Policy Watch: Week of 10/2

County of Santa Clara

Developing Business License Program, including framework to enforce wage & hour laws 

Direct Administration to develop a Business License Program for businesses in unincorporated Santa Clara County.

The Program is intended to be a business registration and enforcement tool, not a business tax.

In addition to enabling the County to accurately track data on business activity and more effectively communicate with businesses, the business license program can be used as an enforcement mechanism for wage and hour laws. Counties have broad authority to regulate businesses in the unincorporated areas, including 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 always encourage compliance and to assist businesses in fulfilling their obligations, and to use the County’s enforcement powers 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.  This period is necessary to procure, install and configure, and train on the enterprise software service to support the Program, identify appropriate job classifications, hire and train staff, develop and execute an engagement plan to affected businesses (before and after the program effective date), fund and hire hearing officers for due process hearings, as well as other requirements.

To date, the Administration has reported to FGOC and CSFC with a general overview of a business licensing proposal to receive input into the design of a program. Since then, County Counsel prepared a draft ordinance which is currently under review by a County Business License Work Group.  The Work Group is scheduling a subset of the Work Group to devote more time to policy considerations.

A RFSQ for Hearing Officers has been drafted and is currently being reviewed by County Counsel.  It is planned that the RFSQ will be issued in approximately a month’s time.

Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors

When: Tues. Oct 3, 2017, 9:30am, Board Chambers

Link to item:  http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8504&MediaPosition=&ID=88317&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8504


Developing pilot program to enforce wage theft violations through Food Facility Permits

Direct Administration to develop a pilot program to enforce wage theft violations through Food Facility Permits. The proposed County pilot program 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 late 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). 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 Board of Supervisors

When: Tues. Oct 3, 2017, 9:30am, Board Chambers

Link to item:  http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8504&MediaPosition=&ID=88395&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8504


Considering having the BOS serve as the Housing Authority’s governing body instead of appointing a governing Board of Commissioners

Receive report from Administration and County Counsel on options for restructuring the governance of the Housing Authority, and direct County Counsel to return to the Board on October 17, 2017 with implementing actions to designate the Board of Supervisors as the Governing Body for the Housing Authority.

Under California law, the Board of Supervisors can instead of appointing a governing Board of Commissioners for the HACSC, serve as the HACSC’s governing body itself, thereby vesting in the Board of Supervisors all of the rights, powers, duties, privileges, and immunities that are currently vested in the HACSC’s Board of Commissioners.  Simultaneously, the Board of Supervisors would appoint an advisory Housing Commission for the HACSC that would report to the Board of Supervisors.  The advisory Housing Commission’s members must include two HACSC tenants, in conformity with federal and state requirements that current tenants must advise on the governance of public housing authorities like the HACSC.  The current HACSC Board of Commissioners, which includes two tenant members, could be appointed to serve as the new advisory Housing Commission.  Numerous counties have elected to govern their housing authorities in this manner, including the counties of Contra Costa, Los Angeles, and Riverside.

Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors

When: Tues. Oct 3, 2017, 9:30am, Board Chambers

Link to item:  http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=8504&MediaPosition=&ID=88460&CssClass=

Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=8504


City of San Jose

Revisions to draft Apartment Rent Ordinance, CPI and capital improvements provisions

The Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) provided recommendations to staff regarding the draft Apartment Rent Ordinance and Regulations on September 14, 2017. The public comment period for review of these documents opened on August 14, 2017 and closed on September 22, 2017.

After reviewing recommendations from HCDC and the public, staff prepared a summary of changes that will be made to the draft Ordinance and Regulations. In forming its recommendations, the Housing Department evaluated public comments from the owner and tenant communities in conjunction with the purpose of Policy and Purposes Declaration of the ARO as delineated in Section 17.23.020.

Staff recommends approval of updates and recommendations to the City Council on:

  • Proposed substantial revisions to the draft Apartment Rent Ordinance (ARO) and

Regulations pertaining to:

  • Rent: Modifications to the annual allowable increase, including increase of CPI-U

option to 8%; allowing rent increases to exceed annual allowable increases for voucher-holders; Limit rent increases under the CPI-U Maximum Allowable Rent to 8% annually.

