;

and 57

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay has requested the Board of Supervisors’

consent to the inclusion of the commercial lodging facilities shown on Attachment A

within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the

County of San Mateo, that:

Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2: The Board of Supervisors consents to the inclusion of the commercial

lodging facilities shown on Attachment A within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business

Improvement District and further authorizes the City of Half Moon Bay to take necessary

steps and actions to collect the assessments imposed under the terms of the Half Moon

Hotel Bay Improvement District, as may be amended from time to time, for commercial

lodging facilities within the District.

Section 3: The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is hereby directed to transmit a

certified copy of this Resolution to the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Half Moon

Bay City.

Section 4: This Resolution is effective upon its adoption.

* * * * * *

58

RESOLUTION NUMBER: 074796

Regularly passed and adopted this 20th day of September 2016

AYES and in favor of said resolution:

Supervisors: DAVE PINE___

CAROLE GROOM

DON HORSLEY

WARREN SLOCUM

ADRIENNE J. TISSIER

NOES and against said resolution:

Supervisors: NONE

Absent Supervisors: NONE

President, Board of Supervisors

County of San Mateo

State of California

Certificate of Delivery

I certify that a copy of the original resolution filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of

Supervisors of San Mateo County has been delivered to the President of the Board of Supervisors.

Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors

59

3

ATTACHMENT A

The 10 hotels to be added to the Half Moon Bay Business Improvement District are as follows: 1. Costanoa Coastal Lodge

Attn: Trevor Bridge 2001 Rossi Road at Hwy 1 Pescadero, CA 94060

2. Cypress Inn on Miramar Beach

Attn: Dinah Sherman 407 Mirada Road Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

3. Goose & Turrets Bed & Breakfast

Attn: Emily and Raymond Hoche-Mong 835 George Street Montara, CA 94037 P.O. Box 370937 (mailing address) Montara, CA 94037

4. Harbor View Inn

Attn: Marina Fields 51 Avenue Alhambra Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 PO Box 127 (mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

5. Ocean Front Inn

Attn: Ann and Werner Stamm 211 Mirada Road Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

60

rgallogly

Text Box

EXHIBIT B TO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY, CALIFORNIA, CONTINUING THE ASSESSMENT FOR AND EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

rgallogly

Text Box

4

6. Ocean View Inn Attn: Debbie Padilla 8425 Cabrillo Hwy Montara, CA 94037 P.O. Box 371211 (mailing address) Montara, CA 94037

7. Oceano Hotel & Spa

Attn: Joel Janoe 280 Capistrano Rd. Princeton-by-the Sea Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

8. Pacific Victorian Bed & Breakfast

Attn: Lori and Jeff Matthews 325 Alameda Avenue Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 P.O. Box 2560 (Mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

9. Seal Cove Inn

Attn: Kelly Dayan 221 Cypress Avenue Moss Beach, CA 94038

10. The Inn at Maverick’s

Attn: Melissa Rey 346 Princeton Avenue Princeton-by-the Sea Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 P.O. Box 898 (mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

61

rgallogly

Text Box

ORDINANCE NO. C‐2016‐____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

1. Half Moon Bay Municipal Code § 3.100.010(B) is hereby amended to read as follows: “The boundaries of the district shall include the city limits of the city of Half Moon bay and those certain commercial lodging facilities located in the unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo identified on Resolution _________.

2. Half Moon Bay Municipal Code § 3.100.010(B) is hereby amended to read as follows:

“The assessments shall be levied annually on all hotels, including, but not limited to, hotels, motels, inns, and bed and breakfasts existing now or in the future, within the boundaries of the district as set forth in section 3.100.010(B).”

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay, California, held on the ______th day of ____________________, 2016. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay, California, held on the ____ day of _____________, 2016, by the following vote: Ayes, Councilmembers: __________________________________ Noes, Councilmembers: __________________________________ Absent, Councilmembers:__________________________________ Abstain, Councilmembers:__________________________________ Attest: ___________________________ _______________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Rick Kowalczyk, Mayor

62

HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2015

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Dana Dahl, Chair Keith Wesselman, Vice-Chair Jamie Barber, Treasurer

MISSION STATEMENT

The assessment levied by the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District shall be used to promote lodging within the district and administer marketing programs that increase overnight lodging.

BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT HOTELS City Hotels Included In the Business Improvement District: As of April 6, 2004, the boundaries of the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District are the city limits of the City of Half Moon Bay. The lodging facilities included in the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District are the following operational establishments:

The Ritz Carlton (261), Joel Costa and Kevin Kelly Half Moon Bay Lodge (80), Keith & Melanie Wesselmann Cameron’s Inn (3), Cameron Palmer Nantucket Whale Inn (7), David Vipond Half Moon Bay Inn (14), Jamie Barber Mill Rose Inn (6), Terry Baldwin The Beach House (54), Kevin Scanlon and Dana Dahl Zaballa House (19), Dave Cresson Jr. Coastside Inn (52), Adam Kari Comfort Inn (54), Gabriel Ronen America's Best Value Inn & Suites (29), Bob Patel San Benito (12), Carlos Nieto

Total Properties = 12 (591 rooms)

63

2015 REPORT

In 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay established a Hotel Business Improvement District (Hotel BID) to promote lodging at the hotels within the Half Moon Bay City limits, administer marketing programs that increase overnight lodging, and fund related activities. The Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce & Visitor’s Bureau (Chamber) has been designated as the Managing Agency for Hotel BID-related activities, staffing, and administration. As the Managing Agency for the Hotel BID, the Chamber is required to submit an annual report summarizing the Hotel BID’s activities and estimated expenses for the upcoming year; the amount of surplus or deficit funds to be carried over from the previous year; recommended assessments; and, any recommended changes to the Hotel BID boundaries. Hotel BID Activities: For calendar year 2015, the Board of Directors (Board) for the Hotel BID voted to appropriate funds towards the following Hotel BID-related activities: Hotel BID management, public relations, destination management (on the Chamber’s website), Chamber website search engine optimization related to the Hotel BID, and social media. Income and Expenses for 2015: There were no changes in the boundaries of the Hotel BID during calendar year 2015. As such the assessment was levied on all lodging establishments, including but not limited to hotels, motels, inns, and bed and breakfasts (collectively, “establishments”) located with the city limits of Half Moon Bay. In addition, during calendar year 2015, the method of levying the Hotel BID assessment remained the same - $1 per day of occupied room, per day of occupancy. For a breakdown of the assessments paid by the Hotel BID establishments during 2015, please see Attachment 1 to this report. Further, for a breakdown of all Hotel BID income and expenses for 2015, please see Attachment 2 to this report. At the end of 2015, the Hotel BID realized a surplus of $7,927.10, which has been carried over for use in calendar year 2016, as needed. In addition, in 2015, per previous direction from the Board, the Hotel BID established a reserve account with a starting balance of $40,000. This reserve account was established to cover Hotel BID expenses in the event of an economic down turn. Lastly, per direction from the Board, the Hotel BID will add an additional $5,000 per year to its reserve account every year beginning in 2016.

