Direction on Inclusionary Housing Ordinance & Housing Impact Fee for Stanford development
HLUET will review two related items that apply to new development at the Stanford University campus: the draft policy framework for an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that would create new affordable housing units when new market-rate units are constructed, as well as an Affordable Housing Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance and Resolution.
Administration envisions that an Affordable Housing Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance and an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance would work in tandem to address the provision of affordable housing on and near the Stanford University campus. The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance would mitigate the demand for affordable housing by households resulting from jobs created through the purchase of goods and services by residents in the newly constructed housing. The Affordable Housing Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance and Resolution would mitigate the direct demand for affordable housing created by the employment associated with newly constructed Academic Space at the University.
The Draft Inclusionary Housing Ordinance contains the following key provisions:
- When new residential rental units are built at Stanford, 16% of those units shall be made available for rent at below market rates. These units are considered “inclusionary units.”
- Exempts single family homes, duplexes and accessory dwelling units.
- Inclusionary rental units shall be made available at the following affordability thresholds:
– 15% ELI or VLI; 45% LI; 40% Moderate-income.
- When new for-sale housing is developed, 16% of those units are made available for purchase to households earning no more than 120% of the Area Median Income.
- Does not apply to student housing.
- Inclusionary units shall be:
- Constructed and available for occupancy at the same time as the market rate units;
- Dispersed throughout the residential project (not clustered in one area); and
- Generally the same and have the same amenities as the market rate units (minor variations allowed).
- In lieu of inclusionary units, the Ordinance allows for alternative compliance, such as:
- Transferring the units to another location within the Stanford Community Plan area;
- Providing the units at another location within six miles of the Stanford Community Plan area, which will require the provision of 20% inclusionary units (instead of 16%); or
- Rehabilitating existing market-rate units and converting them to affordable units.
- Inclusionary units shall remain affordable for no less than 99 years.
- For each Residential Development Planning Application, an Affordable Housing Plan will be submitted that documents the means of compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
After receiving feedback from HLUET, the Administration intends to provide a Draft Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to the Board of Supervisors on August 28, 2018. The Ordinance will be considered by the Planning Commission prior to consideration for adoption by the Board.
For non-residential development, the Draft Affordable Housing Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance and Resolution contains the following key provisions:
- The Draft Ordinance applies only to the development of Academic Space at the Stanford University Campus. Impact fees would be collected at the time of the issuance of the Building Permit.
- Stanford would be afforded the option to either pay the Impact Mitigation Fee per square foot of new Academic Space or construct affordable housing units. For any affordable units that are constructed, Stanford would receive an equivalent “credit” against the payment of the Impact Mitigation Fee.
- Exemption for Academic Space “pipeline” projects that have been deemed complete or issued a building permit by the County of Santa Clara prior to the operative date of the ordinance.
- The Impact Mitigation Fee for the first year of implementation will be $68.50. From the second year onwards, the Impact Mitigation Fee will be $143.10.
- The fee would be indexed annually to the Engineering News Record – San Francisco Bay Area Construction Cost Index.
Incorporating feedback from the FGOC and the HLUET Committee on the Draft Ordinance, the Administration intends to return a Draft Affordable Housing Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance to the Board on August 28, 2018.
Where: Santa Clara County Housing, Land Use, Environment & Transportation Cmte
When: June 21, 2018, 10 am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9990&MediaPosition=&ID=92383&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9990
Adopting resolution for ballot measure to extend and/or raise sales tax to 5/8th of a cent
Staff are recommending the Board adopt a resolution to call for a measure on the Nov. 6, 2018 ballot to continue levying the sales and use tax as well as raising it to five-eighths of one cent. The current tax is one-eighth of one cent and is set to expire March 31, 2023.
The current general tax is used for priorities such as supporting community health clinics, expanding adult and child crisis stabilization services, and funding improvements in the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Emergency Room. Staff have previously identified major budget threats that could impact the County’s ability to provide vital services to residents due to decisions in Congress and the state Legislature. Extending and increasing the sales tax to five-eighths of a cent is estimated to raise $300M a year in revenue.
The Board will consider the two resolutions for following options: 1) continuing the sales tax and raising it to five-eighths of a cent; 2) continuing the existing tax for one-eighth of a cent on an on-going basis.
The first reading of the ordinance for the tax must occur June 19, 2018, and final adoption must take place at the Board’s regular meeting on July 3, 2018. A four-fifths vote of the Board in favor of the ordinance is required to place a general tax on the ballot. A majority vote of the electorate is required. If the voters approve the measure, it would go into effect on April 1, 2019.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tue. June 19, 2018, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9958&MediaPosition=&ID=92394&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9958
Releasing the RFP for $50M Vietnamese American Services Center
Staff recommend the Board authorize the release of the RFP for construction of the $50M Vietnamese American Services Center. Proposals will be due by July 26, 2018.
After the Public Health Department completed a health assessment in 2012 indicating the need for better health services for the Vietnamese-American community, the Board approved the establishment of the VASC project and use of the property at 2410 Senter Road, San Jose. The center will serve as a one-stop hub to deliver health and human services in a culturally-sensitive and language-accessible manner.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tue. June 19, 2018, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9958&MediaPosition=&ID=91611&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9958
Creating a new Division of Equity and Social Justice to oversee children, seniors & family programs; immigrant issues; women’s policy; and LGBTQ affairs
The Board will receive a report on the Special Hearings on Immigration, Women’s Issues, and Hate Crimes and Climate—which have led to the development of plans for a new Division of Equity and Social Justice (E&SJ). The new division would combine the four offices of the Children, Seniors, and Families Committee, the Office of LGBTQ Affairs, Office of Immigrant Relations, and Office of Women’s Policy.
