Updates on ongoing labor negotiations between County and nursing staff of newly acquired St. Louise & O’Connor Hospitals
At the February 12, 2019 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Ellenberg requested that Administration provide a report at the February 26, 2019 Board of Supervisors’ meeting regarding the schedule of ongoing discussions with the Registered Nurses Professional Association (RNPA) in relation to the acquisition of O’Connor Hospital and St. Louise Regional Hospital by the County. This report provides the requested information.
The County and RNPA have been meeting on a weekly basis to review and resolve concerns resulting from the acquisition of O’Connor and Saint Louise Regional Hospitals. The parties are also discussing sections of the current Memorandum of Agreement between the County and RNPA with the intention of addressing them in the successor agreement.
Topics of discussion related to non-economic terms and conditions of employment include shift duration, seniority for vacation selection, and vacation requests. Meetings between the County and RNPA are scheduled on a weekly basis. The most recent meeting as of the writing of this report was held on Wednesday, February 13, 2019. Subsequent meetings are scheduled to occur weekly thereafter. RNPA and the County have agreed on this schedule of weekly meetings.
Any further discussion with the Board of Supervisors on this topic will occur in Closed Session under the authority of labor negotiations.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: February 26, 2019, 9:30AM
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=SplitView&MeetingID=11016&MediaPosition=&ID=95381&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=11016
Report on Congregate Meal program finds budget increase needed for future nonprofit living wage
The Board will receive a report on the capacity of the Congregate Meal program and current budget, including per meal reimbursement rates compared to actual costs and national averages. The analysis finds that in FY2018-19, additional ongoing funds in the amount of $899,719 are needed for the Senior Nutrition Program budget. Overall, the report finds that per‐meal reimbursement rates are too low and SNP does not provide enough meals to cover demand. Staff also conclude that beginning in FY24, implementation of the County’s living wage ordinance on nonprofits will further stress providers and current service levels may not be sustainable.
There are 16 contracts with nonprofits for congregate meal services with lifecycles that can extended through June 30, 2023. These contracts total $3,339,483. While some of these nonprofits currently pay their staff the County’s living wage, these contracts do not currently require meeting this wage threshold and many nonprofits cannot afford to do so. Because of this, if the County has a nonprofit living wage ordinance in place when the congregate meals contracts go out to bid, SNP may need additional funding to increase the per meal reimbursement to a level that permits paying living wage at that time.
The County of Santa Clara – Senior Nutrition Program (SNP) provides nutrition services to all persons aged 60 or older. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger and food insecurity, increase socialization, and promote the health and well-being of older adults by improving access to nutritious meals and other health services. In FY 2018-2019, SNP offers 40 congregate meal sites operated through contracts with 21 providers. Thirty-nine meal sites are funded through SNP’s budget, which consists of both OAA funds and County General Funds. Of these meal sites, 16 are offered through contracts with four cities and 23 are offered through contracts with 16 nonprofit organizations.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tuesday, February 26, 2019, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=11016&MediaPosition=&ID=95011&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=11016
City of San Jose
Council Priority Setting
Councilwill approve and rank items on the Council Priority List.
Council will remove the following priorities from the existing list and add to the nominations list: Spurring High Density Development Along Transit Corridors (#23), Riparian Corridors and Bird Safe Design (#24), and San Jose is Open for Business/Legal Non-Conforming Uses (#26).
Council will remove 4 priorities from the list as complete: Update the City’s Rental Rights and Referrals Program (previously priority #1); Housing Rehabilitation Program (previously #4); Personal Care Business Compliance Initiative (#10); Downtown Active Storefronts Initiative (#25); Medical Marijuana (#27).
Where: San Jose City Council
When: March 5, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3865380&GUID=FAC8B6D6-B599-47C3-9E17-F28983DA140A
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=661115&GUID=BDC1A86E-D186-4CDD-B299-4EFDA4585B3D&Options=info&Search=
4 NEW MEMOS – Four memos from aviation consultants Landrum & Brown provide the work products on their study on airspace and development capacity. These memo provide extensive detailed background information. For example, the “Case Studies” memo gives examples of other U.S. cities like Miami that have address airspace and development capacity challenges; the “Existing Conditions” provides a summary of airport runway configurations, historical weather trends and airline operations/fleet mix at San José International Airport (SJC) as well as assessing its competitiveness compared to regional airports.