64

Estimated Expenses for 2016: For calendar year 2016, the Board recommended that the method of levying the Hotel BID assessments remain the same at $1 per rented room, per day of occupancy. Projected income and expenses for 2016 can be found in Attachment 3 to this report. Please note an additional $5,000 being added to the Hotel BID reserve account, bringing the reserve account to a total of $45,000. Recommended Assessments for 2017: For calendar year 2017, the Board recommends that the method of levying the Hotel BID assessment again remain the same as it has been since the inception of the Hotel BID. Further, the Board recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention to levy the Hotel BID assessment for calendar year 2017 in the amount of $1 per rented room, per day of occupancy. Recommend Changes to the Hotel BID Boundaries for 2017: A number of hotels on the coastside are located in unincorporated areas of San Mateo County (County Hotels). The Board believes these hotels can benefit from the Hotel BID’s efforts to market and promote lodging at their establishments. Accordingly, the Board recommends that beginning January 1, 2017, these hotels be added to the Hotel BID and be assessed along with the current Hotel BID establishments. Further, in compliance with state law, recently, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors consented to the inclusion of these County Hotels in Half Moon Bay’s Hotel BID. See Attachment 4 to this report which is the County staff report, the list of County Hotels to be included in the Hotel BID and the resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors. In light of the above, the Board requests the City Council approve an ordinance expanding the boundaries of the Hotel BID to include the County Hotels, effective January 1, 2017. The Council’s approval of the ordinance would result in an additional 10 hotels being included in the Hotel BID, for a total of 22 hotels and 861 rooms being assessed under the City’s Hotel BID.

65

HMB BID

City Hotels

January 1 - December 31, 2015

Jan'Dec'15

NAME OF PROPERTY # Rooms Total Jan'15 Feb'15 Mar'15 Apr'15 May'15 Jun'15 Jul'15 Aug'15 Sep'15 Oct'15 Nov'15 Dec'15 TOTAL

America's Best Value Inn & Suites 29 10,585 488.00 480.00 561.00 550.00 596.00 616.00 692.00 601.00 672.00 689.00 523.00 455.00 6,923.00

Beach House Inn 54 19,710 1,113.00 1,125.00 1,344.00 1,337.00 1,250.00 1,446.00 1,492.00 1,395.00 1,367.00 1,416.00 1,186.00 1,007.00 15,478.00

Cameron's Inn (batched qtrly) 3 1,095 141.00 71.00 146.00 155.00 513.00

Coastside Inn/Holiday Inn 52 18,980 824.00 734.00 736.00 914.00 1,053.00 1,320.00 1,435.00 1,254.00 1,123.00 1,072.00 871.00 554.00 11,890.00

Comfort Inn/Miramar Lodge 54 19,710 914.00 1,041.00 1,404.00 1,341.00 1,413.00 1,532.00 1,550.00 1,577.00 1,542.00 1,456.00 1,310.00 1,208.00 16,288.00

Half Moon Bay Inn 14 5,110 259.00 204.00 304.00 284.00 319.00 363.00 362.00 419.00 270.00 345.00 304.00 217.00 3,650.00

Half Moon Bay Lodge 80 29,200 1,507.00 1,639.00 1,951.00 1,868.00 1,970.00 2,008.00 2,238.00 2,206.00 2,047.00 2,206.00 1,654.00 21,294.00

Mill Rose Inn & Garden 4 1,460 69.00 92.00 83.00 100.00 116.00 122.00 142.00 132.00 124.00 141.00 89.00 56.00 1,266.00

Nuntucket Whale Inn 7 2,555 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 29.00 33.00 68.00 73.00 61.00 12.00 7.00 288.00

Ritz Carlton (Marriott) 261 95,265 4,427.00 3,579.00 5,638.00 5,296.00 6,145.00 5,434.00 7,075.00 6,573.00 6,178.00 6,483.00 5,567.00 4,841.00 67,236.00

San Benito House 12 4,380 103.00 88.00 31.00 71.00 109.00 91.00 493.00

Zaballa House 19 6,935 193.00 182.00 193.00 195.00 244.00 304.00 343.00 301.00 206.00 253.00 155.00 108.00 2,677.00

0.00

589 214,985 147,996.00

does not reflect $25,000 contribution from the City of Half Moon Bay

HALF MOON BAY - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS

66

4:29 PM

09/27/16

Accrual Basis

Half Moon Bay Hotel BID

Income Expenses January through December 2015

Income Memo Account Split Amount Balance

Other Income

2015-16 City Funding to BID Miscellaneous Income Undeposited Funds 25,000.00 25,000.00

Total Other Income 25,000.00 25,000.00

HMB BID Income

November/December 2014 BID Income Undeposited Funds 8,093.00 8,093.00

Additional October-December Payments BID Income Undeposited Funds 5,145.00 13,238.00

January BID Income Undeposited Funds 9,794.00 23,032.00

February 2015 BID Income Undeposited Funds 6,479.00 29,511.00

March 2015 BID Income Undeposited Funds 14,759.00 44,270.00

April 2015 BID Income Undeposited Funds 20,510.00 64,780.00

May 2015 City Hotels BID Income Undeposited Funds 4,491.00 69,271.00

June 2015 City Hotels BID Income Undeposited Funds 14,057.00 83,328.00

City ED reimbursement to Chamber combined in one check Miscellaneous Income Undeposited Funds 228.85 83,556.85

July 2015 BID Income Undeposited Funds 25,829.00 109,385.85

August, September & October BID Income Undeposited Funds 31,510.00 140,895.85

Total HMB BID Income 140,895.85 140,895.85

Gross Income 165,895.85

Expenses Memo Account Split Amount Balance

Total Expenses Vendors Accounts Payable 157,968.75 157,968.75

Net Income 7,927.10

Page 1 of 1

67

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis


Expenses by Vendor Detail January through December 2015

Vendor Date Memo Account Amount Balance 76% City Hotels

California Travel Association

01/16/2015 2015-16 CalTravel Membership Investment Membership Expenses 340.00 340.00

