Policy Watch: Week of 9/11

County of Santa Clara

Direction on a new Business License program to regulate business in unincorporated areas

This report presents a proposed business license program for the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County.  The purpose of the report is to obtain input and guidance from the Committee.

Although the County does not have a means to accurately assess the number of businesses in the unincorporated areas, there were approximately 5,525 businesses in operation in the unincorporated area as of 2012, according to U.S. Census data.  A business license program would enable the County including the ability to more effectively communicate to businesses regarding proposed requirements or in the event of an emergency, have reliable information on the numbers and types of businesses to monitor trends and patterns in economic activity, enforce local regulations including zoning compliance, and other purposes. The Program is intended to be a regulatory and enforcement tool, not a business tax.

Board members have recently expressed a desire to advance policy goals by using a business license as an enforcement mechanism for wage and hour laws. Counties have broad authority to regulate businesses through business licensing requirements, and other jurisdictions use that authority to suspend or revoke a business license as a means to enforce a judgment, decision, determination, or order related to a wage and hour violation.  It is recommended that this program be structured to accomplish this purpose, with the understanding that the goal of the Administration is to encourage compliance and to assist businesses in fulfilling their obligations, and to use the County’s enforcement power as a last resort failing all other means to obtain compliance.

The Administration preliminarily estimates an 18-to-24 month implementation period from the point of adoption of a Program.

Where:  Santa Clara County Children, Seniors & Families Committee

When: September 13, 2017, 2 PM

Link to item:   http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8706&MediaPosition=&ID=87470&CssClass=

Link to agenda:   http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8706

 

Direction on proposed pilot to enforce wage theft violations thru Food Faculty Permits

In conjunction with the proposed Business License Program for businesses in the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County, the Administration is also proposing a pilot program to evaluate the feasibility of encouraging compliance with labor standards and enforce wage and hour laws through the exercise of the County’s authority over Food Facility Permits.

Administration is seeking input and direction from the Committee on a proposed County pilot program that would, separate and in addition to a business license program, provide the County with another means by which to ensure local compliance with labor standards.  With the CSFC’s consideration of this proposal and Board approval, the Administration would conduct further research and prepare a program proposal for the Board’s consideration in the fall.

The proposed pilot program would entail providing access to the Office of Countywide Contracting Management’s database of California Department of Labor Standards Enforcement and Federal Department of Labor case files on hearing decisions to a proposed County Office of Labor Standards Enforcement (OLSE).  In a separate report to CSFC, the Office of the County Executive is presenting analysis about establishing an office of labor standards enforcement at the County of Santa Clara.  The Office of the County Executive anticipates presenting that analysis, with the Committee’s recommendations, to the full Board on September 26, 2017.

If the County OLSE became aware of a judgment against a relevant business, OLSE staff would work with the business to resolve the judgment through appropriate means.  If administrative efforts to remedy the violation have been exhausted, and the violation against the business remains outstanding, then the County may issue a notice to the business owner of the County’s intention to revoke or suspend the business’s County-issued Food Facility Permit.  Suspension of the permit would require the business to close and to refrain from conducting any food-related business.

Where:  Santa Clara County Children, Seniors & Families Committee

When: September 13, 2017 2 PM

Link to item:

http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8706&MediaPosition=&ID=87344&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8706

 

Proposing a new business license requirement in the unincorporated areas

Staff is proposing the County impose a license requirement on all business activity in the unincorporated areas, including activities that are conducted, transacted or carried on for commercial purposes, and would include any trade, profession, occupation, vocation or calling operated at a fixed location.

The Features of a Proposed Business License

  • The business license would be required for each business or, in the case of a business with multiple locations, for each location.
  • The business license would only be required for businesses with a fixed location in the unincorporated area.  The license would not be required for transient businesses, e.g., a business based within a city’s limits that performs a service in the unincorporated area, such as, a cleaning service or a contractor.
  • The license would be renewable annually and conspicuous display of the license at the place of business would be required.
  • The business license would be non-transferable.
  • The business license would be issued in the name of the business owner, corporation, partnership, or other entity holding ownership over the business.  In the case of a professional partnership or association, such as, a law firm or medical group, one license would be required for the firm or group.

