Considering adoption of an affordable housing impact fee for unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County
Administration is recommending that the Board consider recommendations related to the Silicon Valley/Alameda County Nexus Study, including taking the below possible actions:
- Receive report relating to Affordable Housing Nexus Studies prepared by Keyser Marston Associates.
- Direct Administration to conduct outreach to the public and interested parties to solicit input on the adoption of affordable housing impact fees for new residential and nonresidential development in unincorporated Santa Clara County.
- Direct Administration to extend the county-wide Nexus Study to include residential and non-residential development on the Stanford University Campus.
- Direct Administration to return to the Board in November 2017 with the results of public outreach, the Stanford supplement to the Nexus Study, and recommendations for further action for adoption and implementation of affordable housing impact fees.
In October 2015, The County Housing Task Force recommended the County participate in the Silicon Valley/Alameda County Nexus Study Project because it would allow the County and cities to take advantage of report cost-savings and advance a regional response to affordable housing needs in Santa Clara County. The Nexus Study is now complete. The findings of the Study indicate the maximum supported residential impact fee for single family detached homes in Santa Clara County is $16.60 per square foot. The maximum supported non-residential impact fee ranges between $37.80 and $230.00 per square foot, depending upon the type of development. Actual fee levels for residential and non-residential development are typically selected by jurisdictions based on a combination of factors, such as, policy objectives, economic considerations, and fee levels in neighboring jurisdictions. The Nexus Study recommends implementing a residential impact fee between $15 and $16 per square foot, slightly less than the allowable maximum of $16.60 per square foot. A $15.50 per square foot fee equates to a $46,500 fee for a 3000 square feet home. Due to the infrequency of non-residential development in the unincorporated areas outside of Stanford University, the study does not recommend implementing any impact fee for non-residential development.
The Nexus Study did not analyze affordable housing impacts from residential and nonresidential development at Stanford University. Condition F(6) of the 2000 General Use Permit (GUP) requires Stanford University to provide one affordable housing unit on the Stanford campus for each 11,763 square feet of academic development built under the GUP or make appropriate cash payments in lieu of providing the housing unit. The Administration is proposing to complete this analysis for Stanford as part of the processing of the 2018 General Use Permit application, which proposes a similar type of fee. If the County were to adopt a county-wide impact fee ordinance, Stanford University would be subject to the ordinance. If a county-wide ordinance was not adopted, a Stanford University impact fee would be considered in the context of the General Use Permit application.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: June 20, 2017, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8499&MediaPosition=&ID=87322&CssClass= Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8499
Amending contract w/ San Jose for 911 Emergency Medical Services; City and County not yet in agreement on terms
Administration is recommending that the Board receive a report from the Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System regarding the Agreement with the City of San Jose for 911 Emergency Medical Services.
On April 5, 2011, the City of San Jose and the County of Santa Clara entered into a five year 911 Emergency Medical Services Provider Agreement, starting on July 1, 2011. Similar agreements and annexes authorized every local Fire Department within the County of Santa Clara Exclusive Operating Area (EOA) to operate paramedics and to respond to emergency medical 911 calls in exchange for complying with State and County standards. Annex B of the 911 Emergency Medical Services Provider Agreements is an optional annex that provides participating fire departments funding from Rural/Metro for meeting response time performance standards in urban areas, based on population density. If the participating fire departments achieve response time compliance greater than 95%, they are entitled to have any per minute liquidated damages (financial penalties) forgiven. Annex B provides that failure to meet the 90th percentile response time requirements for three consecutive months, or four months in any 12-month period, constitutes a breach of Annex B. Annex B provides the EMS Agency with discretion to stop or continue funding provided to a first response agency if the loss of those funds would create a financial hardship to the first response agency.
The City of San Jose had failed to meet the 90% response time performance standard set forth in Annex B of the 911 Emergency Medical Services Provider Agreement, as amended for various months resulting in a material breach of the Agreement since October 2012. On December 16, 2014, the Board approved the Second Amendment to the agreement which authorized immediate payment of Annex B monies. On June 28, 2016; the Board approved the Third Amendment to the agreement which extended the agreement for one (1) year and will expire on June 30, 2017. A proposal has been made for a Fourth Amendment, however an agreement has not been reached between the County and the City of San Jose. Attached is a copy of the proposed amendment to the contract.