The work of the offices over the last year, in conversation with multiple stakeholders, has resulted in the draft Report on Resource Allocations to Support Recommendations Stemming from the 2016/2017 Special Hearings. The recommended allocation report creates a plan that seeks to address issues of health disparities, disproportionality in system involvement, economic instability, and leadership and inclusion gaps related to race, culture, immigration status, gender identity and sexual orientation.
With the Board’s approval, the new E &SJ division will serve as a bridge between the County and community to ensure input in policymaking; forge collaborations and partnership between government, non-profit organizations, communities of faith, and the private sector; and provide research and analysis of community needs and local impacts.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tue. June 19, 2018, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9958&MediaPosition=&ID=91889&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9958
Refusing to issue tax and revenue anticipation notes (TRANs) for 3 school districts
Staff are recommending that the Board refuse to authorize the issuance of tax and revenue anticipation notes (TRANs) on behalf of several school districts that requested them. The school districts would incur higher costs through the County’s issuance of their TRANs, and would not be able to take advantage of the pooled program available to them through the California Schools Boards Association Finance Corporation. The school districts making the request are Franklin-McKinley School District, the Gilroy Unified School District and the Loma Prieta Joint Union Elementary School District.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tue. June 19, 2018, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9958&MediaPosition=&ID=91682&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9958
Approve $200K contract with 4Cs for CalWORKs families
Staff are recommending the Board approve a $200K contract with the Community Child Care Council (4C’s) to provide childcare resources and referral services for families in CalWORKs. 4C’s has provided these services to the county for 30 years. Over the past three years, 4C’s assisted an average of 1,000 CalWORKs families annually.
The CalWORKs program requires families to participate in employment and training activities and meet participation requirements as a condition of receiving aid. In order to meet participation requirements, CalWORKs families are entitled to child care and other support services.
Where: Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
When: Tue. June 19, 2018, 9:30am
Link to item: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=9958&MediaPosition=&ID=91770&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=9958
City of San Jose
Transferring Museum Place development rights from Insight to Gary Dillabough
Council will consider approving the transfer of the DDA rights and responsibilities for the Museum Place project from Insight King Wah to an LLC associated with Gary Dillabough, the owner of the Bank of Italy building. Council will consent to an assignment by Insight King Wah, LLC of its interest as the Developer in the Disposition and Development Agreement dated August 18, 2017 for the Museum Place project to Museum Place Owner LLC.
Consent to the assignment will allow the transfer of all of the rights and obligations of Insight King Wah, LLC, the original developer under the DDA for the Museum Place project, to Museum Place Owner, LLC led by Gary Dillabough. Mr. Dillabough and his partners are also the owners of multiple downtown properties including the Bank of Italy and the Fountain Alley parking lot. Museum Place Owner, LLC has stated their intention to move the project forward within the timeframe outlined in the current Schedule of Performance.
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=88c7fbc2-9b3c-49dc-ad19-da5a4a9c94b4.pdf
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tuesday, June 26, 1.30pm, City Chamber
Link to item: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?m=l&id=/matter.aspx?key=3638
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=604598&GUID=FCF17DCF-1E9B-4FF4-98AD-31EDB5702659
Continuing developing ballot measure for council salary setting and procurement, changing bid procedure, and restrict competing measures
- Review the results of a survey regarding a potential ballot measure to modernize the City Charter. b. Direct the City Manager and City Attorney to draft ballot language and return to City Council no later than August 7, 2018 for consideration of placing on the November 6, 2018 ballot a measure modernizing the City Charter with respect to removing the ability of the City Council to set their own salaries and limiting City Council increases to annual adjustments accounting only for inflation; streamlining construction contract procurement and updating the bidding process; and aligning the City Charter with state law regarding competing measures in Municipal Elections.
If the City Council approves this item, the Administration will continue developing a ballot measure for the November 2018 citywide ballot that would modernize the City Charter with respect to Council salary setting, the City’s construction contract procurement process, and placing competing measures on the City ballot.
The changes to the contracting procedures would include:
1) Minor project limit: Increase the minor project limit from $ 100,000 to $600,000 to be more consistent with other jurisdictions, save time and money on smaller projects, and enhance the opportunities for small and local business participation.
2) Best Value Contracting: Proceed with Best Value contracting as a “tool in the toolbox” for staff to use on complicated projects. Provide further information on this alternative to the City Council on August 7, 2018.
3) Advertising Bid Opportunities: Replace the requirement to advertise projects in a local newspaper of general circulation with a requirement for advertising a project by newspaper or other means that adequately informs the general contracting community of the solicitation; and
4) Other: Decrease the design build limit from $5 million to $1 million in alignment with State law. If Mayor and City Council preliminarily support this reduction, staff will present additional analysis to support this recommendation at the August 7, 2018 City Council meeting.
