The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018-04-30 City Council Agenda PacketCity Council 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Monday, April 30, 2018 Special Meeting Council Chambers 5:00 PM Council Member Kou will be participating remotely from Bay Area Council-Shanghai Office Suite 905-907, 9F, 333 Songhu Rd., KIC, Shanghai 上海市淞沪路333号9楼905室-907室 Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 11 days preceding the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. Call to Order Closed Session 5:00-6:00 PM Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Ed Shikada, Michelle Flaherty, Rumi Portillo, Sandra Blanch, Nicholas Raisch, Molly Stump, Terence Howzell, Charles Sakai, Lalo Perez, Kiely Nose, Robert Jonsen, Eric Nickel) Employee Organizations: Palo Alto Peace Officers’ Association (PAPOA); Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA); International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 1319; and Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (PAPMA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 2 April 30, 2018 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Study Session 6:00-6:30 PM 2. Initial Presentation of the Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2018/19 Budget Special Orders of the Day 6:30-6:45 PM 3.Selection of Applicants to Interview on May 9, 2018 for the Historic Resources Board and the Human Relations Commission 4.North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan: City Council Appointment of Working Group Members Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 6:45-6:55 PM Oral Communications 6:55-7:10 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 7:10-7:15 PM 5.Approval of Action Minutes for the April 9 and 16, 2018 Council Meetings Consent Calendar 7:15-7:20 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 6.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 7.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 8.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Triennial External Quality Control Review of the Office of the City Auditor 9.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 4.6 (Permits for Retailers of Tobacco Products) of the Municipal Code to Allow Fees to be set by Ordinance (FIRST READING: April 16, 2018 PASSED: 8-0 Filseth Absent) 10.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the FY18 Municipal Fee Schedule to Amend the Golf Fees (FIRST READING: April 16, 2018 PASSED: 8-0 Filseth Absent) Applicant List MEMO MEMO Q & A Q & A 3 April 30, 2018 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 7:20-7:30 PM 11. SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) to add Cost-sharing Pursuant to Government Code Section 20516 (FIRST READING: April 2, 2018 PASSED: 8 -0 DuBois absent) 7:30-8:30 PM 12. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) to add a new Section Imposing an Annual Office Limit and Setting Forth Related Regulations, and to Repeal the Respective Regulations From Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances). The Proposed Ordinance Will Perpetuate the Existing Annual Limit of 50,000 Square Feet of new Office/R&D Development per Year With Modifications Regarding the Review Process, Unallocated Area Rollover Provisions, and Exemptions. The Planning & Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Ordinance on February 14, 2018. This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution Number 9720 (Continued from April 16, 2018) 8:30-10:00 PM 13. Finance Committee Recommendation Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Address the Funding Gap for the 2014 Infrastructure Plan and Funding for Unplanned Potential Community Assets Projects, Discussion of Next Steps for Addressing the Funding Gap Needs, and Potential Refinement of Survey Elements and Objectives for a Follow- up Survey State/Federal Legislation Update/Action Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance 4 April 30, 2018 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information May 1, 2018 Standing Committee Meetings Finance Committee Meeting Cancellation Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Public Letters to Council Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Sp. Council Appointed Officers Committee Meeting April 30, 2018 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Applicants to Interview on May 9, 2018 for the Historic Resources Board and the Human Relations