Original item: Staff will present a completed Downtown Airspace and Development Capacity Study. Staff recommends that the Council select Scenario 4, which means the City would use the Federal Aviation Administration’s obstruction evaluations to determine building height limits in Downtown Core and Diridon Station Area on a project-by-project basis. To facilitate this new process, they recommend modifying elements of the development review process, e.g. having a civil engineer prepare technical data on the FAA submittal forms identifying the location and elevation of the highest points of the building. They recommend additional planning-related items, such as developing a construction crane policy for the Downtown and Diridon Station areas as well as amending the General Plan to accommodate these changes.
Finally, staff recommends the City explore establishing a “Community Air Service Support Fund” to mitigate the financial impacts to airlines of these new changes.
The Airport Director has also issued a supplemental memo responding to the Airport Commission’s criticism of the proposed height increases.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: February 26, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3859245&GUID=62B21903-3F67-4DDF-A072-C8C46B9DF1CB
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
Memo from CM Arenas calls for a coordinated city-wide response to crisis affecting families with children, including lack of access to childcare, affordable housing for families with children, and related issues. Memo states in part:
“This memo outlines my suggestions for first steps that the City should pursue. It also suggests tying these efforts together as part of a city “Age and Family Friendly Initiative.” While there are many approaches that have merit – what is vital is an approach that correctly identifies the problem. San Jose families are struggling to make it. We will lose something very fundamental if we don’t take sufficient action to address the issue head on. I am recommending we modify the name of the “Age Friendly City Initiative” to the “Age and Family Friendly City Initiative. Additionally, I recommend that we incorporate into the initiative existing efforts to better reflect our city’s commitment to addressing this crisis. These would include current relevant items on the Neighborhood Services and Education Committee work plan such as: Quality Standards for Early Education Programming, City-Wide Expanded Learning Programs, and Demand for Affordable Housing for Families with Children. Also included, would be any relevant Council adopted Prioritization items.
This memo focuses on process improvements to coordinate and streamline existing efforts —similar to the BeautifySJ initiative. It includes referrals to existing processes, such as legislative referrals to the Quarterly Update Process and technical fixes to include priority setting items that successfully pass through that process.”
Where: San Jose Rules Cmte
When: December 4, 2018, 6 PM
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3868564&GUID=241CC3B8-ED3F-473A-9E24-E68A60B3B1D4
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=661137&GUID=D35D10D6-6B9B-4337-8999-57762D49316D
DEFERRED TO 3/12 – Report & direction on $1.5B infrastructure backlog & Measure T funding priorities
DEFERRED TO 3/12- This status report provides updates on the City’s Deferred Maintenance and Infrastructure Backlog and near-term strategies to minimize increases to the backlog. The backlog for 2019 totals roughly $1.5B in unfunded costs with an additional $86.9M needed to maintain the City’s infrastructure. Transportation infrastructure continues to have the largest unfunded needs.
The passage of Measure T, the Disaster Preparedness, Public Safety, and Infrastructure Bond Measure, ensures that $300M of funding will be allocated to repair an estimated 388 miles of local streets in the worst condition starting in 2020. This investment will reduce the street backlog to approximately $600M (from $1.1B) by 2020. Other funding from Measure T is subject to Council approval. Priorities for Measure T funding are: $20M to repair and replace several bridges; $20M to convert outdoor lights to LED, and $35M to construct Storm System Conveyance and Flood Prevention Projects.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: February 26, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3859207&GUID=2EED18EB-279D-4E7F-8752-CEB57C787336
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
City of Mountain View
Denying Bonus FAR requests from SyWest and Google for the North Bayshore Precise Plan; proposing mediation process
Staff recommends that council deny requalification requests from SyWest and Google for the North Bayshore Precise Plan Bonus Floor Area Ratio, and instead urge the parties to participate in a mediation process with the goal of achieving a mutually agreeable outcome for the redevelopment of the Gateway site that meets the current Precise Plan and Master Plan requirements.
In 2014, the City Council adopted the first North Bayshore Precise Plan. The Precise Plan included a significant amount of new office square footage to transform the area from a predominantly suburban employment area to a more urban, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented environment. In 2015, the City established a Bonus Floor Area Ratio (FAR) program to allocate approximately 2.2 million square feet of office floor area to property owners in the Precise Plan area. The office Bonus FAR program was created to help achieve the broad land use and development goals of the General Plan and Precise Plan for North Bayshore.