  • Specified Capital Improvements: Allow 100% pass through for building permit and require a licensed contractor; provide modified amortization periods; construction must be completed within 12 months prior to submitting petition and limiting pass throughs when CPI-U exceeds 5%.
  • Allow City Council to authorize ratio utility billing (RUBS) at initial tenancy by resolution.
  • Allow joint petition for additional occupants for both the 5% and CPI-U options.
  • Appeals under Chapter 6 (violations of the ARO) will be heard by a Hearing

Officer; Under Chapter 7 (Service Reductions) reinstate formal mediation with a

hearing officer, but retain voluntary participation.

  • Tenant Buyout: Addition of a section allowing and regulating Tenant Buyouts.
  • Recommendation to drop one-year written lease requirement.

ARO draft will be heard by City Council in November.

Where: San Jose Housing & Community Development Commission

When:   October 5th, 2017 5:45 pm Council Chambers

Link to item: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72221

Link to agenda: https://scvwd.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=504462&GUID=CA3ED5DB-5185-45F7-BA5E-0A7F54F8EDE6&Options=info&Search=


Proposing changes to Just Cause ordinance, including excluding affordable units

On May 9, 2017, the City Council adopted the Tenant Protection Ordinance (TPO), establishing limits on the reasons landlords may use to terminate or evict tenants (“just cause”). City Council requested that staff return with an amendment to the TPO to address criminal activity as a just cause for eviction and prohibit landlords from threatening notification of immigration authorities of their tenants’ immigration status. The Housing Department will return with an additional amendment to the Tenant Protection Ordinance addressing criminal activity and retaliation by notification of immigration authorities of their tenants’ immigration status in Spring 2018.

Currently, the Housing Department is recommending several changes to the TPO in conjunction with City Council consideration of the final ARO. These changes pertain to the following two areas:

1) Habitual or Material Violation of the Lease – Exception for certain family members as additional occupants

2) Apartments with Affordability Restrictions – Exemption from TPO

The Amendments are presented below (red is addition, cross-through is deleted text):

  1. An obligation to limit occupancy when the additional Tenant(s) who join the Tenant Household are any of the following: a dependent child or foster child, the spouse or domestic partner (which terms may be further defined in the regulations adopted by the City Manager), parent, brother, or sister of a Tenant; so long as the total number of adult Tenants in the unit does not exceed the greater of either the maximum number of individuals authorized in the rental agreement or two persons per bedroom plus one additional person, or in the case of a studio unit, two persons the number permitted by the City under subsection B of Section 17.20.270. The Landlord has the right to approve or disapprove a prospective additional Tenant who is not a dependent child or foster child, spouse or domestic partner, or parent, brother, or sister of a Tenant, provided that the approval is not unreasonably withheld.
  2. “Rental Unit” means a structure or the part of a structure that is used as a home, residence, or sleeping place by one person who maintains a household or by two or more persons who maintain a common household, and which household pays Rent for the use and occupancy for periods in excess of seven days whether or not the residential use is a conforming use permitted under the San José Municipal Code. For purposes of this Part, Rental Unit includes Guest Rooms in any Guesthouse and does not include Rental Units that owned or operated by any government agency, or any individual Rental Unit for which the Rent is limited to no more than affordable rent, as such term is defined in California Health & Safety Code Section 50053, for lower income households pursuant to legally binding restrictions recorded for the benefit of a government agency.

Staff recommends to approve updates and amendments to ARO.

Where: Housing & Community Development Commission

When:   October 5th, 2017 5:45 pm Council Chambers

Link to item: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72221

Link to agenda: https://scvwd.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=504462&GUID=CA3ED5DB-5185-45F7-BA5E-0A7F54F8EDE6&Options=info&Search=

Proposed Staffing Plan and Fee Analysis for Apartment Rent Ordinance

The HCDC deferred their review of the staffing plan and fee analysis from the September 14, 2017 meeting. The following memorandum provides information regarding the proposed staffing plan and analysis necessary to support the implementation of the draft Apartment Rent Ordinance (ARO).