01/16/2015 PAC donation Membership Expenses 34.00 374.00

Total California Travel Association 374.00 374.00 284.24$

Capital One

01/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 500.00

01/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 1,000.00

01/09/2015 HMB Chamber (SMCCCVB Luncheon) Entertainment & Meals 85.00 1,085.00

01/09/2015 Google Penalties - Late fees, etc. 39.00 1,124.00

01/09/2015 Interest charges Account Fees 39.02 1,163.02

02/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 1,663.02

02/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 2,163.02

02/09/2015 Vertical Resopnse Email Marketing (Distribution) 6.11 2,169.13

02/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 2,669.13

02/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 3,169.13

02/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 3,669.13

02/09/2015 Interest Charge Account Fees 8.19 3,677.32

03/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 4,177.32

03/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 4,677.32

03/09/2015 Vertical Resopnse Email Marketing (Distribution) 65.60 4,742.92

03/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 5,242.92

03/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 5,742.92

04/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 6,242.92

04/09/2015 Vertical Response Email Marketing (Distribution) 65.23 6,308.15

04/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 6,808.15

04/09/2015 Rogue Web Works Hosting 220.00 7,028.15

04/09/2015 Google PPC 500.00 7,528.15

05/09/2015 Flickr Graphic Expense 24.95 7,553.10


05/09/2015 Google PPC 111.68 7,729.68


Page 1 of 8

68

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




06/09/2015 Jackrabbit Booking Engine 1,200.00 8,994.14

06/09/2015 Interest Charges Account Fees 10.02 9,004.16


07/09/2015 SFTA (San Francisco Travel Association) Membership Expenses 1,300.00 10,368.35

07/09/2015 Rogue Web Hosting 14.95 10,383.30



08/09/2015 Pasta Moon Entertainment & Meals 80.89 10,552.63




10/09/2015 Deluxe Office Expense 58.12 10,753.31

10/09/2015 Half Moon Bay Lodge Miscellaneous Expenses 358.90 11,112.21





Total Capital One 12,252.62 12,252.62 9,311.99$

Chamberlin Public Relations

01/01/2015 Monthly retainer PR 6,000.00 6,000.00


02/01/2015 1/27 BID Meeting Travel 39.55 12,039.55

02/01/2015 1/08 SMCCVB Annual Luncheon Travel 19.21 12,058.76

02/01/2015 1/30 Chamber Awards Dinner Travel 39.55 12,098.31

02/01/2015 NYC Media Trip PR 600.00 12,698.31


03/01/2015 Safeway - Sunset Travel Guide Miscellaneous Expenses 13.04 18,711.35

03/01/2015 2/26 Lunch w/ Travel Writer from Adventure SpoTravel 39.55 18,750.90

03/01/2015 2/26 Gratuity for Lunch at Pasta moon PR Entertainment & Meals 18.00 18,768.90


04/01/2015 3/24 meeting Travel 39.90 24,808.80

Page 2 of 8

69

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis





05/01/2015 4/06/15 Mileage Travel 48.03 30,856.83

05/01/2015 04/06/15 Lunch & parking gratuity PR Entertainment & Meals 25.00 30,881.83

06/01/2015 Monthly retainer - Reduced hours for June PR 4,500.00 35,381.83

06/01/2015 05/06/15 mileage Travel 70.63 35,452.46

06/01/2015 Dinner with Sarah Lennox 5/6/15 PR Entertainment & Meals 102.70 35,555.16

06/01/2015 Arcangeli Grocery 5/6/15 PR Entertainment & Meals 11.62 35,566.78

06/01/2015 5/20/15 Via Uno Media Dinner Travel 39.55 35,606.33

07/01/2015 Monthly retainer - July PR 6,000.00 41,606.33

07/01/2015 06/23 mileage Travel 39.55 41,645.88

08/03/2015 Monthly retainer - August PR 6,000.00 47,645.88

09/02/2015 Monthly retainer - September PR 6,000.00 53,645.88

09/02/2015 8/20/15 mileage Travel 45.20 53,691.08

09/02/2015 Cowboy Fishing dinner with Dianne French PR Entertainment & Meals 74.54 53,765.62

10/02/2015 Monthly retainer - October PR 6,000.00 59,765.62

10/02/2015 9/22/15 mileage Travel 39.55 59,805.17

11/02/2015 Monthly retainer - November PR 6,000.00 65,805.17

11/02/2015 10/12/15 mileage Travel 39.55 65,844.72

12/01/2015 Monthly retainer - December PR 6,000.00 71,844.72

Total Chamberlin Public Relations 71,844.72 71,844.72 54,601.99$

Destination Advantage, LLC

04/04/2015 halfmoonbaymeetings.com Services Web Site Expense 10,833.33 10,833.33



Total Destination Advantage, LLC 32,499.99 32,499.99 24,699.99$

GraphicWorks

07/02/2015 USB for Press Kits (250) PR 1,033.71 1,033.71

Total GraphicWorks 1,033.71 1,033.71 785.62$

Half Moon Bay Chamber

01/16/2015 BID Management - December 2014 City Hotels BID Management 2,023.25 2,023.25

02/13/2015 BID Management -Additional Oct-Dec 2014 City BID Management 1,286.25 3,309.50

Page 3 of 8

70

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




03/18/2015 BID Management - January 2015 City Hotels BID Management 2,448.50 5,758.00

04/01/2015 BID Management - February 2015 City Hotels BID Management 1,619.75 7,377.75

04/08/2015 BID Management - July-December 2014 CountyBID Management 5,143.00 12,520.75

05/06/2015 Reimburse for Charise, Kelly & Sarah lunch at SEntertainment & Meals 101.96 12,622.71

05/27/2015 BID Management - March 2015 City Hotels BID Management 3,689.75 16,312.46

06/23/2015 BID Management - April 2015 City Hotels BID Management 5,127.50 21,439.96

07/17/2015 BID Management - May 2015 City Hotels BID Management 1,122.75 22,562.71

08/18/2015 City ED reimbursement to Chamber combined inMiscellaneous Income 228.85 22,791.56

08/18/2015 BID Management - June 2015 City Hotels BID Management 3,514.25 26,305.81

10/05/2015 BID Management - July 2015 City Hotels BID Management 6,457.25 32,763.06

10/05/2015 BID Management - Jan-Jun 2015 County Hotels BID Management 5,103.50 37,866.56

12/02/2015 Reimburse for portion of Roy Truitt November ExGroup Sales Expenses 40.30 37,906.86

12/09/2015 BID Management Fee - Aug, Sep, Oct City Hote BID Management 7,877.50 45,784.36

12/31/2015 Reimburse for Roy Truitt December 2015 ServicGroup Sales Expenses 1,800.00 47,584.36

Total Half Moon Bay Chamber 47,584.36 47,584.36 36,164.11$

Half Moon Bay Inn

02/25/2015 Reimburse for Arneli Rufus & Kristan Lawson 2/2Visiting Journalist Expenses 140.00 140.00