The City of San Jose has largely been unable to sustain the call time requirements set forth in Annex B of the 911 Emergency Medical Services Provider Agreement between the City of San Jose and the County of Santa Clara, since October 2012. However, improvement has been demonstrated over the course of calendar year 2014 and 2015.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: June 20, 2017, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8499&MediaPosition=&ID=87392&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8499
Supervisor Simitian to appoint Jason Baker to Fairgrounds Management Corp.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: June 21, 2017, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9146&MediaPosition=&ID=87399&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9146
City of San Jose
Approving ENA w/ Google for gigantic potential development in Diridon Station Area; memo from Mayor, Vice Mayor and CMs supports project & proposed delayed community engagement process that does not include labor
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Google for the acquisition of properties owned by the City of San José and properties owned by the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (SARA) in the Diridon Station Area for the future construction of a mixed-use, transit-oriented development including office and R&D space.
New memo from Mayor Liccardo, Vice Mayor Carrasco, Councilmembers Davis, Peralez, and Arenas supports staff recommendation, with the following additions:
- Require the developer to implement a transparent community engagement process, which should include local residents, small businesses, and faith-based and local organizations. The implementation of the community engagement plan should not commence during the November/December holiday season.
- The City shall obtain fair market value for sale of any publicly owned parcels, and the city shall not subsidize the development with taxpayer dollars.
Since December 2016, Google and its development partner, Trammel Crow, have acquired several parcels in the central zone of the Diridon Station Area, most significantly the former AT&T property on Montgomery Street. Google wants to negotiate with the City for the acquisition of the four SARA-owned properties that were included in the planned ballpark site. Google also wants to acquire the City’s Fire Training property, located at the corner of Park Avenue and Montgomery Street.
Preliminary discussions with Google indicate interest in planning and building a master-planned transit-oriented development that includes between 6 and 8 million square feet of office/R&D space and retail/commercial amenities. This development could support more than 20,000 new Downtown employees, significantly aiding the City’s need for local jobs and supporting ridership on existing and new public transportation investments. No development applications have been submitted to the City, nor are expected to be submitted in 2017.
The Schedule of Performance in the ENA anticipates creation of a MOU by March 2018. This document will be the next check-in point for the potential transaction. The timing for submittal of any development applications will be addressed in the MOU.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tue. June 20, 2017, 1:30PM, Council
Link to memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2689&meta_id=641032
Link to SL, MC, DD, RP, SA: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2689&meta_id=643044
Link to agenda: http://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=b11de27a-caee-456a-8506-8b01b50e9675
Approving settlement with Allied Waste Services for wage theft case involving recycling workers; includes restitution fund, a modified living wage rate of $17.29, and a rate increase to cover costs
Approve the Cooperative Agreement and Fourth Amendment to the Franchises Agreement with Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC to resolve a dispute about the living wage requirements for sorters and housekeepers at the Newby Island Recyclery in the Commercial Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection Franchises Agreement. The settlement will provide both restitution for work performed from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2017, and an increase in hourly wage rates prospectively.
Also, adopt a resolution setting Maximum Commercial Solid Waste Services Rates in the City of San Jose pursuant to the Cooperative Agreement and the Commercial Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Collection Franchises Agreement between the City of San Jose and Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC, dba Republic Services, including the total costs for organic processing services. Approval of the recommendation will increase the maximum commercial solid waste service rates for fiscal year 2017-2018 by 1.79 percent to provide funding required to implement the Recyclery Workers’ Wage as per the Cooperative Agreement between the City of San Jose and Republic Services.
Beginning in 2012, Allied failed to pay the San Jose Living Wage to its housekeepers and sorters at the Newby Island Recyclery. Allied argued its contract with the City did not require a living wage for those workers.
To resolve the dispute, Allied and the City have agreed on a methodology to address the living wage issue. The resolution has five main components: 1) a fund to provide some restitution to housekeepers and sorters that worked at the Recyclery between July 1, 2012, and June 30, 2016; 2) a modified living wage for Recylery housekeepers and sorters, referred to as the “Recyclery Workers Wage” in the amount of $17.29 per hour that will be paid to the housekeepers and sorters commencing July 1, 2017 and continuing through the remainder of the term of the Franchises Agreement; 3) annual increases in the Recyclery Worker Wage consistent with the Consumer Price Index as defined in the Franchises Agreement as amended; 4) modifications in the Consumer Price Index used in the Franchises Agreement for a period of seven years; and 5) a cost splitting arrangement between the City and Allied to cover the additional costs of paying the Recyclery Workers Wage.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tue. June 27, 2017, 1:30PM, Council Chambers
Link to memo part a: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2690&meta_id=642689
Link to memo part b: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2690&meta_id=642719
Link to agenda: http://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=fdfa3266-d7fa-40e3-84af-fa914c13e4e7
City of Milpitas
Receiving presentation on 2 possible urgency ordinances to preserve affordable housing via just cause eviction & a moratorium on demolishing affordable units
Staff are recommending that Council receive a presentation about two urgency ordinances related to affordable housing, and determine whether to enact either or both ordinances.