Plan includes:

  • Existing Staff – The current structure includes 6.0 FTE within the Housing Department and a total of 0.7 FTE in support Departments.
  • Phase I Additions (July 1, 2017) – The City Council approved the addition of 2.0 FTE on April 18, 2017, to implement the Tenant Protection Ordinance and the Ellis Act Ordinance. These positions were included in the FY 2017-2018 program budget.
  • Phase II Additions (January 1, 2018) – 5.5 FTE will be needed in January 2018 to provide the support necessary to implement the Rent Registry and new petition processes included in the updated ARO.
  • Phase III Additions (July 1, 2018) – 7.5 FTE will be added to the 2018-2019 budget to provide the staffing levels necessary to provide support to petitioners and support the compliance efforts of the updated ARO.
  • Duplex Staff Additions – An additional 3.0 FTE will be needed to support the addition of approximately 11,000 new apartments if duplexes are included under the ARO. These positions are not proposed to be added. The Department is not recommending the addition of duplexes to the ARO at this time.

Recommendations are to accept the staff report and provide recommendations to the City Council on the Apartment Rent Ordinance staffing and associated Program Administration Fees.

Where: San Jose Housing & Community Development Commission

When:   October 5th, 2017 5:45 pm Council Chambers

Link to item: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72221

Link to agenda: https://scvwd.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=504462&GUID=CA3ED5DB-5185-45F7-BA5E-0A7F54F8EDE6&Options=info&Search=


CWA/PLA Taskforce recommendations for public works projects DEFERRED

This item has been deferred to October 24th. Council consider accepting the Community Workforce Agreement/Project Labor Agreement (CWA/PLA) Task Force Report and provide further direction to staff as to whether to develop and implement a CWA for City-funded CIP public works construction contracts. Such a CWA would be brought back to Council for formal approval.

The Task Force recommendations where there is agreement and consensus include:

  • PLA vs CWA
    • No single-project PLA – Rather wrap around multi-project labor agreement known as a CWA.
  • Project Type
    • Projects subject to a CWA only apply to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) public works construction projects.
    • CWA does not apply to:
      • Federally-funded CIP public works construction contracts;
      • City-funded affordable housing loan agreements; or
      • Private construction projects.
    • Duration
      • Duration would be five (5) years with an annual reporting requirement in the form of an Information Memo including metrics and goals, an 18-month formal check-in with the City Council, and an option to extend the CWA.
    • Local Hire
      • No local hire requirement – defer issue to separate policy work (Current Council Priority #2 via CED Committee) subsequent to completion of the Labor Market Study.
    • Targeted Hire
      • Include a good faith tiered targeted hire program for apprentices from underrepresented groups with a 25% good faith goal for apprentices from underrepresented groups – similar to Santa Clara County PLA and VTA CWA policy.
    • Liquidated Damages
      • Impose liquidated damages for any CWA work stoppages.

The Task Force accepted four areas where there was no agreement or consensus, which include:

  • Threshold
    • Minimum dollar threshold for projects subject to a community workforce agreement.
  • Exceptions/Exemptions
    • Inclusion of possible exceptions/exemptions.
  • CWA Exemption for Small Businesses
    • Inclusion of exemption for small businesses with subcontract value of <$25 Ok.
  • Core Workforce
    • CWAs/PLAs usually include a core workforce provision.
    • Core workforce provisions typically specify that a contractor can only use a certain percentage of his/her own workforce on a project and must pull the rest of the workforce from the union hall.

Where: San Jose City Council

When:  October 3, 2017 1:30PM City Hall

Link to item: Memo: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=5444247&GUID=8F58917E-24B6-441A-820C-2DEBB040808B

Letters from the public: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=5442792&GUID=C5B62DEF-5BF2-4E74-AAA0-548F0C9D312D

Letter from ABC NorCal: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=5445376&GUID=B94896A3-F45E-4C09-8F9C-E476C75FA827  Link to agendahttps://sanjose.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=560013&GUID=D2EF9AB8-28D1-4FB4-AEEA-57395D3660C1&Options=info&Search=


Council Members nominating multiple Priority Setting items

Approval of nomination for priority setting on October 17, 2017 for the following items:

Urban Street Park Pilot (Peralez)

Creation of an urban street park pilot for no more than 12 months at:

  1. San Pedro Street between West Santa Clara Street and West St. John Street; and
  2. Post Street between South First Street and Lightson Alley.

The pilot should include community outreach prior to implementation in partnership with the affected businesses, San José Downtown Association, City Staff and the Council District 3 office.


Suicide Prevention Policy (Peralez)

Development of a Suicide Prevention Policy, including but not limited to:

  1. Assessment of city-owned properties with recommendations for preventative measures.
  2. Explore how the City could support the County’s efforts to promote suicide prevention education and align its policies.
  3. Review all the City’s public safety protocols in the event of a suicide attempt and make any necessary updates including internal procedures for suicide prevention awareness for city managers and supervisors.