Exemptions would include:

  • Residential facilities where units are rented or leased on a term of thirty days or longer;
  • Residential care homes for adults or children;
  • Family day care homes;
  • Churches, mosques, temples, or other places of worship, to the extent of their use for worship, religious education, or the social affairs of the religious group;
  • Financial institutions and insurers that can demonstrate payment of an in-lieu tax to the State; and
  • Businesses that are exempt by the Constitution or applicable statutes of the United States or of the State of California from the payment of a regulatory business license fee.

Where:  Santa Clara County Finance and Government Operations Committee

When: Thurs. Sept 14, 2017, 2:00pm, Board Chambers

Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8737&MediaPosition=&ID=88096&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8737

 

Update on Civic Center Master Plan & termination of the Master Development Agreement with Lowe-Gensler

FGOC will receive a report from the Facilities and Fleet Department and the Office of Asset and Economic Development relating to the Civic Center Master Plan. Since the last quarterly update, the following has occurred:

  • The Administration accepted the final draft of the Service Plan and Operational Model for the proposed Public Safety and Justice Center prepared by Anderson Brule Architects (ABA).
  • The Administration accepted the Draft Basis of Design for the proposed Public Safety and Justice Center prepared by Lowe Enterprises and their prime consultant, Gensler.
  • The Administration accepted the April 2017 Draft Civic Center Master Plan from Lowe and Gensler.
  • The Board ratified termination for convenience (without cause) of the MDA.
  • The Administration continued to work with its consultant, David J. Powers and Associates, Inc., on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Civic Center Master Plan.
  • The Administration began preparations for the demolition of the former San Jose City Hall Annex (non-historic) consistent with, and in anticipation of, consideration of the EIR in December 2017. Funding for demolition of the Annex is included in the approved Budget for FY2018.

The Civic Center Project Summary provides an overview of approved project expenditures for all aspects of the Project, including the following:

  • Master Planning by Lowe/Gensler;
  • California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance by David J. Powers; and
  • The Public Safety and Justice Center (Service Model and Operational Model Plan) by ABA)

David J. Powers continued CEQA work, assisting the County with development of the Draft EIR (DEIR). The DEIR will be circulated for a 45-day public review from September 14 to October 30, including a public meeting during this period. The Administration anticipates presentation of the Final EIR to the Board on December 12, 2017.

The Administration (Facilities and Fleet) hosted an initial client contact meeting on August 22, 2017 with representatives from the Office of the CEO and Marvin Bamberg Architects. Design is anticipated to start at the end of 2017, followed by hazmat abatement in March of 2018, and building demolition starting in 2018.

Where:  Santa Clara County Finance and Government Operations Committee

When: Thurs. Sept 14, 2017, 2:00pm, Board Chambers

Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8737&MediaPosition=&ID=88080&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8737

 

Rejecting all bids received and releasing new RFP for County Fairgrounds

Administration is recommending that the Board receive a report from the Office of the County Executive related to the Fairgrounds Request for Proposals, declare intent to reject all proposals and receive community input, and direct Administration to begin new RFP process.

At the Board’s regular meeting of December 13, 2016, by Resolution and a 4/5 vote, the Board approved the release of an RFP, with a due date of March 30th, and delegated authority to the Director of Asset and Economic Development (as Designee) to conduct the RFP process for the Fairgrounds property. The Board sought to obtain competing proposals for the development and operation of the Fairgrounds to include existing community activities and the annual County Fair, and to propose uses for the balance the property divided equally between active and passive recreation. The Board further indicated that it sought private investment funding to correct maintenance deficiencies at the Fairgrounds and to improve the infrastructure without requiring County general fund contributions or commitments. Furthermore, the RFP expressed a preference for comprehensive proposals for use of all the property. Only one respondent offered a comprehensive proposal, but that proposal also proposed a County financial commitment. The lack of multiple, comprehensive proposal for the entire 150-acre site makes it highly unlikely that any future negotiations would result in achieving the desired results from the current RFP process.

The Administration recommends that the Board reject the five RFP responses received. Modifying the RFP substantially, such as offering fee ownership for some portion of the acreage, or offering some portion for commercial use, or specifying a particular level of County financial support for a particular type of development, could change the number and type of interested parties and likely future responses. Absent a change of RFP priorities by the Board, Administration recommends that the Board direct the Administration to bring back to the Board specific recommendations and costs for improving the operations and governance of the Fairgrounds, to allow for incremental improvements to the infrastructure and additional uses to be submitted to the Board for its approval on a case-by-case basis.