Total Half Moon Bay Inn 140.00 140.00 106.40$

Jackrabbit Systems

01/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - January Booking Engine 1,200.00 1,200.00

02/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - February Booking Engine 1,200.00 2,400.00

03/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - March Booking Engine 1,200.00 3,600.00

04/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - April Booking Engine 1,200.00 4,800.00

05/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - May Booking Engine 1,200.00 6,000.00

06/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - June Booking Engine 0.00 6,000.00

07/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - July Booking Engine 1,200.00 7,200.00

08/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - August Booking Engine 1,200.00 8,400.00

09/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - September Booking Engine 1,200.00 9,600.00

10/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - October Booking Engine 1,200.00 10,800.00

11/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - November Booking Engine 1,200.00 12,000.00

12/01/2015 Monthly Lease Fee - December Booking Engine 1,200.00 13,200.00

Page 4 of 8

71

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




Total Jackrabbit Systems 13,200.00 13,200.00 10,032.00$

KGO (Cumulus Media)

08/30/2015 KGO On the Go Ad Advertising Expense 1,700.00 1,700.00

Total KGO (Cumulus Media) 1,700.00 1,700.00 1,292.00$

Rogue Web Works, LLC

01/02/2015 Web Services - December Website Maintenance 102.90 102.90

02/02/2015 Web Services - January Website Maintenance 343.00 445.90

03/03/2015 Web Services - February Website Maintenance 63.00 508.90

03/03/2015 Web Services - February Email Marketing (Development) 45.50 554.40

03/03/2015 Web Services - February Website Development 581.00 1,135.40

04/02/2015 Web Services - March Website Maintenance 493.50 1,628.90

04/02/2015 Web Services - March Email Marketing (Development) 59.50 1,688.40

04/02/2015 Web Services - March Website Development 252.00 1,940.40

05/01/2015 Web Services - April Website Maintenance 460.60 2,401.00

05/01/2015 Web Services - April Email Marketing (Development) 70.00 2,471.00

05/01/2015 Web Services - April Website Development 133.00 2,604.00

06/01/2015 Web Services - May Website Maintenance 430.50 3,034.50

06/01/2015 Web Services - May Website Development 45.50 3,080.00

06/29/2015 Web Services - June Website Maintenance 226.10 3,306.10

06/29/2015 Web Services - June Email Marketing (Development) 87.50 3,393.60

08/01/2015 Web Services - July Website Maintenance 287.00 3,680.60

08/01/2015 Web Services - July Email Marketing (Development) 23.10 3,703.70

09/01/2015 Web Services - August Website Maintenance 91.00 3,794.70

09/01/2015 Web Services - August Email Marketing (Development) 70.00 3,864.70

09/19/2015 Web Services - September Website Maintenance 98.00 3,962.70

09/19/2015 Web Services - September Email Marketing (Development) 88.90 4,051.60

09/19/2015 Web Services - September (Advertising plugin/s Web Site Expense 264.50 4,316.10

11/02/2015 Web Services - October Website Maintenance 91.00 4,407.10

11/02/2015 Web Services - October Email Marketing (Development) 59.50 4,466.60

11/30/2015 Web Services - November Website Maintenance 213.50 4,680.10

Total Rogue Web Works, LLC 4,680.10 4,680.10 3,556.88$

Page 5 of 8

72

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




San Francisco Travel

05/29/2015 7/01/2015 to 6/30/2016 Membership Investment Membership Expenses 0.00 0.00

Total San Francisco Travel 0.00 0.00 -$

Terry Plank

02/03/2015 January Blog 453.00 453.00

02/03/2015 January Flickr 60.00 513.00

02/03/2015 January SM Channels 1,119.60 1,632.60

02/03/2015 January Email Marketing (Development) 60.00 1,692.60

02/03/2015 January Web Management 319.20 2,011.80

02/03/2015 January Adwords Management 100.20 2,112.00

02/03/2015 January Facebook Post Boost 124.80 2,236.80

02/03/2015 January Visual Marketing 186.00 2,422.80

03/05/2015 February Blog 150.00 2,572.80

03/05/2015 February Flickr 60.00 2,632.80

03/05/2015 February SM Channels 759.00 3,391.80

03/05/2015 February Email Marketing (Development) 45.00 3,436.80

03/05/2015 February Web Management 120.00 3,556.80

03/05/2015 February Adwords Management 18.00 3,574.80

03/05/2015 February Facebook Post Boost 252.60 3,827.40

03/05/2015 February Visual Marketing 623.40 4,450.80

04/02/2015 March Blog 91.80 4,542.60

04/02/2015 March Flickr 16.20 4,558.80

04/02/2015 March SM Channels 1,189.80 5,748.60

04/02/2015 March Email Marketing (Development) 45.00 5,793.60

04/02/2015 March Web Management 215.40 6,009.00

04/02/2015 March Adwords Management 18.00 6,027.00

04/02/2015 March Facebook Post Boost 367.00 6,394.00

04/02/2015 March Visual Marketing 565.20 6,959.20

05/11/2015 April Blog 253.20 7,212.40

05/11/2015 April Flickr 34.20 7,246.60

05/11/2015 April SM Channels 1,444.20 8,690.80

Page 6 of 8

73

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




05/11/2015 April Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 8,720.80

05/11/2015 April Web Management 279.60 9,000.40

05/11/2015 April Adwords Management 19.80 9,020.20

05/11/2015 April Facebook Post Boost 240.00 9,260.20

05/11/2015 April Visual Marketing 262.20 9,522.40

06/01/2015 May Blog 150.00 9,672.40

06/01/2015 May Flickr 10.20 9,682.60

06/01/2015 May SM Channels 1,021.80 10,704.40

06/01/2015 May Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 10,734.40

06/01/2015 May Web Management 291.00 11,025.40

06/01/2015 May Adwords Management 3.00 11,028.40

06/01/2015 May Facebook Post Boost 219.00 11,247.40

06/01/2015 May Web Management 360.00 11,607.40

07/01/2015 June Blog 148.80 11,756.20

07/01/2015 June Flickr 30.00 11,786.20

07/01/2015 June SM Channels 702.00 12,488.20

07/01/2015 June Email Marketing (Development) 37.20 12,525.40

07/01/2015 June Web Management 370.20 12,895.60

07/01/2015 June Adwords Management 0.00 12,895.60

07/01/2015 June Facebook Post Boost 160.00 13,055.60

07/01/2015 June - BID Ad Project Web Management 31.80 13,087.40

08/07/2015 July Flickr 16.20 13,103.60

08/07/2015 July SM Channels 1,182.60 14,286.20

08/07/2015 July Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 14,316.20

08/07/2015 July Web Management 60.00 14,376.20

08/07/2015 July Facebook Post Boost 240.00 14,616.20

09/02/2015 August Blog 120.00 14,736.20

09/02/2015 August Flickr 88.20 14,824.40

09/02/2015 August SM Channels 1,320.00 16,144.40

09/02/2015 August Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 16,174.40

09/02/2015 August Web Management 135.60 16,310.00

Page 7 of 8

74

3:20 PM

05/27/16

Accrual Basis




09/02/2015 August Facebook Post Boost 320.00 16,630.00

10/01/2015 September Blog 155.40 16,785.40

10/01/2015 September Flickr 19.80 16,805.20

10/01/2015 September SM Channels 1,348.80 18,154.00

10/01/2015 September Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 18,184.00