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=326e435d-78f5-4d0a-ad7f-ac50d8a546fd.pdf
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tuesday, June 26, 1.30pm, City Chamber
Link to item: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?m=l&id=/matter.aspx?key=3654
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=604598&GUID=FCF17DCF-1E9B-4FF4-98AD-31EDB5702659
Review results of polling for the potential November General Obligation Bond measure
Council will consider moving forward with an omnibus version of the potential November ballot measure which will include multiple public safety and infrastructure needs. Both a $950 million and $750 million omnibus option polled above the 2/3 requirement.
Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3), the City’s contracted survey research
consultants, conducted a second public opinion survey from June 2, 2018 to June 10, 2018 to
assess voter willingness to support a potential general obligation bond measure in November
2018, with 1,203 San Jose voters in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese on both landlines and cell
phones.
The principal goal was to test the electoral viability of three potential general obligation bond
options. To avoid confusion, respondents were asked about one of the following three options:
1) An omnibus general obligation bond authorization of $950 million to support public
safety, emergency preparedness, streets and roads, and other urgent infrastructure needs.
2) A general obligation bond authorization of $500 million to repair neighborhood streets, roads, bridges, stormdrains, and other urgent transportation-related infrastructure.
3) A general obligation bond authorization of $500 million to upgrade 911 communications, fire, police, paramedic, and emergency/disaster response facilities.
For each of the above potential general obligation bond measures, researchers tested voters’
willingness to pay a lower authorized amount ($750 million for the omnibus bond measure; $300
million for the streets/roads measure and for the public safety/emergency response measure).
The survey results indicated:
- Only the omnibus general obligation bond measure exceeded the two-thirds threshold
with 68 percent support. Support for the streets/roads (66 percent) and public
safety/emergency response (65 percent) measures both fell just below the two-thirds
requirement.
With approval of this item, the City Manager and City Attorney will bring forward a ballot measure for Council to consider placing on the November 6, 2018 citywide ballot. If needed, the City’s survey consultant will conduct additional polling to refine the ballot language. Finally, the City Manager will also develop an education and outreach plan that includes engaging with Council offices and the community to provide information about the general obligation bond and the City’s infrastructure needs
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=10c54c43-ad4a-401c-89af-0bd8c5262c7e.pdf
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tuesday, June 26, 1.30pm, City Chamber
Link to item: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=10c54c43-ad4a-401c-89af-0bd8c5262c7e.pdf
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=604598&GUID=FCF17DCF-1E9B-4FF4-98AD-31EDB5702659
Ending negotiations with current Recycle Plus haulers after unsuccessful negotiations and soliciting bids for residential solid waste services
- Accept staff’s report discussing the negotiations with the current Recycle Plus haulers and providing information on staff’s evaluation that the negotiations were unsuccessful; b. Direct staff to end negotiations with the current Recycle Plus haulers; c. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to waive the contractor disincentives for not meeting the required diversion rates for calendar year 2018, if by December 31, 2018 the City Manager determines that the Recycle Plus haulers are unable to meet their required diversion rates because of China’s “National Sword” policy on the import of recyclable materials; d. Direct staff to return with recommendations on future waivers as part of the budget process for 2019-2020 if necessary because of the continuing impacts of China’s “National Sword” policy
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=eaef455c-d3a0-4fdc-82d6-6911296dfe24.pdf
Direct staff to: a. Initiate development of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit and award agreements for residential solid waste services that would begin July 1, 2021; services will include collection and processing of solid waste, recyclables, and organic materials for each of the two service districts for single-family residences and a citywide district for multi-family residences, and City Facilities; b. Establish term of 15 years for the new agreements; c. Include the following in the Request for Proposals: 1. Living wage and employee retention requirements consistent with Council’s Living Wage Policy; 2. Solicit ideas for the new system to be flexible to address evolving recycling markets; while continuing to meet zero waste goals; 3. Solicit ideas for the new system to support Climate Smart San José and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; 4. Include optional services for emergency response support; 5. Solicit ideas for providing larger garbage carts to single-family residents and exploring updated customer rate structures; 6. Performance standards that would address leveraging technology and providing ease of use for enhanced customer service, material recovery and marketing, service delivery, environmental compliance, and vehicle standards; d. Complete waste characterization studies to inform the RFP; e. Explore using City staff for Junk Pick-Up services and customer outreach; and f. Procure residential street sweeping and Public Litter Cans services separately from residential waste services.
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f2217812-7e57-4cc6-b208-9e2e5988af29.pdf
- Accept the staff report on: 1. The proposed methodology to implement a Modified Living Wage for Recycle Plus Customer Service Representatives, Mechanics, and Materials Recovery Facility workers (“Facility Workers”); and 2. Updated labor peace plans from the Recycle Plus contractors. b. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute contract amendments with GreenTeam of San Jose and GreenWaste Recovery Inc. to implement a Modified Living Wage Requirement for Recycle Plus Facility Workers effective September 1, 2018. c. Direct staff to include a Living Wage requirement for the Recycle Plus program in future residential garbage and recycling agreements.
Memo: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=cbfd6321-ef81-4a5f-a26a-19aeb7e5db25.pdf
Where: San Jose City Council
When: Tuesday, June 26, 1.30pm, City Chamber
Link to item: http://sanjose.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?m=l&id=/matter.aspx?key=3647
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=604598&GUID=FCF17DCF-1E9B-4FF4-98AD-31EDB5702659
Opposing AB 1912 related to governing public employee retirement liability for members of JPAs
Staff are recommending that Committee members re-affirm an opposition position for AB 1912 (Rodriguez) and recommend a one-week turnaround to the Council so that the City’s legislative representative can continue to advocate the City’s opposition to AB 1912.