Commission Recommendation Direct Staff to schedule interviews with all applicants for scheduled vacancies. Discussion Staff is requesting the City Council select the candidates to be interviewed for:  One term on the Historic Resources Board, ending on December 15, 2019; and  Three terms on the Human Relations Commission, ending on May 31, 2021. Interviews are scheduled for Wednesday, May 9, 2018 beginning at 6:00 P.M. Copies of all applications are attached. Some applications may be redacted at the request of the applicant. A full set of non-redacted applications will be provided to Council Members directly. Background On Monday, April 2, 2018, the City Council directed Staff to reopen recruitment for the Historic Resources Board and the Human Relations Commission. The City Clerk’s Office advertised this recruitment from January 11, 2018 through March 20, 2018, and April 4, 2018 through April 23, 2018, satisfying the 15-day minimum advertising period outlined in Municipal Code Section 2.16.060(a). Advertising included placements in the Daily Post newspaper, Palo Alto Online Express email, Palo Alto Weekly newspaper; announcements by the City Manager during Council meetings, by Clerk staff at Board and Commission meetings; promotion on the City’s website; and inclusion in weekly Council Packet GovDelivery notifications. Applicants Historic Resources Board (One Term) 1. Gogo Heinrich 2. K. Patricia Landman 3. Deborah Shepherd Human Relations Commission (Three Terms) 1. Rebecca Eisenberg 2. Kathy Johnson 3. Gabriel Kralik 4. William Morrison Page 2 5. Kaloma Smith 6. Valerie Stinger (Incumbent) 7. Mark Weiss 8. Qifeng Xue Please note that the City uses DocuSign electronic signatures as a method for individuals to submit applications for Boards and Commissions. Formatting irregularities present in the attached applications are likely the result the DocuSign process. ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: HRB - Heinrich, Gogo (PDF)  Attachment B: HRB - Landman, Patricia (PDF)  Attachment C: HRB - Shepherd, Deborah (PDF)  Attachment D: HRC - Eisenberg, Rebecca (PDF)  Attachment E: HRC - Johnson, Kathy (PDF)  Attachment F: HRC - Kralik, Gabriel (PDF)  Attachment G: HRC - Morrison, William (PDF)  Attachment H: HRC - Smith, Kaloma (PDF)  Attachment I: HRC - Stinger, Valerie (PDF)  Attachment J: HRC - Weiss, Mark (PDF)  Attachment K: HRC - Xue, Qifeng (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 3 �r rr4• rcN Historic Resources Board Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRB regularly meets the second and fourth Thursdays of the month at 8:30 a.m. Name: Address: Cell Ph ____ Home / ____ Office Ph E- Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci Conflict of Interest Code require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2)provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you own or your spouse real property in Palo Alto?___Yes ____ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: CEF2E1E7-6D6D-4557-BF55-80980300AC93 +SKS ,IMRVMGL JVMIRH )HYGEXMSR 9' &IVOIPI] &7 %VGLMXIGXYVI 0MGIRWIW 'EPMJSVRME %VGLMXIGX 0MGIRWI ' 0))( 4VSJIWWMSREP )\TIVMIRGI %VGLMXIGX ERH 4VSNIGX 1EREKIV JSV TVMZEXI ERH TYFPMG EKIRGMIW JSV SZIV ]IEVW .978 6)8-6)( 2SZIQFIV :SPYRXIIV QIQFIV SJ XLI 4VSJIWWSVZMPPI ,MWXSVMG 4VIWIVZEXMSR 'SQQMXXII DocuSign Envelope ID: CEF2E1E7-6D6D-4557-BF55-80980300AC93 Employment Present or Last Employer: City of San Mateo (last employer) Occupation: Senior Project Manager and Architect Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Girl Scout Leader 1995-2007 PTA Member 1994-2007 Peninsula Youth Orchestra Board Member 2001-2006 Professorville Historic Preservation Committee member 2011-2013 CERT (Citizens Emergency Response Team) 2017 to present 1. What is it about the Historic Resources Board that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? As an architect, I have been involved not only in design but in assessments of buildings and sites for historic preservation. It will be beneficial to the City to have a knowledgeable person who can distinguish between a building that is truly historical versus a building that is simply "old". As I have just recently retired, I have the time and resources to study the issues and be a contributing member of the board. Gogo Heinrich Historic Resources Board Application 2 of 5 Historic Resources Board Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Historic Resources Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope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istoric Resources Board Application 4 of 5 4. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good historic architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, Staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. 5. Historic Resources Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 Secretary of the Interiors Standards for: Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings California Environmental Quality Act DocuSign Envelope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�r rr4• rcN Historic Resources Board Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRB regularly meets the second and fourth Thursdays of the month at 8:30 a.m. Name: Address: Cell Phone: ____ Home / ____ Office Ph E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci Conflict of Interest Code require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2)provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you own or your spouse real property in Palo Alto?___Yes ____ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: DC0C369C-0AFD-4956-9E18-43E374B1762C /TEX$KQEMPGSQ 6IXMVIH GPMRMGEP WSGMEP [SVOIV +VEHYEXI WGLSSP MRGPYHIH GSYVWI [SVO MR GSQQYRMX] SVKERM^EXMSR KVSYT [SVO EPWS HYVMRK Q] GEVIIV ERH WSGMEP TSPMG] %W E PMJIXMQI PSGEP VIWMHIRX - LEZI E KSSH JIIPKVEWT SJ XLI EVIE LMWXSV] ERH VIWSYVGIW &]VSR 7X 4EPS %PXS '% / 4EXVMGME 0ERHQER Historic Resources Board Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Historic Resources Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: DC0C369C-0AFD-4956-9E18-43E374B1762C Historic Resources Board Application 4 of 5 4. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good historic architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, Staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. 5. Historic Resources Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 Secretary of the Interiors Standards for: Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings California Environmental Quality Act DocuSign Envelope ID: DC0C369C-0AFD-4956-9E18-43E374B1762C - PMOI XLI SPH LSYWIW SR /MTPMRK 'S[TIV ERH LEZI E WTIGMEP ETTVIGMEXMSR JSV XLI &MVKI 'PEVO FYMPHMRKW - PMOI XS XIWX Q] QIQSV] EW XS [LEX FYWMRIWWIW [IVI MR XLIQ SZIV XLI ]IEVW - PMOI LS[ WSQI SJ XLI RI[IV FYMPHMRKW JMX [MXL XLEX WX]PI 8LI WX]PI VIJPIGXW EW VIWTIGX ERH EHQMVEXMSR JSV PSGEP 0EXMR %QIVMGER 'EPMJSVRME VSSXW Historic Resources Board Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRB regularly meets the second and fourth Thursdays of the month at 8:30 a.m. Name: Address: Cell Ph ____ Home / ____ Office Ph E- Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci Conflict of Interest Code require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2)provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you own or your spouse real property in Palo Alto?___Yes ____ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: 12934AA9-2DA8-460A-A90A-FF3CDBF4D8A3 0IEHIVWLMT 4EPS %PXS'LEQFIV SJ 'SQQIVGI (IFSVEL * 7LITLIVH &% %VX ,MWXSV] 7XERJSVH 9RMZIVWMX] GSYVWI[SVO [MXL 4VSJ 4EYP 8YVRIV MR %QIVMGER EVGLMXIGXYVI 1% %VX ,MWXSV] 9RMZIVWMX] SJ 1MGLMKER GSRGIRXVEXMSR %QIVMGER %VX 'IVXMJMGEXI MR 1YWIYQ 4VEGXMGI 9RMZIVWMX] SJ 1MGLMKER %YHMXIH XL G %QIVMGER %VGLMXIGXYVI 'SPYQFME 9RMZIVWMX] 4VSJ (ERMIP &PYIWXSRI ,MWXSVMG 4VIWIVZEXMSR &SWXSR 9RMZIVWMX] 4VSJ 6MGLEVH 'ERHII DocuSign Envelope ID 12934AA9-2DA8-460A-A90A-FF3CDBF4D8A3 Employment Present or Last Employer: Lat Employer National Gallery of Art Occupation: Corporate Relations Officer, Exhibitions Officer Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: 2017-18 Fellow, Leadership Palo Alto, Chamber of Commerce 2017 -Present, Chair -Elect, Membership Executive Cantor/Anderson, Stanford University 2012-17 Member, Membership Executive University 1996-2001, Board member, Cow Hollow Association, Council, Council, Cantor/Anderson, Stanford San Francisco. Neighborhood organization seeking to represent homeowners in their property rights while maintaining character of historic residential neighborhood, participated in process of refining design guidelines. Member SPUR (San Francisco Planning and Urban Research), PAST, Palo Alto History Association, Palo Alto History Museum, Stanford Historical Society 1. What is it about the Historic Resources Board that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? Since retiring from museum administration, and while raising a family and