10/01/2015 September Web Management 240.00 18,424.00

10/01/2015 September Facebook Post Boost 159.92 18,583.92

10/01/2015 September Visual Marketing 171.60 18,755.52

11/02/2015 October Blog 60.00 18,815.52

11/02/2015 October Flickr 30.00 18,845.52

11/02/2015 October SM Channels 892.80 19,738.32

11/02/2015 October Email Marketing (Development) 30.00 19,768.32

11/02/2015 October Web Management 60.00 19,828.32

11/02/2015 October Facebook Post Boost 160.00 19,988.32

11/02/2015 October Visual Marketing 538.20 20,526.52

12/01/2015 November Blog 130.20 20,656.72

12/01/2015 November Flickr 9.00 20,665.72

12/01/2015 November SM Channels 1,036.80 21,702.52

12/01/2015 November Email Marketing (Development) 60.00 21,762.52

12/01/2015 November Web Management 366.00 22,128.52

12/01/2015 November Facebook Post Boost 160.00 22,288.52

12/01/2015 November Visual Marketing 255.60 22,544.12

Total Terry Plank 22,544.12 22,544.12 17,133.53$

TOTAL 207,853.62 207,853.62 157,968.75$

Page 8 of 8

75

1

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence

DATE: September 13, 2016 BOARD MEETING DATE: September 20, 2016

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: N/A VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Honorable Supervisor Don Horsley

SUBJECT:

Resolution Consenting to the Inclusion of Certain Commercial Lodging Facilities Located in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of San Mateo Within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution Consenting to the Inclusion of Certain Commercial Lodging Facilities Located in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of San Mateo Within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District. BACKGROUND: State law allows municipalities to form special benefit assessment districts for the purpose of business improvement. Thus, in 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay (“Half Moon Bay”) formed the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District (the “Hotel Business Improvement District”) for the purpose of promoting tourism and lodging on the San Mateo County Coastside. The Hotel Business Improvement District collects an assessment of $1.00 per occupied sleeping room per night from all member commercial lodging facilities (hotels, motels, inns, bed & breakfasts). The Hotel Business Improvement District has identified as potential members commercial lodging facilities located in the unincorporated area of the County of San Mateo. The potential members are listed on Attachment A. Half Moon Bay has requested that the Board of Supervisors consent to include the unincorporated area potential members within the Hotel Business Improvement District.

76

2

DISCUSSION: California Streets and Highway Code Section 36521.5 provides that businesses located in a county’s unincorporated territory may be included within a city’s business improvement district but only if the county’s Board of Supervisors consents to such inclusion. Half Moon Bay has requested that the Board of Supervisors consent to include within the Hotel Business Improvement District the commercial lodging facilities located in the unincorporated area of the County of San Mateo which are listed on Attachment A. The recommended action, adoption of a resolution consenting to the inclusion of the unincorporated area commercial lodging facilities listed on Attachment A, will enable the Hotel Business Improvement District to expand its membership and further its purpose of promoting tourism and lodging on the San Mateo County Coastside. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: N/A. FISCAL IMPACT: None.

[CCO-143161]

77

3

ATTACHMENT A

The 10 hotels to be added to the Half Moon Bay Business Improvement District are as follows: 1. Costanoa Coastal Lodge

Attn: Trevor Bridge 2001 Rossi Road at Hwy 1 Pescadero, CA 94060

2. Cypress Inn on Miramar Beach

Attn: Dinah Sherman 407 Mirada Road Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

3. Goose & Turrets Bed & Breakfast

Attn: Emily and Raymond Hoche-Mong 835 George Street Montara, CA 94037 P.O. Box 370937 (mailing address) Montara, CA 94037

4. Harbor View Inn

Attn: Marina Fields 51 Avenue Alhambra Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 PO Box 127 (mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

5. Ocean Front Inn

Attn: Ann and Werner Stamm 211 Mirada Road Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

78

4

6. Ocean View Inn Attn: Debbie Padilla 8425 Cabrillo Hwy Montara, CA 94037 P.O. Box 371211 (mailing address) Montara, CA 94037

7. Oceano Hotel & Spa

Attn: Joel Janoe 280 Capistrano Rd. Princeton-by-the Sea Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

8. Pacific Victorian Bed & Breakfast

Attn: Lori and Jeff Matthews 325 Alameda Avenue Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 P.O. Box 2560 (Mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

9. Seal Cove Inn

Attn: Kelly Dayan 221 Cypress Avenue Moss Beach, CA 94038

10. The Inn at Maverick’s

Attn: Melissa Rey 346 Princeton Avenue Princeton-by-the Sea Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 P.O. Box 898 (mailing address) Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

79

5

RESOLUTION NO. _____________

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * *

RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE INCLUSION OF CERTAIN COMMERCIAL

LODGING FACILITIES LOCATED IN THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY OF THE

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO WITHIN THE HALF MOON BAY HOTEL BUSINESS

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

______________________________________________________________

RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that:

WHEREAS, in 2004, the City of Half Moon Bay formed the Half Moon Bay Hotel

Business Improvement District to promote tourism and lodging on the San Mateo

County Coastside; and

WHEREAS, the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District collects an

assessment of $1.00 per occupied sleeping room per night from commercial lodging

facilities (hotels, motels, inns, bed & breakfasts) which are part of the Half Moon Bay

Hotel Business Improvement District; and

WHEREAS, the lodging facilities shown on Attachment A are located within the

unincorporated territory of the County of San Mateo; and

WHEREAS, California Streets and Highway Code Section 36521.5 provides that

a county’s Board of Supervisors may allow commercial lodging facilities located in the

unincorporated territory of the county to be included within a city’s hotel business

80

6

improvement district provided that the Board of Supervisors consent to such inclusion;

and

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay has requested the Board of Supervisors’

consent to the inclusion of the commercial lodging facilities shown on Attachment A

within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business Improvement District; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the

County of San Mateo, that:

Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2: The Board of Supervisors consents to the inclusion of the commercial

lodging facilities shown on Attachment A within the Half Moon Bay Hotel Business

Improvement District and further authorizes the City of Half Moon Bay to take necessary

steps and actions to collect the assessments imposed under the terms of the Half Moon

Hotel Bay Improvement District, as may be amended from time to time, for commercial

lodging facilities within the District.