In addition, the Board will continue discussions with San Jose State University (SJSU) regarding the South Campus Master Plan and with VTA. Administration contacted VTA, whose representatives reaffirmed previous conversations in which they have expressed an interest in acquiring, if the County were willing to sell, the 14-acre parcel across Tully Road and adjacent to the VTA Chaboya Division (Bus) Yard. SJSU has prepared a South Campus Master Plan whose goal is the development of South Campus, the site of Spartan Stadium, to expand and modernize their athletic department’s offerings. If the existing South campus site is fully built out according to the Master Plan, it will displace about 850 parking spaces that are fully utilized when events take place at CEFCU Stadium. SJSU’s largest issues with the South Campus moving forward are parking and transit. Campus planners considered the possibility of proposing that the Fairgrounds be used to accommodate the displaced parking, although the high cost of operating a necessary shuttle service would reduce football event revenues. Alternatively, they expressed interest in locating the track and field at the Fairgrounds.

Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors

When: September 12, 2017, 9:30am

Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=SplitView&MeetingID=8502&MediaPosition=&ID=88090&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=14&ID=8604&Inline=True

 

Update on ability of County to potentially become a CDE-funded Child Care Resource & Referral provider

Administration is recommending that the Board receive report from the Social Services Agency related to Child Care Resource and Referral Services.

The Board of Supervisors (Board) directed the Social Services Agency (SSA) to report to the Board (8/29/2017 Board Meeting, Agenda Item #18, ID# 87558) regarding the County’s ability to become a Child Care Resource and Referral (R&R) provider through the California Department of Education’s (CDE) process. Requests for Applications (RFA) for CDE-contracted services are issued when new funding becomes available. If a current contractor relinquishes its contract, or CDE terminates a currently funded organization, CDE would issue an RFA to its existing contractor pool to select a replacement, in order to “transfer the program to another agency as soon as practicable.”

Contractors in that pool have other CDE-funded child development programs. CDE staff advised SSA that CDE would exhaust this process before CDE would consider initiating an RFA to recruit a new contractor. The current CDE list of R&R contractors by county is composed of nonprofit organizations, County Offices of Education, and County Superintendents of Schools. No counties are on CDE’s list of R&R contractors. The County could lawfully become a R&R provider if CDE selected the County as a result of a CDE Request for Applications Process, but CDE staff has advised SSA that this would not occur until after CDE’s contract with the currently funded organization ends, and after CDE has then sought applications from other current CDE contractors to determine if a replacement contractor could be identified from CDE’s existing contractors.

As a participant in any process to secure an R&R designation, the County would need to demonstrate the ability to effectively provide child care R&R services to the public and, if selected, would need to ensure the appropriate infrastructure to do so (e.g., child care provider database, access to child care provider licensing information, software required to match child care requests with appropriate and available providers, etc.). The County would also need to build the necessary pool of experienced and knowledgeable staff capable of assisting families with child care decisions. In response to a recent inquiry with CDE staff, SSA was informed that CDE is in the process of conducting a fiscal audit of the local R&R contractor. No definite completion date is available at this time.

Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors

When: September 12, 2017, 9:30am

Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=SplitView&MeetingID=8502&MediaPosition=&ID=88160&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=14&ID=8604&Inline=True

 

Approving two-year extension to agreement with Allied Waste Services through Sep 2019

Administration is recommending that the Board approve a sixth amendment to the agreement with Allied Waste Services of Santa Clara County, dba Republic Services related to providing solid waste collection, disposal, and recycling services, exercising a renewal option to extend the Agreement for a two-year period through September 30, 2019 with no change to the maximum contract amount. An exception to Board of Supervisors Policy 5.4.5.4, Length of Term of Contracts, has been approved by the Office of Countywide Contracting Management.

In 2014 FAF requested an extension of the current agreement with Republic with an option to extend two additional years as required by the County. The expiration of the current contract is September 30, 2017. FAF has reviewed its business needs, the performance of Republic and all of the performance requirements as stipulated in the agreement. Upon review of the current marketplace and the existing needs of the County and Republics performance, FAF has determined that it’s in the best business interest of the County to exercise the option as approved by the board to extend for the final two year extension of the agreement.