Expansion on the Bring Your Own Bag Ordinance (Jones)

Direct staff to explore an expansion on the Bring Your Own Bag Ordinance, banning door-to-door marketers from using plastic bags to place items in front of residential homes or business storefronts.


Council Priority Setting (Khamis)

  1. Data Storage & Use Policy: The development, with robust public input, of City policies on the storage and use of data collected from the general public through existing data collection devices and those anticipated to come online via future City initiatives.
  2. Private Property Graffiti Abatement Ordinance: Include a proposed ordinance change on the upcoming Council priority setting session that will allow staff to warn private property owners to abate graffiti on their property within 72 hours, or the City will abate the graffiti and bill the property owner.
  3. Unified Marketing Function for City Departments: Evaluate the feasibility of unifying marketing efforts across City departments by forming an in-house team of marketing professionals or by contracting with a professional marketing organization (such as Team San José) in order to more effectively promote our revenue-generating assets, advance community pride and unity, and better communicate City services to our residents.


Develop Innovative Strategies to Hire Crossing Guards (Carrasco)

Direct the City Manager’s Office to develop new and innovative strategies to hire crossing guards.


Include the Women’s Bill of Rights. (Carrasco)

Direct the City Manager’s Office to explore a Women’s Bill of Rights.


Reinstate the Family Domestic Violence Advisory Commission. (Carrasco)

Direct the City Manager’s Office to explore the reinstatement of the Family Domestic Violence Advisory Board.


Where:  San Jose Rules Committee

When: Wed. Oct 4, 2017, 2:00pm, W118-120

Link to items:  see above

Link to agenda: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72250


Mayor’s plan for responding to housing crisis

Mayor Liccardo is directing the City Manager to:

  1. Return to Council with a workload assessment identifying which of the items below can be implemented immediately, which require additional resources and prioritization at the October 17th priority setting session and which would consume undue staff time, public cost, or risk that would outweigh the likely benefit.
  2. Prepare an implementation workplan for those items within staff resources to move forward now (“green light”);
  3. Identify and recruit partners, in collaboration with the Mayor’s Office of Strategic Partnerships, including San Jose State University’s Planning Department, SPUR, Housing Trust Silicon Valley, the San Jose Downtown Association, and various foundations interested in affordable housing development (e.g., Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Ford Foundation and others) to provide talent, professional skills and financial resources to help in these efforts.

Accelerating Housing Construction at All Income Levels:

  1. Citywide: Establish a goal of 25,000 homes~and at least 10,000 affordable homes
  2. Downtown and San Jose State University
  3. North San Jose
  4. Urban Villages
  5. Finish Work Already Underway
  6. Aligning Fees to Encourage Housing Construction
  7. Regional Approach – Encouraging Neighboring Cities to Step Up
  8. Teacher Housing

Better Identifying Existing Housing Opportunity Sites:

  1. Better Identifying Housing Sites
  2. Reimagining Underutilized Business Corridors
  3. Align Zoning with General Plan Land Use Designations: “One Color on the Map”
  4. Complete Work from General Plan Update

Responding to the Affordable Crisis:

  1. Leveraging Private Dollars to Finance Affordability for the “Missing Middle”
  2. Secondary Units
  3. Preservation and Displacement
  4. Empty Home/ Empty Parcel Fee Generating Funds for Affordable Housing
  5. Housing Conversions without Consent of City Staff or Council
  6. CalTrans Sites for Homeless
  7. State Advocacy for Tax Increment Financing for Affordable Housing

Where:  San Jose Rules Committee

When: Wed. Oct 4, 2017, 2:00pm, W118-120

Link to item: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=667033

Link to agenda:   http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72250


City of Milpitas

Discussion of inclusionary housing policy and housing impact fees, per Councilmember Barbadillo’s request

Councilmember Barbadillo has requested to discuss the topic of affordable housing  – and specifically inclusionary housing options and housing impact fees – with fellow Councilmembers.

Where: Milpitas City Council

When: October 3, 2017, 7:00pm

Link to agenda: http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/council/2017/100317/Agenda.pdf


Ratifying temporary employment of Steve Pangelinan as Interim City Manager and Interim Chief of Police – including hourly rates for each position

Staff are recommending that Council ratify adoption of a resolution appointing Steve Pangelinan as Interim City Manager and approving the agreement for temporary employment.