AB 1912 would require member agencies of Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs) that participate in or contract with a public retirement system (including the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERs) independent retirement plans and county retirement systems) to mutually agree on how to apportion the JPA’s retirement obligations. If the member agencies are not able to come to a mutual agreement, then the Board of the applicable public retirement system would distribute the retirement liability amongst member agencies based on the share of service received from the JPA or the population of each member agency. Former members of a JPA are still liable for retirement benefits of the JPA employees.
AB 1912 also includes provisions specific to CalPERS:
- Starting on January 1, 2019, CalPERS cannot contract with any JPA unless all the JPA members are jointly and severally liable for all the JPA’s retirement obligations.
- For JPAs that enter into an agreement with CalPERS to terminate its participation in CalPERS, the JPA’s liability for the unfunded benefits is extended to all of the JPA members.
- Requires CalPERS to enter into a terminating agency agreement with a JPA or any of the JPA’s members, unless CalPERS determines it would not be in its best interest. If neither the JPA nor any of its members enter into the terminating agency agreement, then the member agencies assume the JPA’s obligations on their retirement systems.
- Prior to reducing benefits of an employee of a terminating JPA, CalPERS must consider and exercise all options, including suing the JPA and its member agencies to pay the JPA’s pension obligations. The bill provides that CalPERS is entitled to recover its attorney fees and costs.
AB 1912 was introduced in response to a case in LA where a JPA – LA Works – went out of business. CalPERS determined that there was not enough money in the JPA’s account to honor the retirement obligations for LA Works employees. Those employees took roughly a 60% cut in their retirement pensions and benefits.
Where: San Jose Rules and Open Government Committee
When: June 20, 2018, 2:00pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530428&GUID=00CE6345-7139-4EE2-8C23-5BC960A7E497
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530428&GUID=00CE6345-7139-4EE2-8C23-5BC960A7E497
Supporting SB 831 if amended and scheduling for June 26 Council meeting – related to streamlining approval and development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
Staff are recommending that Committee members adopt a support position on SB 831 (Wieckowski) and recommend this item be agendized for the June 26, 2018 Council meeting so that the City’s legislative representative can advocate the City’s support if amended position for SB 831.
SB 831 revises state law governing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) for the purpose of encouraging their development and streamlining their approval. SB 831 would place additional restrictions on the conditions that local governments may impose on ADUs, including limiting the ability to charge developer fees, prohibiting the imposition of owner occupancy requirements, and reducing the timeframe for ministerial approval of ADU permits to 60 days.
SB 831 would prohibit an ADU from being considered by a local agency, special district, or water corporation to be a new residential use for purposes of calculating fees charged for new development, except in certain circumstances when a new or separate utility connection between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility may be required. School districts are also allowed to charge a maximum of $3,000 per ADU for school fees.
City staff is very supportive of SB 831 and its goals of encouraging ADU development as a way to provide affordable housing. City staff would like to request that Senator Wieckowski amend the bill to allow cities to charge ADUs a proportion of singlefamily home park fees. This would allow cities to generate resources needed to provide new parks or improve existing parks that serve the new ADU residents, while generally recognizing that fewer people live in an ADU versus a single family home. For these reasons, staff is requesting a support if amended position.
Where: San Jose Rules and Open Government Committee
When: June 20, 2018, 2:00pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530466&GUID=0CDCA62D-E12D-401D-A4D9-591FBE597A0E
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530428&GUID=00CE6345-7139-4EE2-8C23-5BC960A7E497
City of Mountain View
Adopting Zero Waste City Policy
Adopt a Resolution Adopting City Council Policy K-22, Zero Waste Policy, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).
At the April 24, 2018 Council Study Session, staff introduced a draft zero waste policy as the first step in the development of new waste collection, processing, and disposal agreements for the period following expiration of the current agreements in 2021. At the Study Session, Councilmembers indicated general support for the policy, and no changes were made to the draft policy following the Council’s review.
The policy establishes an overall quantitative goal to reduce generated and disposed waste such that 90 percent of materials are diverted from landfill by 2030. Mountain View’s 2016 diversion rate was 78 percent (the 2017 rate is not yet available). The policy also calls for a continual improvement approach to reducing waste based on relevant data and current scientific research. For example, recent research using life cycle analysis suggests that the total environmental impact of materials must be considered, rather than simply focusing attention on recyclability. Other ways to measure progress besides weight-based diversion may be developed based on this research and should be incorporated into future waste reduction planning efforts.
Achieving 90 percent diversion will require actions in addition to programs that the City has direct control over implementing. Changes are required in private-sector practices related to product design, purchasing, use, and “end-of-life” management, whether voluntary or in response to State or national regulatory mandates. These changes are already beginning to happen, such as recent California leg
The proposed zero waste policy will memorialize many of the practices the City has been embracing since the first Environmental Sustainability Action Plan was adopted by the City Council in 2009. It will serve as a long-term guide for the City’s commitment to reducing waste and provide a structure for development of the new solid waste agreements. After the City’s zero waste goals are formalized in the policy, a focused set of actions consistent with the policy will be developed to guide the new agreement development process.