Living Wage does not apply to this Agreement, as Agreement No. 5500001852 with Republic was approved based upon an RFP issued on September 15, 2009. The.Board Policy Section on Living Wage applies only to contracts for direct services developed pursuant to a formal Request for Proposal process which is initiated on or after July 1, 2015, or Informal Competitive Procurement process which is initiated on or after March 1, 2017.

Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors

When: September 12, 2017, 9:30am

Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=SplitView&MeetingID=8502&MediaPosition=&ID=87468&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=14&ID=8604&Inline=True

 

City of San Jose

Housing Commission to provide input on new Draft Apartment Rent Ordinance

The Housing Department will be presenting their Draft Apartment Rent Ordinance and Regulations (ARO) for initial review and discussion to the San Jose Housing & Community Development Commission. Commission will provide recommendations to Staff on:

  1. New Apartment Rent Ordinance (ARO) and Regulations including consideration of Option A (CPI based rent increases and other provisions) vs. Option B (maximum 5% rent increases and other provisions)
  2. Staffing Plan and Fee Analysis
  3. Additional items not currently included in the ARO
  4. Adding Duplexes to the ARO
  5. Adding a one-year lease requirement to the ARO
  6. Establishing a separate voluntary meditation program

Moving forward, Housing Department will then present ARO to City Council in October.

Where:    San Jose Housing & Community Development Commission

When:  9/14/2017 5:45pm, San Jose City Hall Wing Rooms 118-120

Link to item: http://sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/71520

Link to agenda:   http://sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/71520

 

Potential changes to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee and Inclusionary Housing Programs

Council will receive a staff report regarding potential changes to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee and Inclusionary Housing Programs, and consider a resolution that revises the definition of “dwelling unit” to clarify the distinguishing characteristics of a unit subject to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee; and allows developers of qualifying projects with Affordable Rental Apartments to apply for a different method of calculating their required Affordable Housing Impact Fee. Approval of the recommendation will also Direct the City Attorney and Housing Department to return with a new ordinance imposing an inclusionary housing obligation on for-sale projects with three (3) to nineteen (19) homes.

Approval of the recommended actions is intended to clarify distinguishing characteristics of dwelling units subject to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee (AHIF), encourage the development of on-site affordable units, and apply the inclusionary housing requirements to smaller projects so as to minimize procedural discrepancies between the Inclusionary Housing and AHIF Programs. The recommended actions are intended to simplify processes, improve efficiency, and provide certainty for developers of projects, regardless of whether they are rental or for-sale.

Where:   San Jose City Council

When:  Tues Sept. 19, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3149248&GUID=E8006486-5017-449F-BD79-9A89E315E91A&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=560012&GUID=E93DA60E-B755-48AF-A6AB-D486427982B0&Options=info&Search=

 

Adopting preferred options for BART; recs include West Station option for Downtown, North Station option for Diridon, and Single Bore Tunnel method to Downtown 

Council will consider the following priorities and locally preferred alternatives for the BART Phase II project, as guidance to the City’s VTA Board members in determining the final project description, completion of environmental clearance, and initiation of final design:

  1. Support the West Station Option for the Downtown Station location
  2. Support the North Station Option for the Diridon San Jose Central Station location
  3. Support continued efforts by VTA, with the collaboration and support of BART, to determine a way to enable the Single Bore Tunnel method to be used in construction of the subway tunnel under Downtown San Jose to partially mitigate the significant construction impacts associated with Twin Bore, cut and cover construction methods
  4. Emphasize the need for VTA to continue detailed levels of coordination with the City of San Jose on station access planning, integration with surrounding urban areas, and final station design to ensure that the stations and station areas appropriately represent San Jose.
  5. Establish as a priority the effective integration of the BART project, station location, and portal entrances into the Diridon San Jose Central Station planning and area development
  6. Emphasize the importance for VTA to develop an extensive Construction Outreach and Management Program (COMP).

Where:   San Jose City Council

When:  Tues Sept. 19, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3149278&GUID=A7F8A775-2FAB-4762-8D27-0687F457031D&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=560012&GUID=E93DA60E-B755-48AF-A6AB-D486427982B0&Options=info&Search=

 

Update on Safe Communities Multi-Family Housing Pilot Program; community trust in police increased since implementation

Accept the final report of the one-year Safe Communities Multi-Family Housing Pilot Program in the Hoffman/Via Monte area. The program was designed to promote a high quality of life and safety for the residents living in the area. The pilot program’s goals were to reduce crime and calls for service through environmental design, crime prevention training, Neighborhood Watch, and alignment of neighborhood community resources.