As the demand for affordable housing continues to grow, the City Council has tasked staff with researching and preparing mechanisms to preserve existing affordable housing and produce new affordable housing in the future. The Council indicated at its May 22, 2017, study session that it wanted staff to prepare an urgency ordinance to address these issues. Staff has drafted two urgency ordinances. The first is a ‘just cause’ eviction ordinance that limits the bases upon which landlords may evict tenants. The second is a demolition permit moratorium that will pertain to all structures that currently provide affordable housing.
Just-Cause Eviction Urgency Ordinance. As proposed by staff, the just cause eviction ordinance would protect tenants in covered units from no cause evictions by requiring that landlords wishing to terminate the rental relationship to show that the eviction is either ‘for cause’ or ‘no fault.’ For purposes of the ordinance, ‘covered units’ are all residential housing units in the City, except for hotels (with stays of 30 days or less), owner-occupied units (unless the owner rents out three or more bedrooms), nonprofit cooperatives, and dwellings subject to regulation or restriction by the state or federal government (for the life of the governmental regulation). Any landlord desiring to end a tenancy would be required to provide a notice of termination to the affected tenant, informing them of the grounds of their eviction. This notice would also be provided to the City. If a landlord violated the ordinance, the aggrieved tenant would be empowered to begin a civil lawsuit seeking monetary damages or injunctive relief (in other words, a stop to the eviction) on their own behalf or the City could do so on the tenant’s behalf.
Demolition permit moratorium. The second urgency ordinance presented to the Council for its consideration is a moratorium on the issuance of demolition permits for structures that currently provide affordable housing units. The purpose of the ordinance is to preserve existing affordable housing stock while the City evaluates and takes action on comprehensive affordable housing preservation and production mechanisms. The failure to adopt the ordinance could result in the loss of existing affordable housing while this work continues. This urgency ordinance covers affordable housing units, which (for purposes of this ordinance) are defined as residential dwellings with rental rates either (1) restricted by a recorded document to levels affordable to extremely low, very low, lower, or moderate income households, or (2) subsidized by the state or federal government. No structure containing such units would be permitted to be demolished during the term of this urgency ordinance, with a few exceptions.
The fiscal impact of the demolition permit moratorium is limited to lost permit fees during the pendency of the ordinance. The fiscal impact of the just cause eviction ordinance depends on the degree to which the City becomes involved in the adjudication of tenants’ rights.
Where: Milpitas City Council
When: June 20, 2017, 7:00pm
Link to item: http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/council/2017/062017/attachment.htm
Link to agenda: http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/council/2017/062017/Agenda.pdf
Study Session on City’s pension obligations
Council will be holding a study session on the City’s pension obligations. Staff report not yet available.
Where: Sunnyvale City Council
When: June 20, 2017, 5:30pm
Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=527746&GUID=A60A598A-3894-4073-8D64-F55A5D12ED58
East Side Union High School District
Projected negative budget balance of $27M, developing plan for reductions
The East Side Union High School District Board of Trustees is committed to ensuring that the East Side Union High School District remains fiscally solvent and able to maintain a minimum 3% reserve in FY 2017-18 and the two subsequent out-years. The Board of Trustees has been advised that based on the District’s projections of revenue and expenditures and the District’s current fiscal challenges, it is projected that the District will not meet its required minimum reserves in the 2019-2020 fiscal year, and the District will have a negative ending fund balance of approximately $27,000,000. The Board has decided to delay planned reductions until FY 2018-19 and 2019-20 in an effort to prevent draconian reductions in FY 2017-18. During the FY 2017-18, the District will work collaboratively with all bargaining units to identify alternative budget reductions in order to prevent a reduction in force. Absent a material change in the District’s financial position sufficient to address the current projected $27,000,000 negative ending fund balance, the Board will be requested to proceed with budget reductions and reductions in force as identified in the attached resolution.
Where: ESUHSD Board
When: 06/22, 6:00pm at ESUHSD
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AN6PNH657046.
Link to agenda: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ADW4BU0811CC
Do you have a news tip you would like to share? Would you like to contribute to The Left Hook? Email us at LeftHookBlog@gmail.com
No Comments