Section 3: The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is hereby directed to transmit a

certified copy of this Resolution to the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Half Moon

Bay City.

Section 4: This Resolution is effective upon its adoption.

* * * * * *

[CCO-141275_3]

81


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: John Doughty, Community Development Director TITLE: PDP‐16‐016, STUDY SESSION ON POTENTIAL ZONING ORDINANCE / COASTAL

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS TO REDUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSTRAINTS IN THE R‐2, DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL ZONE

______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff on a potential ordinance amending Title 18 of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code modifying the R‐2, Duplex Residence zone development standards to reduce affordable housing constraints that provide for parking relief and increased site coverage, and other related matters of code clarification in the Residential Land Use District and if, desired, continue the item to November 1, 2016 for Ordinance introduction. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Healthy Communities and Public Safety Elements. BACKGROUND: These potential amendments are intended to modify the R‐2 Zoning standards to reduce affordable housing constraints in accordance with objectives of the City’s adopted Housing Element. The R‐2, Duplex Residential Zone District currently provides the most significant opportunity to address rental housing needs in the City. The amendments are not intended to increase the number of units (increase density), but to lessen constraints that impact the quality of design and the ability to improve and enhance existing units. The proposed revisions include an increase in the Multi‐Story Site Coverage standard, elimination of the Floor‐to‐Area ratio (FAR) requirement, and relaxation of the garage parking requirements. These revisions have been identified through staff design review with applicants and from input from owners within the R2 District.

82

PDP‐16‐016, Introduction of Duplex Residential Zoning Amendments October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 11

The text sections within this report that are formatted in italicized text represent areas of the Municipal Code where staff is seeking input from the council, and that are being considered to be changed. The R‐2, (Duplex) Residential Zoning District is comprised of 46 acres in the central core area bounded by Main and Purissima Streets on the east, Highway 1 to the west, Amesport Landing PUD to the north, and Seymour Street to the south (two lots south of the library on the west side of Purissima Street between Amesport Landing are also zoned R‐2). Most of the east‐west streets terminate at Highway 1, with through access between Main Street and Highway 1 provided via Filbert, Poplar, and Seymour Streets.

Figure 1. R‐2 Area Aerial Photo Figure 2. R‐2 Zoning District Map The area is predominately single family residential with a mixture of duplex, and apartment development interspersed throughout the district as shown in Figure 3 below. Some offices/stores front Main Street between Poplar and Spruce Streets. A church is located at the northeast corner of Highway 1 and Magnolia Street. Please note that the land on the north side of Metzgar Street (between Poplar and Grove Streets) between Main Street and Highway 1 inFigure 3. is classified as “single family,” when a project has been approved for a 12‐lot residential subdivision.1

1 This project was approved for a maximum of 24 residential units. The historic residential structure (William

Metzgar House, circa 1870) at the northwest corner of Main/Metzgar Streets is to remain. The maximum 83


This R‐2, Duplex Zone represents one of the few remaining areas in the community where a higher density residential product can be built, and that product is likely to be more affordable to a broader market rate spectrum. The only other multi‐family zone is the R‐3, Multi‐Family Zone (49 acres), that includes: 1) Main Street R‐3 Zone (26 acres) across Main Street to the east that is fully built out, and 2) Kelly Avenue R‐3 Zone (23 acres) north of Kelly Avenue (in the general vicinity bounded by Jenna Lane, and Pilarcitos and Oak Avenues), which is also nearly built out. To underscore the importance of these R‐2 and R‐3 zoned areas in terms of affordable housing, the developable land area in each of these zones generates a combined total of 88 units of realistic capacity (R‐2 zoned land generates 61 units of realistic capacity, and the R‐3 zoned land generates 27 units of realistic capacity) in the “Very Low” and “Low” income categories. Even though the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for “Very Low” and “Low” income units is 83 units (35%) of the required 240 units overall. These areas allow the City to claim 88 units (37%) of realistic capacity towards its “fair share” under the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA2).

Figure 3. Existing Land Use Map

At the Planning Commission’s April 26, 2016 meeting, they recommended the ordinance amendments to the City Council on. Recommendations include minor clarification of the open space provisions in Residential Districts.

allowable development would be 23 new duplex units, or one single family residence per lot (11 new residences) or a combination of duplex and single family. 2 Table 3‐3: Comparison of RHNA to Sites Inventory by Zone, 2015‐2023 General Plan Housing Element

84


When the City Council adopted the 2015‐2023 Housing Element, a number of Goals and Programs were established to guide the City in meeting affordable housing needs. Program 3‐1 “Removal of Constraints” sets forth the need to: “Continue to assess and update the Zoning Code, Municipal Code, and City procedures to

remove constraints and address changes in state law, particularly regarding housing for special needs groups, including seniors, the disabled, large families, farmworkers, and the homeless.”

DISCUSSION:

While there are parcels available, there has not been a new duplex built in the City in the R‐2 Zone since 2010. Staff has had numerous conversations with property owners interested in remodeling duplexes and/or building new duplex units. Conversations with owners trying to develop in the R‐2 Zone tend to focus on three specific development standards as a constraint in developing R‐2 zoned properties. . Effective options to provide flexibility while still protecting the integrity of the district include:

1) Eliminating the Floor‐to‐Area (FAR), 2) Increasing the allowable multi‐story site coverage from 35% to 45%, and 3) Modifying the parking requirements to allow for 1 enclosed garage space and 1 open parking

space (a total of 2 parking spaces) with the open parking space allowed within the front setback.

Proposed Revisions: Floor‐ to‐Area Ratio: Floor‐to‐Area Ratio (FAR) is more commonly applied and a more appropriately used as a tool in regulating commercial and higher density residential development. In the case of duplex development, the FAR seems to unnecessarily restrict the floor area to a 0.5 ratio. In application, this means that the minimally required lot size of 5,000 square feet (SF) has a total maximum allowable floor area of 2,500 SF, or 1,250 SF per duplex unit. A 400 SF two‐car garage is required for each unit, yielding a maximum net floor area per unit of 850 SF, which is fairly limited, especially when combined with other provisions discussed below.