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with adoption of the zero waste policy. However, the policy does presume that future actions will be taken by the City to further reduce overall waste and waste disposed in landfills. The costs and relative benefits of such actions will be evaluated at the time specific programs are proposed.
Where: City of Mountain View
When: June 19, 2018/ 4:45 p.m./ Plaza & Council Chamber
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530815&GUID=F238E758-CDCB-43F2-89AA-A67AD43A5B7F&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Hearing on Proposed 5.0 percent for Trash and Recycling Rate Increases (effective July 1, 2018)
A public hearing will be conducted on the proposed trash and recycling rate increase of 5.0 percent for carts effective July 1, 2018. For trash and recycling services, no overall rate increase is proposed; however, a 5.0 percent increase for cart rates is proposed to incorporate the cost of the residential food scraps collection program which began July 2017. For Fiscal Year 2018-19, the agreement with Recology provides for an increase based on the CPI which is 3.22 percent
The legislation provided for future rate increases within prescribed limits to be approved without holding a hearing each year for up to an additional four years. Proposed utility rate increases were reviewed and discussed at the May 1, 2018 Narrative Budget Study Session, and at the June 12, 2018 public hearing on the Proposed Budget. A Proposition 218 hearing is not required for the proposed water and wastewater rate increases as these recommended increases for Fiscal Year 2018-19 are within the prescribed limits as noticed May 6, 2016 and approved at the June 21, 2016 public hearing.
These fees will be included in the resolution amending the City of Mountain View Master Fee Schedule to be adopted at the public hearing for adoption of the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Budgets, Appropriations Limit, and Fee Modifications scheduled after this public hearing on the June 19, 2018 agenda. If there is a majority protest, these fees will be removed from the resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
Where: City of Mountain View
When: June 19, 2018/ 4:45 p.m./ Plaza & Council Chamber
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530812&GUID=27560D35-3165-474A-BAF2-34B01F18B1DE
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Approval of Budget, and Capital Improvement Projects
Staff and Board will Convene a public hearing, accept public comment, approve the actions necessary for the City of Mountain View and the Shoreline Regional Park Community to adopt the Fiscal Year 2018-19 budgets, appropriations limit, fee modifications, and funding for the adopted Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Improvement Projects.
Additional Recommendations:
- Rebudget of Nonprofit Agency Funding (GOF)- $192,327
- Community Health Awareness Council – $104,273
- MayView Community Health Center – 50,000
- Community Services Agency – 33,054
- Junior Achievement – 5, 000
- Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (GOF) $84,000
City Council added June 12, 2018
- City Ballot Measures (GNOF limited period) $250,000*
*Staff recommends these fund be flexible to not only cover the cost of placing two measures on the ballot, but for any other related miscellaneous costs, such as any necessary consulting services.
The Proposed Budget included an increase of 15 percent compared to the Fiscal Year 2017-18 property insurance premium, but the quote received just days ago is 33 percent higher. The significant increase is the result of the City’s recent loss history— broken water pipe at City Hall, structural damage to Michaels
The City budget and CIP resolution provides for any amendments approved by the City Council on June 19, 2018 to be included in the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Adopted Budget and authorizes the Finance and Administrative Services Director to make corrections as necessary and report out the final Adopted Budget and any reconciling changes by informational memorandum.
Where: City of Mountain View
When: June 19, 2018/ 4:45 p.m./ Plaza & Council Chamber
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530828&GUID=B310136A-2EC3-488A-98DB-0080881994CA&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Direction on the Draft Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study and key parameters of the fee
Staff are recommending that the Board provide direction to staff on the Draft Multimodal Improvement Plan, and provide direction to staff on the Draft Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study and key parameters of the fee.
On November 10, 2015, the City Council authorized staff to begin work on a Multimodal Improvement Plan to comply with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) Congestion Management Program (CMP). The City’s Multimodal Improvement Plan will include measures to address future congestion impacts, including vehicle flow improvements and improvements/ programs to support travel by other modes. If a city fails to meet LOS standards for one or more of these intersections, it risks forfeiting roughly 25 percent of gas tax allocations from the State (about $405,000 per year for Mountain View).
On June 5, 2018, the City Council expressed support for a measure restructuring the business license tax to be placed on the November 2018 ballot, and indicated that the bulk of funds would be used to help fund transportation services and improvements. The tax measure and this impact fee are not redundant. The tax measure revenue can be used to fund operational or maintenance costs, while the impact fee (levied only once on new development) can only be used for one-time costs. In addition, several new projects identified since staff began work on the Multimodal Improvement Plan, such as the automated guideway transportation system and the Bernardo Avenue undercrossing of Caltrain/Central Expressway, cannot be funded with the impact fee without updating the nexus study. Plus, several projects are very large and require funding from multiple sources. Lastly, as described below, the transportation impact fee alone cannot cover the costs of projects in the nexus study, due to legal requirements for how the fee must be calculated and the projects will require funding from other sources, such as a tax measure.