There were some key lessons learned through the pilot:

  1. Neighborhood organizing doesn’t happen overnight. Building trust required time and attention from crime prevention staff and police officers, the team sergeant, and the Division Captain.
  2. Initial plans may need to be reworked. For example, property owners were not interested in engaging with the pilot program as hoped, so staff refocused efforts on the residents.
  3. Additional opportunities for collaboration exist (for example, with City Code Enforcement or other community agencies), however this pilot was limited in scope and resources.
  4. Funding needs to be available for survey outreach to measure crime reduction strategies vs community trust and expectations.

The final survey report found that community members’ trust in the police had increased since the pilot began in July 2016. Nearly 57 percent of the respondents stated that they had noticed the increased police presence accompanying the Safe Communities pilot program, and 99 percent said they want the Police Department to sustain or increase the heightened police presence. Nearly 92 percent of the respondents said the police were very trustworthy or somewhat trustworthy and 43 percent reported that they still feel somewhat unsafe or very unsafe in their own neighborhood at the end of the pilot.

Where:   San Jose City Council

When:  Tues Sept. 19, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3149276&GUID=357DE11A-BE76-44F0-B409-D05B5A10A4D2&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=560012&GUID=E93DA60E-B755-48AF-A6AB-D486427982B0&Options=info&Search=

 

Council Member Rocha request for analysis into City of San Jose OTW exception

Approve CM Rocha’s request to agendize for the Sept 19 Council meeting that staff be directed to analyze the administrative and budget implications of implementing the Opportunity to Work rules within the City organization and return to City Council with the results of their analysis and an implementation plan for Council consideration. Also, that the City Attorney be directed to provide an explanation of why the Opportunity to Work ordinance does not apply to the City of San José, along with an explanation whether it applies to other public agencies within San José.

Where: San Jose Rules Committee

When:  Wed. Sept 13, 2017, 2:00pm, W118-120

Link to item: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=654835

Link to agenda: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/71537

 

Study session on the City of San Jose Urban Village planning process, specifically Stevens Creek Boulevard, Winchester Boulevard and Santana Row/Valley Fair

In response to a written petition submitted to the City of Santa Clara City Council by the organization “United Communities for Sensible Development”, the City Council will be conducting a study session on the City of San Jose Urban Village planning process. The study session will provide an opportunity to discuss topics raised by the petitioners, including “Signature Projects”, “Protected Intersections” and the environmental review process conducted by the City of San Jose prior to adoption of Urban Village Plans for the Stevens Creek, Winchester, and Santana Row Valley Fair Urban Villages.

The petition and related public comments were received at the August 29, 2017 City Council meeting. Comments received verbally and in writing regarding the Urban Village plans identified
a large number of issues of concern to the community including impacts of new development in San Jose upon surrounding Santa Clara (and Cupertino) neighbors including increased traffic, taller buildings, increased demand on existing parks and other community facilities, and adequacy of infrastructure. Community members also raised objections to San Jose’s planning process.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: Tues. Sept 12, 2017, 4:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=61090

Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1986&doctype=AGENDA

 

City of Sunnyvale

Appointment of Interim City Manager

Council will be meeting with city representatives regarding appointment of interim city manager.

Where: Sunnyvale City Council

When: September 12, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: N/A

Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=527753&GUID=1FF29760-1460-4AE1-80F0-75C6C08C30C4

 

City of Mountain View

Study Session on Affordable Housing Priorities and Strategic Framework

The purpose of this Study Session is to receive input from the City Council in order to develop a strategic framework for achieving the City’s major goal to address its affordable housing needs. The City Council has discussed several affordable housing policy issues over the past year. Addressing these policy issues may involve certain trade-offs and updates to existing housing programs. Staff has developed an initial framework to address the Council’s policy goals, but staff seeks direction from the Council in order to confirm the approach. Based on Council input, future items may return to the City Council for consideration. No formal action will be taken at this meeting.