85


Figure 4. Existing R‐2 Zone Regulations for Floor‐to‐Area Ratio

Eliminating the FAR restrictions would provide more flexibility to increasing the livable space including making provision for second floor space in existing and new duplexes. Code protections regulating setbacks, lot coverage, building height, maximum building envelope, parking, and design review through the Coastal Development Permit review process would remain in place. These are similar to those found within the R‐1 (Single Family) Zoning District. Multi‐Story Site Coverage: Single story site coverage for all residential zones is 50%. Multi‐story site coverage for duplex development is currently limited to 35%, which is the same requirement for all single family development. Duplex development is inherently multi‐family development, and reasonably could be regulated on a similar basis (Multi‐Story Site Coverage for the R‐3, Multi‐Family Zone is 45%). Practically, the standard is making development of multi‐story duplexes on a standard 5,000 SF duplex lot (as shown below in Figure 5.) undevelopable. What does this mean? At a 35% multi‐story coverage, the maximum yield for both units is 1,750 SF, resulting in 875 SF per unit of site coverage. When the required 400 SF two‐car garage is applied, it yields a net usable amount of first floor living area (i.e., site coverage) of 475 SF, which is only slightly larger than the garage itself. Please see “Prototypical Multi‐Story Site Coverage” and “Prototypical Multi‐Story Duplex Lot Coverage/Area Calculations” below in Table 1.

86


Figure 5. Existing Regulations ‐ Prototypical R‐2 Zoned Lot

The Planning Commission recommended that the maximum Multi‐Story Site Coverage be increased from 35% to 45% (to match the Multi‐Family Zone). Adjusting the Multi‐Story Site Coverage to 45% would provide more flexibility in designing duplexes that also allow for slightly larger living areas and building footprints as shown bold below in Figure 6.

87


Figure 6. Proposed Regulations for Multi‐Story Site Coverage at 45%

Table 1 below reflects existing Multi‐Story Site Coverage regulations. Table 1. Prototypical Multi‐Story Site Coverage R‐2 Minimum Lot Size 5,000 SF (minimum lot width of 50’ x 100’ lot depth) Net Buildable Area 2,400 SF (area outside front, side and rear setbacks) Multi‐Story Lot Coverage @ 35% 1,750 SF Table 2 below reflects the allowable living area with changes to the Multi‐Story Site Coverage regulations

88


Table 2. Prototypical Multi‐Story Duplex Unit Living Area Calculations

Lot Coverage Per Unit @ 35% 875 SF (1,750 SF/2 units = 875 SF/unit) ‐ 2‐Car Garage Area ‐ 400 SF (2 spaces @ 9’ x 19’ + maneuvering area) 1st Floor Coverage/Living Area = 475 SF per duplex unit Lot Coverage Per Unit @ 45% 1,125 SF (2,250 SF/2 units = 1,125 SF/unit) 2‐Car Garage Area ‐ 400 SF (2 spaces @9’x19’ + maneuvering area) 1st Floor Coverage/Living Area = 725 SF per duplex unit Increasing the allowable lot coverage from 35% to 45% yields approximately 250 additional square feet of first floor living area for each unit (475 square feet to 725 square feet). Parking Requirements: The current parking requirements for duplex development is a two (2) garage (app. 400 SF) per unit, plus one (1) guest space for every five (5) units. Upon closer examination of the development standards in conjunction with the parking standards, the Planning Commission directed staff to focus identifying potential solutions. Succinctly, the Planning Commission requested staff consider options that reduced the impact and/or amount of area devoted to garage parking requirements on duplex properties. Two car garages within the area are often used to store household items other than cars. Typically, residences in the R‐1 and R‐2 Zoning Districts utilize open parking in the front setback and on‐street parking in the vicinity of the property. The Planning Commission recognized the benefit of enclosed parking, but recommends a compromise; a one (1) car garage requirement (200 SF), with a minimum of one (1) uncovered parking space that may be located within the front setback (i.e., in tandem). Additionally, as each lot may contain one or two units, the guest parking requirement (1 space/5 units) is never applied and recommends that ito be removed. Figure 7 below shows how this parking arrangement could work. It is noteworthy that the R‐2 Zoning District is centrally located and near walkable downtown destinations that is also close to bicycle and transit facilities. These factors have the potential to influence transportation choices and potentially reduce dependence on automobiles over time.

89


Figure 7. Proposed R‐2 Zone Parking Requirements

From a design standpoint, allowing a single car garage would reduce the dominance of the garage on the street front elevation of the building, leaving more building area for architectural design including articulation. Additional front yard landscaped area would also be made available, as opposed to a paved driveway and apron area to a garage space. This impact is even more dramatic on a smaller R‐2 lot (40‐foot width) as under current standards, the entire street frontage would be garage doors. Guest parking and other vehicle parking would utilize the on‐street parking spaces as they currently do. Code Clarifications and Reformatting, Chapter 18.06 – Residential Land Use (R‐1, R‐2, R‐3): The Planning Commission considered a number of potential changes to Chapter 18.06. In the end only a single modification/clarification was recommended. Based upon Planning Commission direction, Section 18.06.040(A) “Specific Development Standards” for “Open Space” is recommended to be amended as follows:

A. Open Space. Development of multi‐family structures in the R‐2 district and R‐3 district shall include usable open space which is fifteen percent of the floor area per unit, as follows:

90


1. Usable Open Space. Usable open space shall be defined as the sum of private open space and common open space as defined in this section providing outdoor or unenclosed area on the ground, or on a balcony, deck, porch or terrace designed and accessible for outdoor living, recreation, pedestrian access or landscaping, but excluding any required front yard, and required street side yard, parking facilities, driveways, utility or service areas, or any land area with a slope in excess of twenty percent.

2. Private Open Space. Private open space is open space adjoining and directly accessible to a dwelling unit, reserved for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling unit and their guests, such as patios or screened decks or balconies. Patios at grade level must have a minimum area of one hundred twenty square feet, and balconies must have a minimum area of sixty square feet with no dimension less than six feet, in order to meet a portion of the open space requirement.