The City Manager resigned effective September 15, 2017. Prior to his retirement on December 30, 2016, Steve Pangelinan served as the City’s Chief of Police. As a retiree, he has served as Acting City Manager and currently serves as Interim Chief of Police. Mr. Pangelinan resigned from his position as Acting City Manager concurrently with the resignation of the City Manager. After recruitment for a permanent appointment to the City Manager position was opened, the Council formally appointed Mr. Pangelinan as Interim City Manager on September 21, 2017 until a permanent appointment is made.

His hours for both the Interim Chief of Police position and the Interim City Manager position will not exceed 960 hours combined per fiscal year. The foregoing limitation will also include the hours he performed as Acting City Manager from July 1, 2017 through the date of his resignation on September 15, 2017.

In addition to the appointment of Mr. Pangelinan as Interim City Manager, the Council also approved an Agreement for Temporary Employment which was restated to include the duties of the Interim City Manager. Although the Council adopted a resolution appointing Mr. Pangelinan as Interim City Manager and approved the Agreement at a special meeting on September 21, 2017, the City Attorney’s office is recommending that the Council ratify the appointment and the adoption of the Agreement at a regular meeting.

Mr. Pangelinan will be paid an hourly rate of $115.38 per hour for his services as Interim Chief of Police. For the time Mr. Pangelinan is serving as the Interim City Manager, retroactive to September 21, 2017, he will be paid an hourly rate of $123.83, consistent with the salary for the City Manager position as noted in the City’s publicly available schedule. This change is required to comply with Section 21221(h) of the Government Code. Mr. Pangelinan will not be entitled to any benefits, vacation or holidays.

Where: Milpitas City Council

When: October 3, 2017, 7:00pm

Link to agenda: http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/council/2017/100317/Agenda.pdf


City of Sunnyvale

Study session on potential new revenue strategies

Study session for the evaluation of the work plan for new revenue strategies to fund new and increasing service demands and/or unfunded capital investments. (No memo provided.)

Where:   Sunnyvale City Council

When:  Tues. Oct 3, 2017, 6:00pm, Council Chambers

Link to item:   https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3165203&GUID=2FCDE676-6606-4094-B244-4A58764628E6

Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=527760&GUID=E18BF3CC-DD6F-4FC3-9B8D-6341D0FC8B27&Options=&Search=


City of Santa Clara

Charter Review Committee to prioritize potential charter amendments 

The Charter Review Committee will meet to consider the following:

  1. Review and Approval of Revised Draft Charter Amendment Related to Election of City Council Members
  2. Review & Prioritization of the Following Potential Charter Amendments as received from Community and Committee Members:
  3. Voting method of elected Mayor, City Clerk, Police Chief
  4. Convert Mayor from elected to appointed rotating position
  5. Convert City Clerk from elected to appointed position
  6. Convert Police Chief from elected to appointed position
  7. Provide City Officers with duty to report city charter violations, establish complaint process for city staff who report suspected charter violations, provide whistleblower protection for those who report
  8. Require Council Meetings to occur every 30 days and at least 20 meetings per year, separated by 14 days
  9. Revise current value of property ($500.00) that can be sold by City of Santa Clara according to approved process
  10. Revise the required five-sevenths vote for an emergency ordinance to four-sevenths vote
  11. Require full text of any proposed ordinance to be posted on website at least three days before adoption
  12. Add “commissions” to requirement of City Attorney to attend meetings of and give his/her advice or opinion in writing when requested to do so by City Council, boards or officers
  13. Clarify City Planning Commissioners’ classification
  14. Require city budget to be posted on city website
  15. Revise current value of public works contracts ($1,000) that requires bidding
  16. Require final audit and report to be posted on city’s website
  17. Require public documents to be posted on city’s website

Where:  Santa Clara City Charter Review Cmte

When:  Oct. 2, 2017, 7 pm

Link to agenda packet: http://santaclaraca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=53710


City of Gilroy

Creating deferred fee payment option as economic development incentive for hotel, commercial or industrial

Agenda item introduces an Ordinance Amending Chapter 21, Article 7 Section 21.127 of the Gilroy Code Pertaining to the Payment of Impact Fees, and Approval of an Update to the Economic Incentive Policy (EIP).