One of the applications was for the approximate 30-acre Gateway site and was jointly submitted by SyWest and LinkedIn because each party owned a different portion of the site. In May 2015, council allocated Bonus FAR to five of the applicants, one being the SyWest-LinkedIn application for the Gateway site, which received approximately 1.45 million square feet of office floor area. However,, LinkedIn and Google swapped various landholdings in 2016. As a result, Google ended up owning LinkedIn’s portion of the Gateway site. Second, the Precise Plan was amended to allow up to 9,850 residential units with a 20 percent affordability goal in three “complete neighborhoods.”
After the LinkedIn-Google land swap, SyWest and Google attempted to work together to develop a Gateway Master Plan. Those attempts failed and the two parties submitted separate requalification requests in November 2018. SyWest’s requalification request includes their property at the Gateway site only, whereas Google’s requalification request includes a significantly larger area, with a vision for the Gateway site and other significant Google-owned properties in North Bayshore outside of the Gateway site.
Staff recommend denying the requalifications because both are substantially different from the 2015 Bonus FAR allocation; neither is an integrated Master Plan for the entire Gateway area; and the addition of newly allowed residential uses to the Precise Plan has changed the 2015 Bonus FAR evaluation criteria, which now incorporates residential uses as a key criterion for the Gateway site.
Where: Mountain View City Council
When: Tuesday, February 26, 2019, 5pm
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3868690&GUID=CC7774DC-2EE2-4B86-BDFF-5408A8085DC3&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=655801&GUID=73BE078E-8DB8-4863-80C0-49198746C371&Options=info&Search=
Setting March 2020 election for proposal to change to by-district elections
Staff recommend that council direct staff to return before March 29, 2019 with a resolution amendment that sets March 2020 as the date for an election proposing a change to a district-based form of electing city council.
The recommended action comes on the heels of letters from potential plaintiffs arguing that the City’s current at-large with numbered seats electoral system violates the California Voting Rights Act because it “dilutes the voting power of Asian American voters.” In addition to Samir Kalra, three additional potential plaintiffs who are Sunnyvale residents, Galen Kim Davis, Kathy Higuchi, and Bowman Ching, have joined the original CVRA challenge.
On November 20, 2018, Council adopted a resolution of intent to change to district-based elections, which provides a 90-day “safe harbor” period during which the City cannot be sued. In adopting that resolution, the Council restated its prior direction to move forward with a change to district-based elections and identified possible election dates of March 2020 or November 2020 for amending the City Charter to allow for by-district elections. The safe harbor period was due to expire on February 18, 2019, before the initial community outreach efforts were scheduled to be complete.
The potential plaintiffs recently agreed to extend the safe harbor period through March 29, 2019. After that date they could file a CVRA lawsuit against the City. While representatives of the potential plaintiffs have been actively cooperating with the City on the community outreach efforts, they have also consistently made clear that they are not willing to compromise on their goal of implementation of by-district elections in November 2020. Staff believes that there is a very high likelihood that the potential plaintiffs will file a CVRA lawsuit sometime after March 29, 2019, if the Council does not take follow up action to choose March 2020 as the date for an election proposing a Charter amendment to change to by-district elections, or if the Council chooses November 2020 as the date for the charter measure.
Where: Sunnyvale City Council
When: Tuesday, February 26, 2019, 6pm
Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=573886&GUID=C78C58BD-AA7B-457A-B65C-2646D25AE243&Options=info&Search=
Cupertino Union School District
Approve filling Board vacancy through appointment process rather than special election
On December 6, 2018, the Board Members discussed with the incoming Board Members how to proceed with filling the vacant Board seat, which was made necessary due to the recent election of Trustee Liang-Fang Chao to the Cupertino City Council. The consensus of the group was that they would prefer to engage in an appointment process rather than call for a special election, primarily because of the exorbitant costs associated with calling a special election (about $400,000 to $600,000). This cost would need to be paid by the District.
Staff recommends that the Board take action to approve filling this vacant Board seat through an appointment process. Details of this process will be further discussed and agreed to at this meeting.
Where: Cupertino Union School District
When: Thursday 6pm, Board Room
1309 S. Mary Avenue, Suite 150, Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/cusdk8/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=B78UCL7247DC
Link to agenda: https://www.boarddocs.com/ca/cusdk8/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=B76VKF75A8D1
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