Key housing topics, discussion points, and questions have emerged during the City Council’s deliberation on these items over the years and will be discussed in the study session, including:

  • Desire for more housing for families.
  • Desire to facilitate homeownership opportunities.
  • Desire to create housing opportunities for the “missing middle.”
  • Desire for market-rate rental housing developers subject to the City’s Rental Housing Impact Fee program to build more affordable units on-site as part of a mixed-income development instead of paying the in-lieu fee.
  • Support for developing a permanent supportive housing/rapid rehousing strategy to respond to the housing needs of the homeless and of those living in vehicles.
  • When a market-rate rental housing developer subject to the City’s affordable housing program requirements builds the affordable units on-site as part of a mixed-income development, what is the equivalent number of Moderate-Income units that would need to be built instead of building Low-Income units?
  • Consideration of using the North Bayshore Precise Plan affordable housing guidelines as a model for the East Whisman Precise Plan and possibly Citywide.

Staff are proposing that the following two investment strategies be implemented based on the estimate of $78 million between Fiscal Years 2017-18 and 2021-22:

  1. Investment Strategy 1: Target the development of 350 to 400 affordable rental housing units at 60 percent AMI and below. Allocate approximately $50 million to fund between 350 and 400 affordable housing units at 60 percent AMI and below. The number of units that can be developed will depend on development conditions and costs, income targets, the population served, the size of the units, and the amount of external funding leveraged. Input from the Council will help guide the type and number of affordable housing units funded. Additionally, the development of underwriting guidelines will help maximize the number of units built.
  2. Investment Strategy 2: Target the development of 200 to 250 units of permanent supportive housing and/or rapid rehousing units. Allocate up to $28 million to fund between 200 to 250 units of permanent supportive housing and/or rapid rehousing over the next four years. Achieving this target will require key partnerships with external agencies, such as, but not limited to, the County of Santa Clara and the Santa Clara Housing Authority, with the development and service provider community, and with significant external funding, in particular Measure A. The number of units that can be developed will depend on development conditions and costs, the population served, the size of the units, and the amount of external funding for development and ongoing operating subsidies that can be leveraged. Upon achievement of the target range of units, staff will reassess the need for permanent supportive/rapid rehousing units.

Additional questions to be considered by Council at the study session include:

  1. Does the City Council support the proposed investment plan for the projected funding for the four-year period from Fiscal Year 2017-18 to Fiscal Year 2021-22?
  2. Does the City Council have any additional feedback on how to achieve a diverse affordable housing pipeline under Investment Strategy 1, taking into consideration the background information on the City’s existing housing portfolio, the trade-offs that may come with funding different types of affordable housing (e.g., larger units may mean less units and vice versa), and the funding available?
  3. In order to facilitate middle-income rental housing, does the City Council support the addition of the Moderate-Income category when units are built on-site in market-rate developments in lieu of paying the Rental Housing Impact Fee? If so, does the Council support Strategy No. 3a (establishing a range of income levels) or 3b (equivalency methodology)?
  4. Does the Council support the other strategies identified in Table 9 to enhance the City’s affordable rental housing program? Are there other tools or mechanisms that the Council recommends that staff explore?
  5. Does the Council wish to continue to prioritize the preservation of the affordable ownership unit through strict resell restrictions (but still allow the homeowner to keep all of the equity gained by paying down the mortgage) or would the Council wish to modify the BMR program to allow homeowners to benefit from housing appreciation?
  6. If the Council wishes to allow a BMR unit to be sold at a higher price and for the homeowners to benefit from appreciation, does the Council wish to preserve the affordability of the unit by using City funds to subsidize the unit?
  7. Does the Council support the other strategies identified in order to support the City Council’s goal to facilitate homeownership? Are there other tools or mechanisms that the Council recommends that staff explore?
  8. Does the Council wish to consider using the NBPP as a template for Precise Plans that will be developed (such as East Whisman and Shenandoah), for existing Precise Plans (such as El Camino Real and San Antonio), or both future and existing Precise Plans, taking into consideration the uniqueness of each Precise Plan and the appropriateness of the various NBPP elements?

Where: Mountain View City Council

When: September 12, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3150011&GUID=D79B1F96-7790-4269-AD0C-591F35BFA2D7&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=558992&GUID=37D02C00-55A3-43C7-A1DC-E63F93CA9FA0

No Comments

Leave a Comment