Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2016-08-19TIBURON Correspondence, Notices and other Information 1. Email - August 15 - Flood Control Zone 4 Neighbors 2. Letter - August 18 - Response to Grand Jury Report: Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures 3. Email - August 15 - 2016 Annual Conference Resolutions Packet Agenda, Minutes 1. Cancellation - August 24 - Tiburon Planning Commission Regular Meeting REGIONAL, NOTICES AND AGENDA Correspondence, Notices and other Information Agenda, Minutes 1. Sani 5 - August 11- Special Meeting: Finance & Fiscal Oversight Committee 2. Reed School - August 16 - Review online at: www.reedschools.org 3. Sani 5 - August 18 - Regular Meeting Diane Crane Iacopi From: Sent: To: Subject: DIGEST a McMorrow, Scott <SMcMorrow@marincounty.org> Monday, August 15, 2016 8:41 AM McMorrow, Scott Cove Pump Station Update Dear Flood Control Zone 4 Neighbors, At the meeting last Thursday, the Zone 4 Advisory Board voted unanimously to recommend improvements to the Cove Pump Station. Of the three options being considered, staff recommended the most significant upgrade and the Board agreed. This upgrade will included more pumping capacity, onsite fuel pod with a back-up generator to run the entire pump station in the event of an electrical power outage, and a larger wetwell that will increase the pump station's overall capacity. The next step is to design the upgrades and start the environmental review process, which will occur this fiscal year. The build should take place in the second year. Best Regards, Scott McMorrow Marin County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Our Mission is Excellent Service Scott McMorrow Assistant Engineer Office 415.473.2918 smcmorrow@marincountv.org County of Marin Department of Public Works 3501 Civic Center Dr., Rm 304 San Rafael, CA 94903-5222 Email Disclaimer: http://www.marincountv.or2/main/disclaimers 1 Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon, CA 94920 • P. 415.435.7373 E. 415.435.2438 • www.townoftiburon.org Office of the Town Manager / 415.435.7388 August 18, 2016 The Honorable Kelly V. Simmons Judge of the Marin County Superior Court Post Office Box 4988 San Rafael, CA 94913-4988 Mr. John Mann, Foreperson Marin County Grand Jury 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Re: Response to Grand Jury Report Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures Dear Honorable Judge Simmons and Mr. Mann: This letter explains in detail the Town of Tiburon, including the Tiburon Police Department's, response to the Grand Jury Report dated June 16, 2016. The Report directs the Town to respond to Findings Nos. 1-7 and Recommendations Nos. 1-14. The Findings involve conclusions of fact that the Town has little or no independent basis to evaluate. In responding to these Findings, the Town assumes that the information in the Report is correct and relies on that information. FINDINGS Finding 1: Marin County law enforcement agencies have procedures for Citizen Complaints that could act as deterrents to participation in the complaint process. Town's Response to Finding 1: The Town agrees with this finding. Finding 2: Some Marin County law enforcement agencies employ procedures and admonitions that have been held to be unconstitutional. Town's Response to Finding 2: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, however, the Town is not aware of its procedures to be held as unconstitutional. Finding 3: Some Marin County law enforcement agencies' complaint procedures require face-to-face contact with law enforcement officers, which may deter citizens from using the Citizen Complaint process. Erin Tollini Mayor Jim Fraser Vice Mayor Frank X. Doyle Councilmember Alice Fredericks Councilmember Emmett O'Donnell Councilmember Greg Chanis Town Manager Page 2 of 5 Town's Response to Finding 3: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, however, the Town does not require face-to-face contact in order to proceed with submitting a Citizen Complaint. Finding 4: Not all Marin County law enforcement agencies provide written policies, procedures and Citizen Complaint forms in English and Spanish. Town's Response to Finding 4: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, however, the Town does provide Citizen Complaint forms in both English and Spanish. Finding 5: Not all Marin County law enforcement agencies accept and investigate anonymous Citizen Complaints. Town's Response to Finding 5: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, however, the Town accepts and will investigate anonymous Citizen Complaints. Finding 6: Information about and access to the Citizen Complaint procedure is difficult to find on Marin County law enforcement agency websites. Town's Response to Finding 6: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, however, the Town understands that it may be difficult to obtain a Citizen Complaint form on the Town's website, and will be making the necessary improvements to ease submittals. Finding 7: Marin County law enforcement agencies do not publish the number, the nature or the disposition of Citizen Complaints. Town's Response to Finding 7: The Town disagrees partially with this finding. The Town has no personal knowledge of the practices of other law enforcement agencies within the County, Page 3 of 5 however, the Town does not publish the nature or the disposition of the Citizen Complaint. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1: Every Marin County law enforcement agency should have a clear and full description of the law enforcement agency's policy and procedures for handling Citizen Complaints on its website that is accessible by a direct link from the law enforcement agency's home page to a clearly identified "Citizen Complaints" folder. Recommendation 2: All Marin County law enforcement agencies should accept the filing of Citizen Complaints online. Recommendation 3: A clear and full description of the law enforcement agency's policy and procedures along with forms for filing Citizen Complaints should be available to the public in the lobby of each law enforcement agency. Recommendation 4: Written policies and procedures, as well as Citizen Complaint forms, should be available to the public in English, Spanish and other languages appropriate to the community. Recommendation 5: Marin County law enforcement agency personnel should be trained in the agency's Citizen Complaint policy and procedures in order to fully describe them to members of the public. Recommendation 6: All public -facing law enforcement personnel should present an open and welcoming attitude to any inquiry about the Citizen Complaint process. Recommendation 7: No policy, procedure or form for handling Citizen Complaints should have any language based in whole or in part on California Penal Code Section 148.6 and/or California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Section 47.5, nor should a complainant be required to acknowledge that they have read and understood such language. Recommendation 8: A person who initiates a Citizen Complaint should not be required to verify or certify the contents of the complaint form. Recommendation 9: The identification of the complainant should not be required on the form. Recommendation 10: The signature of the complainant should not be required on the form. Page 4 of 5 Recommendation 11: Anonymous Citizen Complaints, and complaints initiated by minors, should be accepted and investigated in accordance with the agency's procedures. Recommendation 12: Members of the public who desire information regarding a law enforcement agency's policy, procedures and Citizen Complaint forms should not be required to discuss their involvement, identity or situation before the materials are provided. Recommendation 13: All Marin County law enforcement agencies should incorporate within their policies and procedures an appeal process that allows the complainant to appeal the disposition to an entity outside of the law enforcement agency. Recommendation 14: Marin County law enforcement agencies should publish on their websites and annually update