As previously considered on July 10, the proposal included a proposed economic incentive payment plan policy for large scale economic development projects. After Council discussion, incentives for mixed-use developments downtown was removed from staff’s recommended changes. A separate downtown incentive policy, which would include incentives for mixed-use developments, is being developed for Council consideration.

The current proposal before Council is an incentive for large commercial/industrial or tourism developments. It would allow developers, instead of paying development impact fees up from, to defer payments and space them our over three increments. The first 1/3 payment would be due at Certificate of Occupancy (CofO) issuance. A second 1/3 payment would be due no later than one year after CofO issuance, and the final 1/3 payment would be due no later than two years after CofO issuance.

Interest calculations would be based on the California LAIF (Local Agency Investment Fund) rates, and an additional 0.5% will be applied at the time of loan initiation to cover City related costs. Because there is no waiver or reduction of required development fees, it does not constitute a use of public funds.

Qualifying projects have to create 100 permanent jobs or 75+ new hotel rooms all within city limits.

Staff recommends City Council to 1) approve amendments to Chapter 21, Article 7 Section 21.127 of the Gilroy Code, and 2) approve update to EIP with the addition of the IFPPO. If approved, EIP would be effective immediately and ordinance would be scheduled for adoption at next regular meeting and be effective 30 days thereafter.

Where: Gilroy City Council


Link to full packet: http://www.cityofgilroy.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_10022017-1175?packet=true

Link to agenda: http://www.cityofgilroy.org/AgendaCenter/Search/?term=&CIDs=all&startDate=10/02/2017&endDate=&dateRange=&dateSelector=



Review of Tunneling Options for BART Phase II Extension

VTA Board to continue to review and discuss the single- and twin-bore tunneling options for the BART extension to Silicon Valley.

Where:  VTA Board of Directors Special Meeting

When:  October 5, 2017 4:30PM 70 West Hedding St

Link to agenda:   http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/bod_100517_spl_packet.pdf


Adopt Measure B Guidelines

With the passage of the 2016 Measure B sales tax, VTA developed guidelines for each of nine program areas: Local Streets and Roads; BART Phase II; Bicycle and Pedestrian; Caltrain Grade Separation; Caltrain Corridor Capacity Improvements; Highway Interchanges; County Expressways; SR 85 Corridor; and Transit Operations.

Based on initial direction from the Board and committees, VTA developed draft guidelines for each program area. After receiving feedback and input from a series of board committee meetings in 2017, staff is proposing the adoption of final 2016 Measure B program guidelines. Staff notes that the guidelines may be revisited by the Board over the 30-year life of the sales tax.

The draft guidelines for each of the areas are included in the packet, along with the list of candidate projects. Highlights include:

The County Expressway program area funding is estimated at $750 Million. VTA and County of Santa Clara will execute a Master Agreement for the administration of the 2016 Measure B County Expressways Program. VTA is also recommending that all projects apply Complete Stree0ts best practices in order to improve transit, bicycle and pedestrian elements throughout the system.

The Highway Interchanges program area funding is estimated at $750 Million. VTA is proposing $87 million for FY 2018-19. Proposed criteria for prioritizing projects include:

– Project Readiness

– Level of Local Contribution

– Geographic Consideration

Additionally, noise abatement projects identified in the 2011 VTA Soundwall Study will receive higher consideration for funding.

The Transit Operations program area funding is estimated at $500 Million. The program is divided into the following categories:

– Transit Service

o Enhance frequent core bus network.

o Support new/innovative mobility models and programs to address first/last mile connections and services to transit dependent and paratransit customers.

  • Expand mobility services and affordable fare programs for seniors, disabled, students and low income riders.
  • Improve amenities at bus stop to increase safety, security and access as well as on-going maintenance.

The proposed allocation of the $500M is 73% to enhanced core transit service, 8% Innovative Mobility Models, and new/innovative transit service models), 15% to fare programs and 4% to bus stop amenities.

The FY18 & FY19 Budget Allocation for this program category is $33.3 million

– The Enhanced Frequent Core Bus Network will directly fund VTA’s core bus network of services increasing core bus route service frequencies, and expanding or adding evening, late night and weekend service.

– The Fare Programs will fund the Transit Assistance Program (TAP) and reduced fares for youth.

– The Innovative Transit Models Program will support goals to address first/last mile connections. Strategies may include competitive grant programs to help fund services operated by local jurisdictions, utilize excess paratransit capacity, and other programs that encourage investments in local service.