3. Common Open Space. Common open space is open space used commonly by residents of a building, having a minimum dimension of fifteen feet in any direction and a minimum area of three hundred square feet. Common open space includes terraces, courts, non‐street side yard, rear yards, open patios and decks, rooftops surrounded by parapet wall or similar structure having a minimum height of four feet. Common open space shall be open to the sky and shall not include driveways, pedestrian access to units, parking areas or area required for front or street side yards.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA) An Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) was previously prepared for the 2015‐2023 Housing Element and circulated for a 30‐day public review period that ended on November 24, 2014. The City Council certified the Negative Declaration and adopted the 2015‐2023 Housing Element on March 3, 2015. An addendum to this previous IS/ND has been prepared and a Findings Analysis (Attachment 5 ‐ CEQA Findings Analysis – Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration Addendum) for the proposed R‐2, Duplex Residential ordinance amendments concludes that:

No substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions to the environmental document, and

No substantial changes occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaking, which will require major revisions to the environmental document; and

91


No new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time

of environmental document was certified as complete, has become available. CONCLUSION: Ultimately, the decision to amend the R‐2 District Standards is a policy decision of City Council. The purpose of the study session is to present potential changes that would likely reduce constraints and add flexibility in the duplex regulations in conformance with the General Plan Housing Element goals. ATTACHMENTS: None

92


AGENDA REPORT


TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Magda Gonzalez, City Manager FROM: Reed Gallogly, Deputy City Attorney TITLE: COUNCIL COMPENSATION ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Provide staff direction for adjusting compensation for Councilmembers. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. However, if an adjustment is adopted, the impact is insignificant, though ultimately dependent on Council action: see attachment for range of potential cost impacts. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Infrastructure and Environment Element. BACKGROUND: At the request of the Mayor, this item is being brought forward for discussion with the full City Council. Controlling Law The salary of Half Moon Bay City Council members is controlled by Government Code 36516(a), which allows a city council to establish a salary, by ordinance, up to a ceiling determined by the city’s population. For cities up to and including 35,000 in population (like Half Moon Bay), the salary approved by ordinance may be up to and including three hundred dollars per month.1 That salary may be increased by ordinance or amendment, but the increase may not exceed an amount equal to 5 percent for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of the salary in effect when the ordinance or last amendment was enacted.2 The

1 Government Code § 36516(a)(2)(A). 2 Government Code § 36516(a)(4).

93

Council Compensation October 18, 2016 Page 2 of 3

Attorney General has opined that the 5 percent increase is noncompounded (5 percent times the number of years since last salary adjustment).3 In addition, the question of whether City Councilmembers shall receive a salary, and the amount of that salary, may be submitted to the voters. If a majority of voters concur, all of the Councilmembers shall receive the salary specified in the election call, and that salary may be increased beyond the amount set forth under the Government Code.4 Any amounts a City pays for retirement, health and welfare, and federal social security benefits for Councilmembers is not included in determining salary, nor is any amount paid as reimbursement to a councilmember for actual and necessary expenses (pursuant to Government Code § 36414.5).5 Councilmembers may waive any or all of their compensation.6 Finally, any increase in salary may take effect only when at least one member of the council commences a new term.7 Council Compensation in Half Moon Bay In 1987, a former City Council enacted the City ordinance setting Councilmember compensation. That ordinance, found at Half Moon Bay Municipal Code § 2.04.03, originally set compensation at $300 per month. The ordinance was modified in 2015 to replace “councilmen” with “councilmember,” but salary was not adjusted in that amendment. Accordingly, current Half Moon Bay City Councilmembers still receive $300 per month as compensation– the same as in 1987. Councilmembers in Half Moon Bay do not receive any other benefits from the City (such as health, social security, retirement, etc.). Council Compensation in Half Moon Bay vs. San Mateo County Half Moon Bay City Councilmembers have one of the lowest total compensation package8 in all of San Mateo County. As shown on Attachment 1 (using 2015 numbers from the State Controller’s Compensation Report), the Councilmembers for the City of Half Moon Bay receive far less total compensation than Councilmembers in all other relatively comparable San Mateo cities. This is partly because Half Moon Bay Councilmembers receive no benefits other than Government Code salary, but also because that salary has not been adjusted in nearly 30 years. Although it might appear at first glance that Half Moon Bay Councilmembers’ low compensation is entirely due to Government Code §36516, which sets caps on the amount of

3 89 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 159 (2006). 4 Government Code § 36516(b). 5 Government Code § 36516(d‐e). 6 Government Code § 36516(f). 7 Government Code § 36516.5. 8 “Total Compensation” refers to the combined value of the salary and any other benefits (medical, retirement) provided to a Councilmember by a city.

94

Council Compensation October 18, 2016 Page 3 of 3

salary according to the population of a city, the cap increases only marginally as the population increases. The below table sets forth the caps and accompanying population levels.

Population Max Salary under Gov. Code 36516

0‐35,000 $300/month

35,000‐50,000 $400/month

50,000‐75,000 $500/month

75,000‐150,000 $600/month

150,000‐250,000 $800/month

Over 250,000 $1000/month

Options for Adjusting Council Compensation City Council has several options for adjusting compensation. Council could consider adding benefits for Councilmembers (such as health care or retirement), or Council could simply increase the salary. Council could also adopt a blended approach, increasing salary and providing benefits, or take no action. If Council were to amend the ordinance to implement the 5% increase permitted by Government Code § 36516(a)(4), any proposed adjustment would affect the overall salary as follows:

5% Change to Year X New Salary

No change to salary $300.00

5 years adjusted value (2011) $375.00

10 years adjusted value (2006) $450.00 15 years adjusted value (2001) $525.00 20 years adjusted value (1996) $600.00 25 years adjusted value (1991) $675.00 29 years adjusted value (1987) $735.00

Any changes to Councilmember salary would take effect when the newly elected Councilmembers take office (effective January 2017).9 ATTACHMENT: Summary spreadsheet regarding councilmember salary and benefits in San Mateo County

9 Government Code § 36516.5.

95

Municipality Population Population

Category

Wages Ret. & Health

Bene

Total

Comp.

Colma 1,509 1 973 1,606 2,579

Portola Valley 4,751 1 - - -

Woodside 5,664 1 - - -

Atherton 7,150 1 - - -

Hillsborough 11,687 1 - 1,442 1,442

Half Moon Bay* 12,528 1 300 - 300

Millbrae 23,136 1 345 527 872

Belmont 27,834 1 1,006 169 1,175

San Carlos 29,008 1 656 582 1,239

Burlingame 29,724 1 461 1,563 2,024

East Palo Alto 30,545 1 395 515 911

Foster City 33,201 1 777 1,125 1,902

Menlo Park 33,863 1 640 1,415 2,055

Average for Population Category 1 427 688 1,115

Pacifica 37,806 2 785 404 1,189

San Bruno 45,360 2 622 1,001 1,623

South San Francisco 64,585 2 756 847 1,603

Average for Population Category 2 721 751 1,472

Redwood City 85,992 3 679 1,546 2,225

San Mateo 102,659 3 592 745 1,338

Daly City 109,139 3 1,616 962 2,578

Average for Population Category 3 962 1,084 2,047

*Half Moon Bay has been adjusted to current compensation

Source: State Controller's Compensation Report 2015

Population Range Categories:

1 0-35,000

2 35,000-75,000

3 75,000-150,000

City Council Monthly Compensation in San Mateo County - FY 2015

96

city council agenda regular meeting city of half … · 2016. 10. 15. · city council agenda...

Documents