the number, nature and disposition of Citizen Complaints. Town's Response to Recommendations: Recommendation 1: This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented by November 1, 2016. Recommendation 2: This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented by November 1, 2016. Recommendation 3: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 4: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 5: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 6: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 7: This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented by November 1, 2016. Recommendation 8: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 9: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 10: This recommendation has already been implemented. Page 5 of 5 Recommendation 11: This recommendation has already been implemented. Anonymous complaints are always investigated assuming there is sufficient detail to conduct a meaningful investigation. Recommendation 12: This recommendation has already been implemented. Recommendation 13: This recommendation has already been implemented. Any decision is appealable directly to the Town Manager. Recommendation 14: This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented by November 1, 2016. The Tiburon Town Council reviewed and approved this iesponse on August 17, 2016, at a duly noticed and agendized public meeting. If you have further questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Very )urs, � L (7 GR G CHANIS To „��n Manager cc: Town Council Town Attorney Diane Crane Iacopi From: City_clerks <city_clerks-bounces@lists.cacities.org> on behalf of Meghan McKelvey <m mckelvey@cacities. org> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 1:56 PM To: 'City_managers@lists.cacities.org'; City_clerks@lists. cacities. org (City_clerks@lists.cacities.org) Cc: Meg Desmond Subject: [City_clerks] 2016 Resolutions Packet Attachments: 2016 Annual Conference Resolution Packet.pdf; ATT00001.txt DIGEST te s Enclosed please find the 2016 Annual Conference Resolutions Packet. Annual Conference in Long Beach. This year's League Annual Conference will be held October 5 — 7 in Long Beach. The conference announcement has previously been sent to all cities and we hope that you and your colleagues will be able to join us. More information about the conference is available on the League's Web site at www.cacities.org/ac. We look forward to welcoming city officials to the conference. Closing Luncheon/General Assembly - Friday, October 7, 12:00 p.m. The League's General Assembly Meeting will be held at the Long Beach Convention Center. Resolutions Packet. At the Annual Conference, the League will consider one resolution introduced by the deadline, Saturday, August 6, 2016, midnight. The resolution is included in this packet. Resolutions submitted to the General Assembly must be concurred in by five cities or by city officials from at least five or more cities. These letters of concurrence are included with this packet. We request that you distribute this packet to your city council. We encourage each city council to consider this resolution and to determine a city position so that your voting delegate can represent your city's position on the resolution. A copy of the resolution packet is posted on the League's website for your convenience: www.cacities.org/resolutions. The resolutions packet contains additional information related to consideration of the resolution at the Annual Conference. This includes the date, time and location of the meetings at which the resolution will be considered. Voting Delegates. Each city council is encouraged to designate a voting delegate and two alternates to represent their city at the General Assembly Meeting. A letter asking city councils to designate their voting delegate and two alternates has already been sent to each city. If your city has not yet appointed a voting delegate, please contact Meg Desmond at (916) 658-8224 or email: mdesmond(a�ca.cities.org. Please Bring This Packet to the Annual Conference October 5 — 7, Long Beach 1 Annual Conference Resolutions Packet 2016 Annual Conference Resolutions Long Beach, California October 5 — 7, 2016 INFORMATION AND PROCEDURES RESOLUTIONS CONTAINED IN THIS PACKET: The League bylaws provide that resolutions shall be referred by the president to an appropriate policy committee for review and recommendation. Resolutions with committee recommendations shall then be considered by the General Resolutions Committee at the Annual Conference. This year, one resolution has been introduced for consideration by the Annual Conference and referred to the League policy committees. POLICY COMMITTEES: One policy committee will meet at the Annual Conference to consider and take action on the resolution referred to them. The committee is Transportation, Communication and Public Works. The committee will meet 9:00 — 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, October 5, 2016, at the Hyatt Regency. The sponsor of the resolution has been notified of the time and location of the meeting. GENERAL RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE: This committee will meet at 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 6, at the Hyatt Regency in Long Beach, to consider the report of the policy committee regarding the resolution. This committee includes one representative from each of the League's regional divisions, functional departments and standing policy committees, as well as other individuals appointed by the League president. Please check in at the registration desk for room location. ANNUAL LUNCHEON/BUSINESS MEETING/GENERAL ASSEMBLY: This meeting will be held at 12:00 p.m. on Friday, October 7, at the Long Beach Convention Center. PETITIONED RESOLUTIONS: For those issues that develop after the normal 60 -day deadline, a resolution may be introduced at the Annual Conference with a petition signed by designated voting delegates of 10 percent of all member cities (48 valid signatures required) and presented to the Voting Delegates Desk at least 24 hours prior to the time set for convening the Annual Business Meeting of the General Assembly. This year, that deadline is 12:00 p.m., Thursday, October 6. Resolutions can be viewed on the League's Web site: www.cacities.org/resolutions. Any questions concerning the resolutions procedures may be directed to Meg Desmond at the League office: mdesmond@cacities.org or (916) 658-8224 1 GUIDELINES FOR ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS Policy development is a vital and ongoing process within the League. The principal means for deciding policy on the important issues facing cities is through the League's eight standing policy committees and the board of directors. The process allows for timely consideration of issues in a changing environment and assures city officials the opportunity to both initiate and influence policy decisions. Annual conference resolutions constitute an additional way to develop League policy. Resolutions should adhere to the following criteria. Guidelines for Annual Conference Resolutions 1. Only issues that have a direct bearing on municipal affairs should be considered or adopted at the Annual Conference. 2. The issue is not of a purely local or regional concern. 3. The recommended policy should not simply restate existing League policy. 4. The resolution should be directed at achieving one of the following objectives: (a) Focus public or media attention on an issue of major importance to cities. (b) Establish a new direction for League policy by establishing general principals around which more detailed policies may be developed by policy committees and the board of directors. (c) Consider important issues not adequately addressed by the policy committees and board of directors. (d) Amend the League bylaws (requires 2/3 vote at General Assembly). 