Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Priorities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Bruno outlines $3.76M in FY26 priorities; cleanup program estimated at $1.46M first year
Summary
City staff sought council direction on FY202526#8211;26 priorities, proposing a cross-department "Cleanup San Bruno" program with a first-year cost of about $1.46 million and ongoing costs roughly $825,0001,000,000; council discussed phasing for streetlight retrofits and scoping for a residential parking study.
Get email alerts on the Budget Priorities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Bruno city staff presented fiscal-year 202526#8211;26 priority proposals and asked the City Council for direction on project scopes and funding. The priorities package totals approximately $3.76 million if all initiatives move forward; staff recommended Measure G fund two top items and additional funding sources or phasing for others.
Cleanup San Bruno: scope and costs The interim police chief presented "Cleanup San Bruno," a cross-department effort to reduce illegal dumping, manage hot-spot litter and encampments, and strengthen municipal-code enforcement and interagency agreements (Caltrans, other owners). The chief said the program would combine hot-spot management, public education, expanded contracts for parks/maintenance, targeted enforcement using mobile cameras and motion-detection lights, and updated municipal codes to enable accountability.
Staff estimated a first-year budget of about $1,460,000 for the cleanup initiative and said many costs are one-time investments; ongoing annual costs were estimated in the $825,000 to $1,000,000 range depending on staffing and contract decisions. Staff proposed adding one 0.5 FTE and one code-enforcement supervisor to manage the initiative and offered to return to council with metrics to evaluate progress.
Why it matters: Councilmembers said repeated dumping and hotspots have visible neighborhood impacts and that coordinated, measurable investment could reduce recurring costs and improve public perception. Members cautioned about the initial price tag and asked for phasing options, metrics, and interagency MOUs to reduce long-term city costs.
Communications, streetlights and parking Staff also presented a communications and engagement plan request (including potential funding for a public-information position) and an update on a phase-2 streetlight retrofit project to replace remaining unreliable circuits; staff estimated phase 2 at about $1.8 million but proposed phasing or lower-cost alternatives.
Council debated a proposed residential-permit-parking reassessment. Staff described a targeted study (not necessarily citywide) to analyze parking supply/demand and alternatives; cost estimates discussed in the meeting were approximately $300,000 for a focused pilot study, with council members asking to explore using prior studies and narrower pilot areas to reduce cost.
Next steps: Staff will incorporate council direction into budget development, provide refined cost breakdowns and phasing options, and return with metrics and a proposed contract scope/timeline for the parking assessment and streetlight phases.