The Multimodal Improvement Plan includes future projects that may cost approximately $450 million. Most of these projects were previously identified in other planning documents and the Capital Improvement Program. Approximately $350 million may be available from regional, private and grant-giving sources. This leaves approximately $100 million that the City may need to fund, though other sources (such as community benefits) can also be leveraged. If the City Council adopts a transportation impact fee, it is expected to provide approximately $14 million to $50 million over the life of the 2030 General Plan, depending on exemptions or reductions for developments. This fee can be used to pay for the Multimodal Improvement Plan projects. Adoption of a Multimodal Improvement Plan will maintain City compliance with the Congestion Management Program. Based on this direction, the project team will revise the Multimodal Improvement Plan and Nexus Study, and finalize a draft Transportation Impact Fee. Adoption of both by the City Council is expected in the fall. Final approval of the Multimodal Improvement Plan by the VTA Board of Directors is expected immediately after Council approval.
Where: City of Mountain View
When: June 19, 2018/ 4:45 p.m./ Plaza & Council Chamber
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530818&GUID=6FA6D09B-83AD-4855-BECF-993FBE31E602&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Study Session on Population Growth and Public Service Levels
During the biannual goal setting process, the City Council expressed an interest in better understanding how the City is planning for the impacts of potentially significant population growth on City service levels. Every two years, the Council establishes major goals to address priority community needs. Projects to support these goals, and any necessary resource allocations, are included in the City’s budget. Highlights of potential resource needs at the point that significant population increases occur include:
- A multi-use facility in North Bayshore, potentially including library and recreational programming.
- A Police beat in North Bayshore.
- Fire staffing and equipment increase accommodated at existing fire stations.
- Increased fire inspection staffing for multi-family and high rise developments.
- Increased park maintenance staffing.
- Increased staffing in engineering, project management, and maintenance to expand, upgrade, and maintain City infrastructure.
- Water and sewer capacity studies.
Transportation studies. - Additional staff in internal service departments to support an increase in City programs, facilities, and staffing.
Staff suggests the following next steps and seeks Council input.
- Continue current annual service planning processes and ongoing monitoring of population increases, development approvals, and project completions and prepare an annual update of the status of growth toward planning capacity.
- As part of the next Council Goal- Setting Process for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020- 21, undertake the Fire and Emergency Response Study included as an Implementation Action in the North Bayshore Precise Plan. This could include Police staffing as well.
- As part of the Fiscal Year 2021-22 and 2022-23 Council Goal-Setting Process, include a review of the status of development and population projections and propose projects as appropriate to address service level impacts and resource needs. This would be a good checkpoint given the anticipated completion of projects currently under review, but before significant residential growth is expected to be completed in North Bayshore and East Whisman.
Where: City of Mountain View
When: June 19, 2018/ 4:45 p.m./ Plaza & Council Chamber
Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3530827&GUID=E9C7DADB-F242-4C4A-8F43-9CDBF3131429&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
City of Cupertino
Direction on potential Nov. 2018 ballot measure to restructure business license tax as a “head tax”
The Council will provide staff direction on a proposed restructuring of the Cupertino’s business license tax that will ultimately be placed before the voters in the form of a ballot question.
The City’s business license tax was enacted in 1992 with minor amendment. Rates have been increased periodically based on inflation and are estimated to generate about $800,000 in FY 2017-18.
As part of the City’s Work Program, staff presented background information on restructuring the City’s business license tax at a study session on June 5, 2018, including the City’s current business license structure, business profile, and preliminary public opinion polling data. The polling data indicated that a majority of likely November voters would support an employee-based business license tax with large business paying more than small businesses.
At the study session, Council directed staff to return on June 19, 2018 with information and several draft models for restructuring the business license tax. Information requests included a list of potential projects that could be funded with revenue generated from a restricted business license tax, feedback from the business community, Council’s ability to refund tax revenues in exchange for community benefits or partnership agreements, and information on other key parameters.
Staff favors (but is not specifically recommending) a model being proposed by Mountain View. In this model, employers would pay a flat base fee plus a progressive per-employee rate that increases in increments as the employee count increases. Businesses with less than 99 employees would not be subject to a per-employee rate in any of the five models. Larger businesses would not pay an employee rate for the first 99 employees. From a policy perspective, this ensures that small businesses will not be negatively impacted. Most cities take a similar approach to protecting small businesses.
Staff will bring an action item to Council on July 3, 2018 authorizing the placement of a ballot measure on the November 2018 ballot. However, staff needs direction on the specific model Council wishes to pursue to prepare ballot language for Council consideration by July 3. The easiest option is to generally structure the measure after Mountain View’s per-employee proposal. Council can make different recommendations on specific rates and other key parameters.
Where: Cupetino City Council
When: 6/19/2018, 6:00 PM, 10300 Torre Avenue
Link to item: https://cupertino.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3528729&GUID=018958B6-1C9A-4AF1-A8E5-813E71CFAED4&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=574546&GUID=01A0287C-A6DF-4712-AFCA-FDB6FC177B94&Options=&Search=
Approving a voluntary tax collection agreement with Airbnb
The Council will authorize the City Manager to enter into a voluntary collection agreement (VCA) with Airbnb to collect transient occupancy taxes owed to City from short-term rental operators in Cupertino using the Airbnb platform.