2 LOCATION OF MEETINGS Policy Committee Meetings Wednesday, October 5 Hyatt Regency Long Beach 200 South Pine Street, Long Beach 9:00 — 10:30 a.m.: Transportation, Communication & Public Works General Resolutions Committee Thursday, October 6, 1:00 p.m. Hyatt Regency Long Beach 200 South Pine Street, Long Beach Annual Business Meeting and General Assembly Luncheon Friday, October 7, 12:00 p.m. Long Beach Convention Center 300 East Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN ON RESOLUTIONS Resolutions have been grouped by policy committees to which they have been assigned. Number Key Word Index Reviewing Body Action 1 2 3 1 - Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee 2 - General Resolutions Committee 3 - General Assembly TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, AND PUBLIC WORKS POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 Information pertaining to the Annual Conference Resolutions will also be posted on each committee's page on the League website: www.cacities.org. The entire Resolutions Packet will be posted at: www.cacities.org/resolutions. 4 KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN ON RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Resolutions have been grouped by policy committees to which they have been assigned. KEY TO REVIEWING BODIES 1. Policy Committee 2. General Resolutions Committee 3. General Assembly ACTION FOOTNOTES * Subject matter covered in another resolution ** Existing League policy * * * Local authority presently exists KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN A Approve D Disapprove N No Action R Refer to appropriate policy committee for study a Aa Aaa Ra Raa Da Na Amend+ Approve as amended+ Approve with additional amendment(s)+ Refer as amended to appropriate policy committee for study+ Additional amendments and refer+ Amend (for clarity or brevity) and Disapprove+ Amend (for clarity or brevity) and take No Action+ W Withdrawn by Sponsor Procedural Note: The League of California Cities resolution process at the Annual Conference is guided by the League Bylaws. A helpful explanation of this process can be found on the League's website by clicking on this link: Resolution Process. 5 1. RESOLUTION COMMITTING THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO SUPPORTING VISION ZERO, TOWARD ZERO DEATHS, AND OTHER PROGRAMS OR INITIATIVES TO MAKE SAFETY A TOP PRIORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND POLICY FORMULATION, WHILE ENCOURAGING CITIES TO PURSUE SIMILAR INITIATIVES Source: City of San Jose Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials: Cities: Fremont; Los Angeles; Sacramento; San Diego; San Francisco; Santa Monica; and West Hollywood Referred to: Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolution Committee: WHEREAS, each year more than 30,000 people are killed on streets in the United States in traffic collisions; and WHEREAS, traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and is estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people; with pedestrians and cyclists accounting for a disproportionate share; and WHEREAS the Centers for Disease Control recently indicated that America's traffic death rate per person was about double the average of peer nations; and WHEREAS Vision Zero and Toward Zero Deaths are comprehensive strategies to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries using a multi -disciplinary approach, including education, enforcement and engineering measures; and WHEREAS a core principal of Vision Zero and Toward Zero Deaths is that traffic deaths are preventable and unacceptable; and WHEREAS cities across the world have adopted and implemented Vision Zero and Toward Zero Deaths strategies and successfully reduced traffic fatalities and severe injuries occurring on streets and highways; and WHEREAS safe, reliable and efficient transportation systems are essential foundations for thriving cities. RESOLVED that the League of California Cities commits to supporting Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, and other programs, policies, or initiatives that prioritize transportation safety; AND encourage cities throughout California to join in these traffic safety initiatives to pursue the elimination of death and severe injury crashes on our roadways; AND encourage the State of California to consider adopting safety as a top priority for both transportation projects and policy formulation. ////////// Background Information on Resolution to Support Transportation Safety Programs Each year more than 30,000 people are killed on streets in the United States in traffic collisions. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and are estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people, with children, seniors, people of color, low-income and persons with disabilities accounting for a disproportionate share. The Centers for Disease Control recently reported that the traffic death rate per 6 person in the United States was about double the average of peer nations, with close to 10% of these deaths occurring in California (3,074 in 2014). California's largest city, Los Angeles, has the highest rate of traffic death among large U.S. cities, at 6.27 per 100,000 people. Cities around the world have adopted traffic safety projects and policies that underscore that traffic deaths are both unacceptable and preventable. In 1997, Sweden initiated a program called Vision Zero that focused on the idea that "Life and health can never be exchanged for other benefits within the society." The World Health Organization has officially endorsed Vision Zero laying out traffic safety as an international public health crisis and the United Nations General Assembly introduced the Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011-2020 and set the goal for the decade: "to stabilize and then reduce the forecast level of road traffic fatalities around the world" by 50% by 2020. As of this writing, 18 U.S. cities have adopted Vision Zero programs (including New York City, Boston, Ft. Lauderdale, Austin, San Antonio, Washington DC, and Seattle) to reduce the numbers of fatal crashes occurring on their roads (http://visionzeronetwork.org/map-of-vision-zero-cities/). California cities lead the way, with the cities of San Jose, San Francisco, San Mateo, San Diego, Los Angeles, Long Beach and Fremont having adopted Vision Zero strategies and many others are actively considering adoption. In 2009 a national group of traffic safety stakeholders launched an effort called "Toward Zero Deaths: A National Strategy on Highway Safety". This initiative has been supported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/tzd/) and states throughout the United States, including California (http://www.ots.ca.gov/OTS_and__TrafficSafety/About_OTS.asp). This past January the U.S. Department of Transportation launched its "Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets." This effort calls on elected officials to partner with the USDOT and raise the bar for safety for people bicycling and walking by sharing resources, competing for awards, and taking action. The California cities of Beverly Hills, Davis, Maywood, Cupertino, Culver City, Rialto, Santa Monica, Porterville, Los Angles, San Jose, Monterey, Glendale, Irvine, Oakland, Palo Alto, Alameda, West Hollywood and Fullerton signed on to this effort. Additionally, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), a leading organization for transportation professionals, recently launched a new initiative to aggressively advance the Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths movements (http://library.ite.org/pub/ed59a040-caf4-5300-8ffc-35deb33ce03d). Ultimately all of these programs share the fundamental belief that a data -driven, systems -level, interdisciplinary approach can prevent severe and fatal injuries on our nation's roadways. They employ proven strategies, actions, and countermeasures across education, enforcement and engineering. Support for many of these life-saving programs extends far beyond government agencies, and includes National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Kaiser Permanente, AARP, the National Safe Routes to School Partnership, and the International Association of Chiefs of Police, among many others. There is wide -spread recognition that cities and