– The Bus Stop Amenities Program will directly fund improvements at VTA’s bus stops.

Where:  VTA Board of Directors

When:  October 5, 2017 5:30 70 West Hedding St

Link to agendahttp://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/bod_100517_packet.pdf


Approve San Jose BART station locations

The board will consider locations for the Downtown San Jose and Diridon stations.

  • The Downtown Station has an East and West Option. The East Option would be essentially across the street from City Hall and close to the center of the SJSU campus. The West Option is close to the First Street and Santa Clara intersection which allows for easier transfer to light rail and the center of the Central Business District. Staff has recommended the West Option.
  • The Diridon Station has a North and South option. The North option would be nearly under Santa Clara Street across from the SAP Center. The option requires less disruption to train and parking operations but will cost $50 million more. In the staff report, it is made clear that this option allows for more economic development options. The South Option would go under the station parking lots on either side of Montgomery Street. That construction will be cheaper as it doesn’t require more tunneling to avoid Caltrain tracks.

Where:  VTA Board of Directors

When:  October 5, 2017 5:30 70 West Hedding St

Link to agenda:   http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/bod_100517_packet.pdf


Proposal to cut 141 FTEs to address $27M shortfall

The district is experiencing a $27 million reserve shortfall and is planning to reduce staff by 140.75 FTEs to resolve this shortfall. The district will present to the board and stakeholders a list of recommended force reduction positions in the November 2017 board study session.

Where:    ESUHSD Board

When:  9/28, 5:30pm at ESUHSD

Link to item:   http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ARGT7D75F94B.

Link to agenda:   http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ARGT3D75630D.


Results of poll for a potential June 2018 parcel tax

The poll found a 63.1% support for a parcel tax.  If the Board gives the green light to pursue a possible parcel tax measure, next steps would include drafting the measure, creating the project list, and outreach and consensus-building, leading up to a Board vote no later than March 9th to put a measure eon the June ballot.

Where:    ESUHSD Board

When:  09/28, 5:30pm at ESUHSD Board

Link to item:   http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ARGT9G764715.

Link to agenda:   http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ARGT3D75630D.


West Valley Mission Community College District

Reviewing list of projects for a potential June 2018 general obligation bond

Voters approved a general obligation bond in 2004 and 2012 to help the district complete a list of projects that would help the district fund major facilities project. However, to complete a district transformation, the district is predicting it will need another general obligation bond in June 2018. The board will review a list of projects and discuss a general obligation bond at this meeting.

Where:    WVMCCD Board

When:  10/03, 7:00pm at WVMCCD board room

Link to agenda packet:   https://www.wvm.edu/trustees/Pages/default.aspx#Tab1.


Santa Clara Valley Water District

Update & direction on Expedited Purified Water Program & delivery method (design/build or P3

At its March 27, 2017 special Board Meeting, the Board received information on experiences with various project delivery methods from representatives of the Orange County Water District and the cities of Rialto, San Jose, and Stockton. The Board directed staff to arrange a presentation from the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) regarding its project delivery experiences.

The Board also requested staff to return with more information on 1) the District’s capacity for publicly funding its capital program and the associated bond rating risks; 2) a meaningful comparison of costs between DB and P3 delivery methods; and 3) how District staffing levels would vary for a DB versus a P3 delivery method for the Program.

A presentation by SDCWA staff and staff’s response to the Board’s requests are provided by agenda item.

Staff recommends to:

  • Receive information from San Diego County Water Authority on their experiences with various project delivery methods;
  • Receive staff’s response to questions posed by the Board at its March 27, 2017 Board Work Study Session regarding various impacts of choosing Design/Build (DB) or a Public-Private Partnership (P3);
  • Receive information on the Program Status; and
  • Provide direction to staff on next steps for the Expedited Purified Water Program procurement process.

Where: Santa Clara Valley Water District Board of Directors

When:   October 10th, 2017 1:00 pm District Headquarters Board Room

Link to item: https://scvwd.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3177647&GUID=9AA4558E-E796-4F43-B744-FC943CB709EB&Options=&Search=&FullText=1

Link to agenda: https://scvwd.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=504462&GUID=CA3ED5DB-5185-45F7-BA5E-0A7F54F8EDE6&Options=info&Search=


No Comments

Leave a Comment