Short-term rentals (STRs) fall under the definition of “hotel” under Cupertino’s Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) regulations (Section 3.12.020 of Chapter 3.12, Transient Occupancy Tax). People or “transients” occupying these short-term rentals are subject to a 12% TOT on the rent charged during the first 30 days of occupancy. Proprietors or “operators” of these short-term rentals are required to register and obtain a Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate from the City within 30 days of commencing business as well as collect TOT from renters. To date, the City has not received any TOT remittances from short-term rental operators in the City.
As reported to Council in February, there are roughly 300 STRs available within City limits. However, the City does not have the data or resources required to proactively enforce TOT requirements at this time. Enforcement of STRs has been complaint-based and focused on zoning requirements. Staff recommends that the City enter into the VCA with Airbnb and begin to collect TOT revenues as of August 1, 2018. The VCA will simplify the remittance process for STR operators using the Airbnb platform and enable the City to receive 100% of the TOT associated with taxable rental bookings completed on Airbnb.
Cupertino stands to generate an additional $350,000 in TOT revenue annually with little to no effort from City staff. This estimate is based on activity from 2017 showing 190 active rentals in Cupertino and transactions totaling $3.4 million. All TOT is credited to the General Fund and can be used for general purposes.
Nothing in this VCA prevents the City from enacting a regulatory program that restricts how STRs operate in the City. Based on Council direction, staff is drafting amendments to its zoning code to provide more flexibility to STR operators while ensuring these STRs do not take away opportunities for long-term rentals. The program will also create a process for addressing nuisance issues. Staff does not anticipate that draft regulations will conflict with the VCA and expects to bring a draft to Council on July 3.
Where: Cupertino City Council
When: 6/19/2018, 6:00 PM, 10300 Torre Avenue
Link to item: https://cupertino.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3528721&GUID=B2FC7A95-8EDB-48B4-9D51-7E8CA63AA681&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=574546&GUID=01A0287C-A6DF-4712-AFCA-FDB6FC177B94&Options=&Search=
Approving ordinance to allow short-term rental platforms to collect & remit TOT from hosts via a Voluntary Collection Agreement w/ City
The Council will (1) Conduct the first reading of the draft ordinance: “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 3.12 of the Municipal Code to provide for the collection of transient occupancy taxes from short-term rentals using internet-based/social media platforms”; and (2) Schedule the second reading of the ordinance for July 3.
The City’s Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT) Ordinance currently requires hosts to collect and remit TOT to the City. The proposed amendment adds a definition for internet-based/social media platforms, like Airbnb, and authorizes such platforms to collect and remit TOT on behalf of hosts if a voluntary collection agreement exists between the platform and the City.
This will allow the City to enter into a voluntary collection agreement (VCA) with Airbnb and begin collecting TOT from hosts who use the Airbnb platform. It is estimated that there are about 300 short-term rentals in the City, mostly listed on Airbnb.
Where: Cupertino City Council
When: 6/19/2018, 6:00 PM, 10300 Torre Avenue
Link to item: https://cupertino.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3528740&GUID=A9CEABEB-E928-4163-B5F1-61A7E35F15F3&Options=&Search=
Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=574546&GUID=01A0287C-A6DF-4712-AFCA-FDB6FC177B94&Options=&Search=
City of Palo Alto
Placing SEIU-sponsored health care costs initiative on Nov. ballot; Stanford likely to file legal challenge
This ballot initiative, the “City of Palo Alto Accountable and Affordable Health Care” initiative, seeks to cap the amount that hospitals and medical clinics in the city may charge for patient services/ It is spearheaded by SEIU.
On May 22, 2018, the initiative sponsors submitted the petition with signatures to the City Clerk. On June 3, 2018, the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters completed examination and verification of the signatures and determined that sufficient signatures were submitted to qualify the initiative for the ballot. On June 11, 2018, the City Council accepted the Certificate of Sufficiency of the Initiative Petition. Palo Alto Charter Article VI, Section 2, requires the City Council to either adopt the initiative ordinance verbatim or place it on the ballot. After hearing from the public, the Council directed staff to return on June 18, 2018 with a resolution to place the Initiative on the November 6, 2018 ballot. The Council also directed staff to prepare a report analyzing the effects of the Initiative on Palo Alto residents, businesses and City staff, after the summer recess. The staff report for the June 11th meeting is at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65422
On June 13, 2018, the City Attorney received a letter from Stanford Health Care reiterating its request that the City file a court challenge to the Initiative or, if the City was not so inclined, that the City Council not further delay the placement of the Initiative on the ballot so that Stanford Health Care could initiate a pre-election challenge.
Where: Palo Alto City Council
When: June 18, 2018, 8:30 pm
Link to item: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=70601.51&BlobID=65571
Link to agenda: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=65435
$3M affordable housing funds for potential teacher housing project
This is a “late packet” and there is no other information at this time.
Where: Palo Alto City Council
When: 6/25/2018, 5:00 PM, Council Chambers
Link to item: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=69809.76&BlobID=65570
Link to agenda: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=42444.14&BlobID=65511
San Jose Unified School District
Delegation of Power to Superintendent to contract for the Re-Roof and Exterior Improvements at the District Office
Staff recommend that the Board delegate to the Superintendent (or her designee) the power to contract for the Re-Roof and Exterior Improvements at the District Office (Project Z0500). Per Ed. Code 17604, the Board may, by a majority vote of the Board, delegate the power to contract to the Superintendent or her designee. This particular delegation of the power to contract will allow staff to complete this project without delay. Any contract authorized by this delegation of the power to contract will come before the Board of Education for ratification at the next possible meeting of the Board. This delegation of the power to contract will continue for three months once approved.