towns need safe, efficient transportation systems to be economically prosperous. A resolution by the League of California Cities to support transportation safety policies like Vision Zero and Toward Zero Deaths, and encourage implementation of projects and programs that prioritize safety will help California elevate the health and safety of its residents and position us as a leader in national efforts to promote a culture of safe mobility for all. ////////// League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 1 Staff: Rony Berdugo Committee: Transportation, Communication, and Public Works Summary: The resolved clauses in Resolution No. 1: commits the League of California Cities to: 1) Supporting Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, and other programs, policies, or initiatives that prioritize transportation safety; 2) Encouraging cities throughout California to join in these traffic safety initiatives to pursue the elimination of death and severe injury crashes on our roadways; and 3) Encouraging the State to consider adopting transportation safety as a top priority for transportation projects and policy formulation. Background: The City of San Jose notes national and international efforts to reduce fatal and severe injury traffic collisions through systematic data driven approaches, such as Vision Zero and Toward Zero Deaths. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), "Vision Zero is a traffic safety policy, developed in Sweden in the late 1990s and based on four elements: ethics, responsibility, a philosophy of safety, and creating mechanisms for change."1 Below is a summary of each Vision Zero element, according to WHO: 1. Ethics — Life and health trump all other transportation benefits, such as mobility. 2. Responsibility — Responsibility for crashes and injuries is shared between the providers of the system and the road users. 3. Safety Philosophy — Asserts that a transportation system should account for the unstable relationship of human error with fast/heavy machinery to avoid deaths/serious injury, but accept crashes/minor injuries. 4. Driving Mechanisms for Change — Asserts that road users and providers must both work to guaranteeing road safety, taking measures such as: improving levels of seat belt use, installing crash - protective barriers, wider use of speed camera technology, increasing random breathalyzer tests, and promoting safety in transportation project contracts. A Vision Zero City meets the following minimum standards: • Sets clear goal of eliminating traffic fatalities and severe injuries • Mayor has publicly, officially committed to Vision Zero • Vision Zero plan or strategy is in place, or Mayor has committed to doing so in clear time frame • Key city departments (including police, transportation and public health) are engaged List of cities that meet the minimum Vision Zero standards nationally include: Anchorage, AK; Austin, TX; Boston, MA; Cambridge, MA; Denver, CO; Eugene, OR; Fort Lauderdale, FL; Fremont, CA; Los Angeles, CA; New York, NY; Portland, OR; Sacramento, CA; San Antonio, TX; San Diego, CA; San Francisco, CA; San Jose, CA; Seattle, WA; Washington, DC List of cities that are considering adoption of Vision Zero nationally include: Ann Arbor, MI; Bellevue, OR; Bethlehem, PA; Chicago, IL; Columbia, MO; Houston, TX; Long Beach, CA; 1 http://who.int/violence injury prevention/publications/road traffic/world report/chapterl.pdf 8 New Orleans, CA; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; San Mateo, CA; Santa Ana, CA; Santa Cruz, CA; Santa Monica, CA; St. Paul, MN; Tampa, FL2 Vision Zero — Samples: 1. San Francisco — In 2015, the City established a two-year action strategy that outlines the projects and policy changes to implement its Vision Zero goal of zero traffic deaths by 2024. The strategy adopts five core principles, such as: 1) traffic deaths are preventable and unacceptable; 2) safety for all road modes and users is the highest priority; 3) transportation system design should anticipate inevitable human error; 4) education, enforcement, and vehicle technology contribute to a safe system; and 5) transportation systems should be designed for speeds that protect human life.3 The strategy focuses on engineering, enforcement, education, evaluation, and policy changes that can be made to achieve their goals. The City is working on projects, such as: a. Creating protected bike lanes b. Building wider sidewalks c. Reducing traffic speeds4 The City is also exploring policy changes to state law that will allow the City to place traffic cameras near schools and senior centers to cite speeding drivers through automated speed enforcement.5 2. Los Angeles — the City has established a commitment to eliminate all traffic deaths by 2025. They have identified a network of streets, known as the High Injury Network (HIN)6, which maps out their areas of concern where they plan on making strategic investments in reducing deaths/severe injury. According to the City, only 6% of their city streets account for 2/3 of all deaths/severe injury for pedestrians. The City highlights the three following projects as part of their Vision Zero efforts': a. Installation of 22 new Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) at signals throughout the city, which gives pedestrians a head start against right -turning vehicles when crossing b. Installation of a pedestrian scramble at the intersection of Hollywood and Highland, which stops traffic in all four -directions during pedestrian crossing. c. Installation of curb extensions along Cesar E. Chavez Avenue in their HIN, which reduces the crossing distance for pedestrians, narrows the intersections, and reduces speed for turning vehicles. San Francisco's Vision Zero Categories: 1. Engineering — implement treatments and redesign streets to reduce the frequency and severity of collisions (i.e. using/implementing: high injury network maps, signal timing, high visibility crosswalks, bus stop lengths, etc.) 2. Enforcement — use data driven approach to cite and focus on violations of the California Vehicular Code and S.F. Transportation Code that identify as causative in severe and fatal collisions (i.e. explore implementation of E -citation Pilot, reporting on traffic collision data, police training, etc.) 2 http://visionzeronetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/VZ-map-April-20-2016-4.jpg s http://www.joomag.com/magazine/vision-zero-san-francisco/0685197001423594455?short a http://visionzerosf.org/vision-zero-in-action/engineering-streets-for-safety/ s http://visionzerosf.org/vision-zero-in-action/public-policy-for-change/ 6 http://ladot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=488062f00db44ef0a29bf481aa337cb3 ' http://visionzero.lacitv.org/actions/ 9 3. Education — coordinate among city departments to create citywide strategy for outreach and safety programs, such as Safe Routes to Schools. (i.e. education campaign includes — Safe Streets SF, large vehicle safe driving for municipal vehicles, etc.) 4. Evaluation — evaluate the impact of engineering, enforcement, education and policy efforts to provide recommendations for refinement (i.e. use of web -based data sharing and tracking systems for transparency and accountability). 5. Policy — support and mobilize local and state policy initiatives that advance Vision Zero (i.e. Advance Automated Safety Enforcement initiative at the state level, in -vehicle technology usage, partnering with state and federal agencies on administrative and legal issues, etc.) In its annual reporting, the City has established the following measures for successful benchmarks: • Decreasing total severe and fatal injuries • Decreasing the proportion of severe and fatal injuries in communities of concern to address social inequities • Decreasing medical costs at SF General Hospital relating to collisions • Increasing the number of engineering projects and miles of streets receiving safety improvements • Decreasing the speeds on SF streets • Increasing investigation and prosecution of vehicular manslaughter • Increasing public awareness of Vision Zero and traffic safety laws • Increasing policy changes made at the state and local levels to advance Vision Zero Toward Zero Deaths — The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) is committed to the vision of eliminating fatalities and serious injuries on national roadways. FHWA has a strategic goal of ensuring the "nation's highway system provides safe, reliable, effective, and sustainable mobility for all users."8 It is essentially the national version of Vision Zero administered primarily through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). At the state level, the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) has a mission to "effectively and efficiently administer traffic safety grant funds to reduce traffic deaths, injuries, and economic losses."9 They make available grants to local and state public agencies for traffic law enforcement, public traffic safety education, and other programs aimed at reducing fatalities, injuries, and economic loss from collisions. Support: City of Fremont, City of Los Angeles, City of Sacramento, City of San Francisco, City of San Jose, City of Santa Monica, and City of West Hollywood Opposition: One individual Fiscal Impact: Unknown. The costs to any particular city can vary tremendously depending on the level and scope of investment any particular city would seek to make. For example, the City of San Francisco has Vision Zero project costs ranging from $30,000 for pedestrian safety treatments up to $12,000,000 for a Streetscape project. The cost of any particular effort could be well below, above, and anywhere between those ranges for Vision Zero implementation. 8 http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/tzd/ 9 http://www.ots.ca.gov/OTS and Traffic Safety/About OTS.asp 10 Comment: 1) Policy committee members are. encouraged to consider carefully how the adoption of the resolved clause in this resolution may affect the League's future policy when it comes to advocating for transportation funding and other existing priorities. While the clause "encouraging cities throughout California to join in these traffic safety initiatives to pursue the elimination of death and severe injury crashes on our roadways" provides an opportunity to highlight strategies that can be considered to improve transportation safety, two other aspects of the resolved appear to establish new policy for the organization in that it would "commit" the League to: • Supporting Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, and other programs, policies, or initiatives that prioritize transportation safety. • Encouraging the State to consider adopting transportation safety as a top priority for transportation projects and policy formulation. 2) Effects of various strategies to improve transportation safety can vary. According to an article published in the San Francisco Chronicle on March 26, 2016, deaths in San Francisco traffic were not falling despite Vision Zero efforts.10 The article notes that there were seven deaths in 2016, while there was only one in the first 10 weeks of 2015 and seven in 2014 during the same period. The San Francisco Department of Public Health commented that despite these incidents, it's too early to make any conclusions about Vision Zero's effectiveness. In Los Angeles, however, the city has cited significant decreases in severe and fatal injuries with implementation of certain technologies, such as installation of pedestrian scrambles. The success of Vision Zero in any particular city will likely depend on the level of investment and scope of the project(s) as the projects can vary widely. 3) In the fifth "Whereas" clause from the top, the word "principal" should be "principle." Existing League Policy: "The League supports additional funding for local transportation and other critical unmet infrastructure needs. One of the League's priorities is to support a consistent and continuous appropriation of new monies from various sources directly to cities and counties for the preservation, maintenance and rehabilitation of the local street and road system. New and additional revenues should meet the following policies: • System Preservation and Maintenance. Given the substantial needs for all modes of transportation, a significant portion of new revenues should be focused on system preservation. Once the system has been brought to a state of good repair, revenues for maintenance of the system would be reduced to a level that enables sufficient recurring maintenance. • Commitment to Efficiency. Priority should be given to using and improving current systems. Recipients of revenues should incorporate operational improvements and new technology in projects. • All Users Based System. New revenues should be borne by all users of the system from the traditional personal vehicle that relies solely on gasoline, to those with new hybrid or electric technology, to commercial vehicles moving goods in the state, and even transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians who also benefit from the use of an integrated transportation network. • Alternative Funding Mechanisms. Given that new technologies continue to improve the efficiency of many types of transportation methods, transportation stakeholders must be open to new alternative funding mechanisms. Further, the goal of reducing greenhouse gases is also expected to affect vehicle miles traveled, thus further reduce gasoline consumption and revenue from the existing gas tax. The io http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Deaths-in S F traffic-not-falling-despite-Vision-7182486.php 11 existing user based fee, such as the base $0.18 -cent gas tax is a declining revenue source. Collectively, we must have the political will to push for sustainable transportation revenues. • Unified Statewide Solution. For statewide revenues, all transportation stakeholders must stand united in the search for new revenues. Any new statewide revenues should address the needs of the entire statewide transportation network, focused in areas where there is defensible and documented need. • Equity. New revenues should be distributed in an equitable manner, benefiting both the north and south and urban, suburban, and rural areas as well as being equally split between state and local projects. • Flexibility. Needs vary from region to region and city to city. New revenues and revenue authority should provide the flexibility for the appropriate level of government to meet the goals of the constituents. • Accountability. All tax dollars should be spent properly, and recipients of new revenues should be held accountable to the taxpayers, whether at the state or local level." 1 - Additionally, the League adopted to "Increase Funding for Critical Transportation and Water Infrastructure" as its number one strategic goal for 2016. It reads, "Provide additional state and federal financial assistance and new local financing tools to help meet the critical transportation (streets, bridges, active transportation, and transit) and water (supply, sewer, storm water, flood control, etc.) infrastructure maintenance and construction needs throughout California's cities."12 ii http://www.cacities.org/Resources-Documents/Policy-Advocacy-Section/Policy-Development/2016-Summary- of-Existing-Policy-and-Guiding-Princi.aspx 12 http://www.cacities.org/Secondary/About-Us/Strategic-Priorities 12 LETTERS OF CONCURRENCE Resolution No. 1 VISION ZERO Fremont July 21, 2016 Office of the Mayor• 3300 Capitol Avenue, Building A 1 P.O. Box 5006, Fremont, CA 94537-5006 510 284-4011 ph 1 510 284-4001 fax 1 www.fremont.gov The Honorable Dennis Michael, President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, California 95814 RE: A RESOLUTION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES SUPPORTING THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INITITIAVES TO PRIOIRITZE TRAFFIC SAFEY THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA Dear President Michael, The City of Fremont enthusiastically endorses the proposed resolution to support the implementation of initiatives to eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries on our roadways. Fremont is among the early adopters of the Vision Zero traffic safety strategy. With City Council's approval of our Fremont Vision Zero 2020 action plan in March 2016, we are already seeing the benefits of building a safety first culture in our community. I strongly encourage other California cities to join a growing coalition of support for Vision Zero. Accordingly, we concur in the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and is estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people. This is about double the average of peer nations and must be addressed. Safety of our residents and visitors is paramount and this is especially true on the roads and streets of our cities. We must put safety as the top priority for all users of our streets. It is fundamental for the prosperity of California cities as safe, efficient, organized transportation systems are essential for economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City of Fremont has embraced Vision Zero and we are in strong support of expanded transportation safety in California cities and support the proposed Resolution. Sincerely, Bill Harrison Mayor 14 CITY HALL LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012 August 2, 2016 The Honorable Dennis Michael President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, California 95814 RE: League of California Cities Resolution Supporting Initiatives to Prioritize Traffic Safety Dear President Michael: We write in support of the proposed resolution to support the adoption and implementation of Vision Zero initiatives throughout California to eliminate traffic fatalities and injuries. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in cities throughout California, including the City of Los Angeles. Accordingly, we concur in the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Every year, more than 200 people are killed while trying to move around Los Angeles. Nearly half of the people who die on Los Angeles streets are people walking and bicycling, and an alarming number of them are children and older adults. The safety of our residents and visitors is paramount. If we can realize Vision Zero throughout California, children will be safer walking to school, families will be safer going to the park, and commuters will be safer getting to work. The City of Los Angeles adopted Vision Zero as part of its Transportation Strategic Plan, and an executive directive was issued in 2015 directing its implementation. We are in strong support of Vision Zero in California, and we support the proposed Resolution. Sincerely, ERIC GARCETTI Mayor ott '&v6—) JOE BUSCAINO Councilmember, 15th District League of California Cities Representative 15 OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL JAY SCHENIRER COUNCILMEMBER DISTRICT FIVE CITY OF SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA The Honorable Dennis Michael, President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, California 95814 July 27, 2016 RE: RESOLUTION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES SUPPORTING THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INITIATIVES TO PRIORITIZE TRAFFIC SAFETY THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA Dear President Michael, The City of Sacramento supports the proposed resolution to support the adoption and implementation of initiatives to prioritize transportation safety toward eliminating death and severe injuries on our roadways. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in many cities and Sacramento is currently developing its own Vision Zero Action Plan. Accordingly, we concur in the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and are estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people. This is about double the average of peer nations and must be addressed. Safety of our residents and visitors is paramount and this is especially true on roads and streets of our cities. We must put safety as a top priority for all users of our streets. It is fundamental for prosperity of California cities as safety, efficient, organized transportation systems are essential for economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City of Sacramento is in strong support of prioritized and expanded transportation safety in California cities and supports the proposed Resolution. Sincerely, Jay Scheni Chair, Law cii Member lation Committee 915 I STREET 5th FLOOR, SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-2604 PH 916-808-7005 ® FAX 916-264-7680 ® jschenirer@cityofsacramento.org THE CITY OF ANV DIEGO August 9, 2016 The Honorable Dennis Michael, President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear President Michael: RE: A resolution of the league of California Cities Supporting the Adoption and Implementation of Initiatives to Prioritize Traffic Safety throughout California The City of San Diego Transportation & Storm Water Department supports the proposed resolution to support the adoption and implementation of initiatives to eliminate death and severe injuries on our roadways. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in numerous cities throughout California, including the City of San Diego (Attachment 1). Accordingly, we concur in the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and is estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people. This is about double the average of peer nations and must be addressed. Safety of our residents and visitors is paramount and this is especially true on the roads and streets of our cities. We must put safety as the top priority for all users of our streets. It is fundamental for the prosperity of California cities as safe, efficient, organized transportation systems are essential for economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City of San Diego Transportation & Storm Water Department has embraced Vision Zero/Towards Zero Death and I am in strong support of expanded transportation safety in California cities and support the proposed Resolution. Sincerely, Kris McFadden Director Attachment: A Resolution of the Council of the City of San Diego Adopting a Vision Zero Plan to Eliminate Traffic Fatalities and Serious Injuries in the Next Ten Years cc: Katherine Johnston, Director of Infrastructure and Budget Policy, Office of the Mayor Kristin Tillquist, Director of State Government Affairs, Office of the Mayor Vic Bianes, Assistant Director, Transportation & Storm Water Department Linda Marabian, Deputy Director, Traffic Engineering Operations Transportation & Storm Water Department 202 C Street , 9th Floor) AS 9A • Son Diego, CA 92101 Tel (619) 236-6594 Fox (619) 2366570 10/-1/, 3 3 c7 (R-2016-155) RESOLUTION NUMBER R- 310042 DATE OF FINAL PASSAGE NOV 0.3 Z015 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO ADOPTING A VISION ZERO PLAN TO ELIMINATE TRAFFIC FATALITIES AND SERIOUS INJURIES IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS. WHEREAS, on average one person each day is seriously injured or killed on the road while walking, bicycling, or driving the streets of San Diego; and, WHEREAS, the City has adopted numerous studies and plans that outline design concepts to improve safety for people walking and biking in the City including a Pedestrian Master Plan and Bicycle Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of San Diego's draft Climate Action Plan proposes to achieve 50 percent of commuter mode share for walking, biking and transit use in transit priority areas by 2050 and safer conditions for walking and biking can help implement this Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City will increase in population by approximately 30 percent by 2050 and the majority of growth will result from infill development thereby increasing demand for safe walking and bicycling; and, WHEREAS, communities in San Diego have prioritized infrastructure projects that improve walking and biking safety among other project types as represented by the Community Planning Committee report to Infrastructure Committee in November 2013; and, WHEREAS, the City incurs costs to respond to lawsuits