Where: San Jose Unified School District
When: June 14, 2018, 2018/ 6:00 p.m./ Board Room
Link to item: http://agendaonline.net/public/Meeting.aspx?AgencyID=123&MeetingID=60547&AgencyTypeID=1&IsArchived=False
Link to agenda: http://agendaonline.net/public/sanjose
East Side Union High School District
Adoption of second reading of new Policy Response to Immigration Enforcement—AB699
Staff recommend that the Board adopt the second reading of new Board Policy 5415.13 (Response to Immigration Enforcement) and amendments to Board Policy (Nondiscrimination in District Programs and Activities), (Bullying), (Nondiscrimination / Harassment), and (Hate-Motivated Behavior).
AB 699 was approved and signed into law by the Governor in October 2017, and amends various provisions of the Education Code.AB 699 also prohibits school officials and employees of a school district, county office of education, or charter school, except as required by state or federal law or as required to administer a state or federally supported educational program, from collecting information or documents regarding citizenship or immigration status of pupils or their family members. The new law also requires the superintendent of a school district, the superintendent of a county office of education, and the principal of a charter school, as applicable, to report to the respective governing board or body in a timely manner any requests for information or access to a school site by an officer or employee of a law enforcement agency for the purpose of enforcing the immigration laws in a manner that ensures the confidentiality and privacy of any potentially identifying information. The bill would encourage a school, when an employee of the school is aware that a pupil’s parent or guardian is not available to care for the pupil, to work with parents or guardians to update the emergency contact information and not to contact Child Protective Services to arrange for the pupil’s care unless the school is unable to arrange for care through the use of emergency contact information or instructions provided by the pupil’s parent or guardian.
AB 699 requires all local educational agencies (school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools) to adopt model policies prepared by the California Attorney General, or equivalent policies, by July 1, 2018, which include the protections of AB 699. The amendments are based on CSBA recommendations and reflect changes to comply with AB 699 and to meet the recommendations of the Attorney General.
Where: East Side Union High School District
When: June 21, 2018, 2018/ 4:00 p.m./ District Board Room
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AZL93L210B0C
Link to agenda: https://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AY5JHA4D2EF7
Reject RFP from Swenson & Associates/Aedis Architects/Project Frog— and, Approve additional request of $1.1M in order to re-bid using the design/build delivery method
In 2017, the Board approved the use of Measure Z General Obligation bond funds for the “Post Senior North” project with an associated project budget of $4.5M. On February 13, 2018, the Board approved Administration’s recommendation to allow the EC Adult Transition Program North project to move forward in its development at 830 N. Capitol Avenue, San Jose, CA 95133, with a $1.2M augmentation to the approved $4.5M budget, bringing the combined project budget to $5.7M.
The District’s staff reviewed seven categories as part of the selection criteria that included the following: Technical Expertise, Life Cycle Cost Analysis, Schedule, Architectural Aesthetics and Design Innovation, Project Management Requirements, and Program Requirements. Price was scored by the software system, Planet Bids and received the maximum score because it was the only price entered into the system. Staff did not request the Presentation from the DBE due to the outcome would not change.
Staff believes that additional funds are needed in order to construct the project to the stakeholder’s requirements but the fee that Swenson’s DBE team proposed is completely out of the project budget that was requested in the RFP and staff’s opinion is it is an inflated number when staff looked at the per square foot actuals from other recent projects. Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that the Board of Trustees:
- Reject the RFP-15-17-18 Design/Build Proposal received from Swenson & Associates/Aedis Architects/Project Frog; and
- Approve Staff’s 2nd Augmentation request of $1,125,000 in order to re-bid using the design/build delivery method
Where: East Side Union High School District
When: June 21, 2018, 2018/ 4:00 p.m./ District Board Room
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AZGEX879D020
Link to agenda: https://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AY5JHA4D2EF7
District will not meet its required minimum reserves in the 2019-2020 fiscal year, and the District will have a negative ending fund balance
Staff recommend that the Board adopt Resolution to Confirm East Side Union High School District’s Commitment to Fiscal Solvency as presented. The Board 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 2018-19 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. The Board has decided to delay planned reductions until FY 2019-20 and 2020-21 in an effort to prevent draconian reductions in FY 2018-19. During the FY 2018-19, 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 negative ending fund balance, the Board will be requested to proceed with budget reductions and reductions in force as identified. Attachments are not yet posted with actual dollar amounts.
Where: East Side Union High School District
When: June 21, 2018, 2018/ 4:00 p.m./ District Board Room
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AZHDF374A77F
Link to agenda: https://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AY5JHA4D2EF7
Direction on a Potential Parcel Tax on the November 6, 2018, Gubernatorial General Election
As a result of the Measure G parcel tax not passing on the June 5 Primary Election, the Board requested to have this item on the June 22 agenda. Discussion will include whether or not to place a parcel tax on the November 6, 2018, Gubernatorial General Election ballot.
Where: East Side Union High School District
When: June 21, 2018, 2018/ 4:00 p.m./ District Board Room
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AZRF2J3D037D
Link to agenda: https://www.boarddocs.com/ca/esuhsd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AY5JHA4D2EF7
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