alleging the City's failure to provide safer streets; and, WHEREAS, restoring infrastructure in the City is a priority of the Council and Mayor; and, -PAGE 1 OF 3- 18 (R-2016-155) WHEREAS, Vision Zero provides a framework for reducing traffic deaths to zero through a combination of safe engineering measures, education, and enforcement practices; and, WHEREAS, Vision Zero has been adopted in many cities throughout the country, most notably in New York City which has seen the lowest number of pedestrian fatalities in its first year of implementation since documentation began in 1910; and, WHEREAS, Circulate San Diego is convening an Advisory Committee to advance Vision Zero Goals; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Diego, that it hereby adopts a goal of eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2025; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Diego, that it urges City staff from the Mayor's office, Transportation and Stormwater Department, San Diego Police Department, and a representative of the City's Bicycle Advisory Committee to attend meetings of Circulate San Diego's Vision Zero Advisory Committee for a limited time to develop a traffic safety plan that will help the City reach the goal of zero traffic deaths and serious injuries; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the traffic safety plan will be guided by innovative engineering solutions to improve road safety for all users, especially the most vulnerable; will measure and evaluate performance annually; and will include enforcement and education strategies to prevent the most dangerous behaviors that cause public harm, especially along the • corridors where collisions are most frequent. -PAGE 2 OF 3- 19 APPROVED: JAN L GOLDSMITH, City Attorney By Thomas C. ele Deputy City Att TCZ:cfq September 24, 2015 Or.Dept:Envir. Comm. Doc. No.: 1116742 (R-2016-155) I certify that the fo?irrnyiution was passed by the Council of the City of San Diego, at this meeting of Approved: Vetoed: 5 `(date) ELIZABET S. MAL City Cl By Tf.11%- eputy �'` erk (date) KEVIN L. FAUL ONER, Mayor KEVIN L. FAULCONER, Mayor -PAGE 3 OF 3- 20 Passed by the Council of The City of San Diego on OCT 2 7 2015 , by the following tirote: Councilmembers Yeas Sherri Lightner Lorie Zapf Todd Gloria Myrtle Cole Mark Kersey Chris Cate Scott Sherman • David Alvarez Marti Emerald Date of final passage Nal OV 15 Nays C C 1 1 Not Present 1 C C Recused (Please note: When a resolution is approved by the Mayor, the date of final, passage is the date the approved resolution was returned to the Office of the City Clerk.) KEVIN L. FAULCONER AUTHENTICATED BY: Mayor of The City of San Diego, California. (Seal) Diego, California. Office of the City Clerk, San Diego, California Resolution Number R- 310042 21 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR SAN FRANCISCO August 1, 2016 The Honorable Dennis Michael President, League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814 EDWIN M. LEE MAYOR Re: Resolution of the League of California Cities Supporting the Adoption and Implementation of Initiatives to Prioritize Traffic Safety Throughout California Dear President Michael, On behalf of the City and County of San Francisco, I am writing to express my support for the proposed resolution to support the adoption and implementation of initiatives to eliminate death and severe injuries on our roadways. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in numerous cities throughout California including San Francisco, San Jose, San Mateo, San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Santa Monica. Accordingly, I encourage the submission of the resolution to support Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, and other initiatives that make traffic safety a priority, which will be considered by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Every year in San Francisco, approximately 30 people lose their lives and over 200 more are seriously injured while traveling on our streets. These deaths and injuries are unacceptable and preventable, and the City is strongly committed to stopping further loss of life. San Francisco adopted Vision Zero as a policy in 2014, committing to build better and safer streets, educate the public on traffic safety, enforce traffic laws, and adopt policy changes that save lives. Our goal is to create a culture that prioritizes traffic safety and to ensure that mistakes on our roadways do not result in serious injuries or deaths. The safety of our residents and the over 18 million visitors that use our streets each year is paramount, and the same holds true for cities across the California, which need safe, efficient, and organized transportation systems to support economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City and County of San Francisco has embraced Vision Zero, and I am in strong support of expanded transportation safety in California cities and, in turn, the proposed Resolution. Sincerely, Edwin Mayor 1 DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE, ROOM 200 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102-4681 TELEPHONE: (415) 554-6141 22 City of Santa Monica® July 21, 2016 Mayor Tony Vazquez Mayor Pro Tempore Ted Winterer Councilmembers Gleam Davis Sue Himmelrich Kevin McKeown Pam O'Connor Terry O'Day The Honorable Dennis Michael, President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, California 95814 RE: THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONSIDERATION OF INITITIAVES TO PRIOIRITZE TRAFFIC SAFEY THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA Dear President Michael: The City of Santa Monica supports initiatives to eliminate death and severe injuries on our roadways. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in numerous cities throughout California, leading to the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. The City of Santa Monica embraced Secretary Anthony Foxx's Mayor's Challenge for Safer People, Safer Streets in March 2015. Simultaneously, the Council directed staff to initiate work on Vision Zero and 8-80 cities — a movement created by Gil Penalosa, to make cities that work for people aged 8 to 80. Combined, these two efforts aim to create streets that are safe and comfortable for people in all modes and of all abilities. In February 2016 the Santa Monica City Council adopted a Vision Zero target in our first Pedestrian Action Plan. We are now actively working to incorporate these visionary targets into City operations. Our City cares deeply about the safety of our people, and their ability to access good, services, education, social networks and employment. Creating a New Model for Mobility is one of the Council's Five Strategic Goals, identified to organize and advance work on our top priorities. A safe mobility network supports our urgent need to provide transportation options that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and provide equitable access to places and activities that support community Wellbeing. Reducing and ultimately eliminating severe injury and fatal crashes part of a resilient, safe and prosperous community. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015 and is estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people. This is about double the average of peer nations and must be addressed. Safety of our residents and visitors is paramount and this is especially true on the roads and streets of our cities. We must put safety as the top priority for all users of our streets. It is fundamental for the prosperity of California cities as safe, efficient, organized transportation systems are essential for economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City of Santa Monica has embraced Vision Zero/Towards Zero Deaths and I am in strong support of expanded transportation safety in California cities. Sincerely, agt Tony azquez Mayor 1685 Main Street • PO Box 2200 • Santa Monica • CA 90407-2200 tel: 310 458-8201 • fax: 310 358-1621 m e-mail: council@smgov.net nle1rmmaWta41nma 1.10 d NS BEBE MEM City of West Hollywood California 1994 CITY DF WEST HOLLYWOOD CITY MALI. 3300 SANTA MONICA BLVD. WEST HOLLYWOOD, CA 90069-6216 TEL: (323) 848-6460 FAX: (323) 848-6562 OFFICE QF THE CITY MANAGER PAUL AREVALO CITY MANAGER is 8IROO July 21, 2016 The Honorable L. Dennis Michael, President League of California Cities 1400 K Street Sacramento, California 95814 RESOLUTION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES SUPPORTING THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INITITIAVES TO PRIOIRITZE TRAFFIC SAFEY THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA - SUPPORT Dear President Michael: The City of West Hollywood supports the proposed resolution to support the adoption and implementation of initiatives to eliminate death and severe injuries on our roadways. Vision Zero and Towards Zero Deaths strategies have been adopted in numerous cities throughout California. Accordingly, we concur in the submission of the resolution for consideration by the League of Cities General Assembly at its annual meeting on October 5, 2016. Traffic fatalities in America hit a seven-year high in 2015, and it is estimated to have exceeded 35,000 people. This is about double the average of peer nations and must be addressed. Safety of our residents and visitors is paramount and this is especially true on the roads and streets of our cities. We must put safety as the top priority for all users of our streets. It is fundamental for the prosperity of California cities as safe, efficient, organized transportation systems are essential for economically vibrant and sustainable communities. The City of West Hollywood is in strong support of expanded transportation safety in California cities and support the proposed Resolution. Paul Arevalo, CITY MANAGER c: Honorable Members of the West Hollywood City Council 24 NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION DIGEST A •� THE REGULAR TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 2016 HAS BEEN CANCELLED THE N F XT SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 SCOTT AI\ DERS ON, S F CRETARY SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 5 OF MARIN COUNTY 2001 Paradise Drive Tiburon, California 94920 AGENDA Finance & Fiscal Oversight Committee Special Meeting Thursday, August 11th, 2016, 9:00 A.M. DIGEST RAX 0.1 I. Roll Call II. Public Comments III. New Business 1. Warrants for July 15th through August 11th, 2016 2. Financial Reports for July, 2016 3. Review/Discuss Ca1PERS Earnings for FY2015-2016 4. Review/Discuss Monthly Pension, Health, OPEB, and Payroll Reporting 5. Review Protocol re: Board of Directors' Semi -Annual Disbursements 6. Review/Discuss FY2015-2016 Preliminary Audit Schedule 7. Review of FY2016-2017 Residential & Commercial Sewer Fees Submitted to County of Marin 8. Upcoming District Obligations for August — September, 2016 IV. Adjournment This Committee may be attended by Board Members who do not serve on this committee. In the event that a quorum of the entire Board is present, this Committee shall act as a Committee of the Whole. In either case, any item acted upon by the Committee or the Committee of the Whole will require consideration and action by the full Board of Directors as a prerequisite to its legal enactment. Accessible public meetings: Upon request, the District will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternate formats, or disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individual with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Requests are to be submitted in writing to the Administrative/Finance Specialist at Post Office Box 227, Tiburon CA 94920 or rdohrmann@sani5.org at least two days prior to the meeting. T:\Board\Committees\Finance Committee\Agendas\2016 08 11 Finance Committee Agenda RD TR TM.docx Richard Snyder, President Catharine Benediktsson, Vice President John Carapiet, Secretary NOTICE AND AGENDA Regular Board Meeting at Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County Meeting Room 2001 Paradise Drive, Tiburon, CA 94920 Thursday, August 18, 2016 5:00 P.M. REGULAR BOARD MEETING CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL D 1 E Michael Lasky, Director Tod Moody, Director PUBLIC COMMENTS: The public is invited to address the Board on items that do not appear on the agenda and that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. The Brown Act does not allow the Board to take action on any public comment. Please limit public comments to no more than three minutes. DIRECTORS' COMMENTS AND/OR AGENDA REQUESTS: CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Approval of July 21st, 2016, Regular Board Meeting Minutes (Dohrmann) 2. Approval of all Electronic Fund Transfers (EFT) and Warrants for July 14th through August 11th, 2016; JP Morgan Chase Bank Check No. 5227 through Check No. 5272, all transactions totaling in the amount of $135,432.22 (Dohrmann) 3. Receipt of Financial Reports for July, 2016 (Dohrmann) 4. Approval of Purchases of Dry Weather & Wet Weather Pumps (Rubio) MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 5. District Management Summary Report (Rubio) NEW BUSINESS: 6. Consideration and approval of Resolution No. 2016-07: A Resolution Amending the Language Used for Director Compensation for Attendance at Committee Meetings, and the Semi -Annual Distribution of Directors' Fees, based on Meeting Attendance, on June 30th and December 31st, as listed in the Rules of Procedure for Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County (B. Stock) — Action Board of Directors Agenda Regular Board Meeting, August 18, 2016 Page 2 7. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-08: A Resolution by Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County Accepting Completion and Directing District Manager to File Notice of Completion for the Mar West Pump Station No. 5, Phase I, Improvement Project (Rubio) — Action UNFINISHED BUSINESS: COMMITTEE REPORTS: 8. Capital Improvement Program Committee (Carapiet/Moody) 9. Governance Committee (Benediktsson/Snyder) 10. Finance & Fiscal Oversight Committee (Moody/Carapiet) 11. Personnel Committee (Benediktsson/Lasky) 12. Tiburon Pump Station #4 Ad Hoc Committee (Carapiet/Benediktsson) OTHER BUSINESS: ENVIRONMENTAL: CORRESPONDENCE: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CONVENE TO CLOSED SESSION: 1) Conference with Real Property Negotiators — Government Code §54956.8 Property: 059-181-09 059-181-37 059-181-84 059-181-88 059-181-86 059-181-89 059-181-80 059-181-34 059-181-81 District Negotiator: Tony Rubio, District Manager T:\Board\Agendas\2016 08 18 Regular Board Agenda RLD TR RS BLS.doc Board of Directors Agenda Regular Board Meeting, August 18, 2016 Page 3 (Closed Session Cont'd from Item 1) Negotiating Parties: J. Bloom P. Kaiser Y. Ma E. & C. Ware J. Behmke & K. Clancy R. Barbaria S. L'Heureux Under Negotiation: Price and Terms 2) Conference with Legal Counsel— Anticipated Litigation i. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Section 54956.9(d)(2): (1 potential cases) 3) Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation i. Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: Name of Case: Tiburon 21 Marinero LLC vs. Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County, Marin County Superior Court Case No. CIV 1601046 REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT The Board will be asked to adjourn the meeting to a Regular Board Meeting on September 15th, 2016, at 5:00 p.m. at the Main Plant of Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County, located at 2001 Paradise Drive, Tiburon, California. The Board of Directors may at its discretion consider agenda items out of the order in which they appear above. Accessible public meetings: Upon request, the District will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternate formats, or disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services to enable individual with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Requests are to be submitted in writing to the District at P.O. Box 227, Tiburon, CA 94920 or rdohrmann@sani5.org at least two days prior to the meeting. T:\Board\Agendas\2016 08 18 Regular Board Agenda RLD TR RS BLS.doc