restoring several historic structures (which were ultimately successful investments), I have pursued an interest in preservation in the context of vital and changing communities. My husband and I chose to return to Palo Alto (we met at Stanford)in our semi -retirement, and sought out the opportunity to renovate the Tobey House, a Category 2 historic structure (c.1904, Hale/Hamilton). I am particularly interested in issues around the current housing crisis and our need for increased density. I think this can be done while respecting some of the historic fabric of our community as well as the rights of property owners. Planners and city leaders must be more flexible and creative to meet this growing need. Deborah F. shepherd Historic Resources Board Application 2 of 5 Historic Resources Board Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Historic Resources Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: 12934AA9-2DA8-460A-A90A-FF3CDBF4D8A3 - LEZI JSPPS[IH XLI HIZIPSTQIRX SJ XLI )MGLPIV HIWMKR KYMHIPMRIW [MXL MRXIVIWX 8LMW MW E QENSV MRMXMEXMZI ERH MW SJ KVIEX MQTSVXERGI XS SYV GMX] ERH VIKMSR 8LI GMX] LEW IRKEKIH XLI FIWX I\TIVXW ERH RS[ XLI GLEPPIRKI [MPP FI XS IHYGEXI LSQIS[RIVW ERH WIIO SYX MRGIRXMZIW JSV XLIQ XS YWI XLI KYMHIPMRIW MR [SVOMRK [MXL RIMKLFSVW EW XLI KYMHIPMRIW EVI RSX IRJSVGIEFPI ERH S[RIVWW VMKLXW QYWX YPXMQEXIP] FI VIWTIGXIH EW XLI] VIRSZEXI SV I\TERH - [SRHIV MJ XLIVI MW E VSPI JSV XLI ,6& MR WYTTSVXMRK E GMX] [MHI IJJSVX XS JEGMPMXEXI XLI MRGVIEWIH PIKEP YWI SJ KYIWX GSXXEKIW KEVEKI ETEVXQIRXW ERH MRPE[ YRMXW MR XLI TVMQEV] VIWMHIRGIW MR 4EPS %PXS %R I\EQTPI GSYPH FI WIX XLVSYKL JPI\MFMPMX] MR TIVQMXXMRK JSV LMWXSVMG VIWMHIRXMEP WXVYGXYVIW [LIVI ER I\XIVMSV GSYPH FI GEVIJYPP] EPXIVIH XS MRGPYHI ER EHHMXMSREP IRXVERGI HMWGVIIX KEW ZIRXMRK JSV EHHMXMSREP ETTPMERGIWERH I\XIRHIH VSSJPMRIW SV VIXVEGXEFPI E[RMRKW XS MRGVIEWI SJJ WXVIIX TEVOMRK - VIEPM^I XLMW MW E PEVKIV ERH GSQTPI\ MWWYI LEZMRK XS HS [MXL GYVVIRX GSHIW ,S[IZIV [I LEZI QER] HIIT PEVKI PSXW [MXL XLI TSXIRXMEP JSV EHHMXMSREP LSYWMRK [LMPI WXMPP VIWTIGXMRK XLI LMWXSVMG ERH WMRKPI JEQMP] H[IPPMRK WX]PIW 8LIWI YRMXW GER KEVRIV ZEPYEFPI VIZIRYI JSV LSQIS[RIVW ERH EPPS[ XLIQ XS WXE] MR XLIMV S[R LSQIW [MXL XLI HVEQEXMGEPP] MRGVIEWIH GSWX SJ PMZMRK LIVI 7YGL MQTVSZIQIRXW GER EPWS EHH WMKRMJMGERXP] XS XLI ZEPYI SJ XLI S[RIVW TVSTIVXMIW Historic Resources Board Application 4 of 5 4. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good historic architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, Staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. 5. Historic Resources Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 Secretary of the Interiors Standards for: Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings California Environmental Quality Act DocuSign Envelope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ocuSign Envelope ID 12934AA9-2DA8-460A-A9OA-FF3CDBF4D8A3 Consent to Puhlish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Wehsite California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk, OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: X Home/ E-mail: Office Phone: The phone number/ address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. (-DocuSgned by: 006114, F. S (ALr4. Signature: `—Oc1De51FFDOA452 Date: 4/19/2018 (Optional) Additional Attachment(s) If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Deborah F. shepherd Historic Resources Board Application 5 of 5 �r rr4• rcN DocuSign Envelope ID C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-008147259A22 Personal Information — Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Rebecca Eisenberg Address: 2345 Waverley St. , Palo Alto, CA 94301 Cell Phone: 415-235-8078 Home/ x Office Phone: 415-235-8078 E-mail: rebeccac privateclientlegal . com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? x Yes No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto. who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes x No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? x Yes No California state law and the City's Conflict of Interest Code LINK require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests. Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in. or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects. or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Yes x No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? _ Yes x No How did you learn about this vacancy? Community Group Daily Post x Email from City Clerk X City Website Palo Alto Weekly Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: * Attorney; active Member of the California Bar since 1993. * J.D. Cum Laude Harvard Law School, 1993. * B.A. Phi Beta Kappa Psychology/Decision Sciences, Stanford, 1990. * Legal expert in Title IX, Title VII, CA's Equal Pay Act, ADA, AREA, IDEA, FERPA, and related equal -opportunity federal and state laws * Trained mediator, negotiator and crisis counselor. * Own & operate boutique law firm handling employment negotiation and private company stock transactions * Advise companies on pay equity and comper AA QPelations Commission Application lof5 Rebecca Eisenberg DocuSign Envelope ID C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-008147259A22 Employment Present or Last Employer: Private Client Legal Services Occupation: Attorney - Principal & Founder Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Non -Profit Board Memberships: * Board of Directors, Legal Momentum (formerly known as the National Organization for Women Legal Defense Fund national board), 2009-2012. * Board of Directors, Craigslist Foundation, Treasurer, Founding member, 1999-2007. * Board of Advisors, Kiva.org (Microfinance Nonprofit), 2006-2009. * Board of Advisors, The Webby Awards, and Member, International Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2003 -present. Volunteer Contributions: * Pro Bono attorney for families of special ed and Title IX students. * Jordan Middle School: Parent Volunteer * Leadership Circle, Palo Alto Partners in Education (PiE) * Stanford University: Special Gifts / Fundraising / Development Committee, Stanford Homecoming Reunion 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015. * Harvard Law School: Celebration 55 Executive Organizing Committee, Celebration 60 Executive Committee and Panel Moderator: Panel on discrimination in high tech industry. 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? The Human Relations Commission's mandate of promoting the just and fair treatment of all people in Palo Alto, particularly those most vulnerable, is precisely aligned with the mission of my professional career as well as my personal interests. Professionally, I run a law firm serving mostly women and minorities with compensation negotiation, working towards the shared goals of equal pay for equal work. Previously, I served of head of Legal and Human Resources for several technology companies, including Trulia, Flip Video and Reddit. I have published numerous articles on unconscious (and conscious!) bias in Silicon Valley, and have spoken on these topics at conferences and events. I am passionate about promoting awareness of these issues, and enabling conversations that seek to increase inclusion and mutual respect. My legal expertise and experience in the areas of human rights law, and also in the areas of technology law combine to make me a highly qualified candidate for the HRC. For example, my knowledge of federal and state privacy law could be helpful to the analysis of the police proposal about video surveillance. And my knowledge of civil rights law could help with analyzing the women's equality discussion the Commission had recently. Human Relations Commission Application 2of5 Rebecca Eisenberg Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 - [SYPH PMOI XLI 'SQQMWWMSR XS GSRXMRYI MXW KSSH [SVO MR LIPTMRK XS QEOI ERH OIIT 4EPS %PXS ER MRGPYWMZI ERH [IPGSQMRK GSQQYRMX] - [SYPH EREP]^I XLI TVSTSWEPW KMZIR XS QI YWMRK Q] I\TIVMIRGI ERH WOMPPW EW ER EXXSVRI] ERH EW E PMJIPSRK EHZSGEXI JSV GMZMP ERH LYQER VMKLXW 3RI EVIE [LIVI - XLMRO [I GER KVS[ MW MR TVSZMHMRK QSVI STTSVXYRMXMIW MR PIEHIVWLMT TSWMXMSRW JSV KMVPW ERH [SQIR 1SWX 4EPS %PXS 'SQQMWWMSRW EVI QENSVMX] QEPI IZIR XLSYKL XLI QENSVMX] SJ 4EPS %PXSW TSTYPEXMSR MW WEMH XS FI JIQEPI - LEZI E PMJIPSRK VIGSVH SJ EGGSQTPMWLQIRXW TVSQSXMRK SXLIV [SQIR ERH TVSZMHMRK SXLIV [SQIR IWTIGMEPP] QMRSVMX] [SQIR [MXL STTSVXYRMXMIW [LIR TYX MR E TSWMXMSR XLEX EPPS[W QI XS HS WS %W E 7IRMSV 0IKEP (MVIGXSV EX 4E]4EP JSV ]IEVW JSV I\EQTPI - LMVIH LMKLP] UYEPMJMIH [SQIR SRXS Q] XIEQ QER] SJ XLIQ QMRSVMX] [SQIR ERH IZIR VIGVYMXIH X[S [SQIR [LSWI NSFW PEGOIH ER] YT[EVH TSXIRXMEP FIJSVI - LMVIH XLIQ LEZMRK WIVZIH TVIZMSYWP] EW EHQMRMWXVEXMZI EWWMWXERXW XS I\IGYXMZIW FYX RS[ FIGEQI GSRXVEGX EREP]WXW ERH GSRXVEGX QEREKIVW - EPWS [SYPH PMOI XS WII QSVI EXXIRXMSR XS XLI RIIHW SJ SYV 'MX]W EKMRK TSTYPEXMSR QER] SJ [LSQ PMZI EPSRI ERH QER] EPWS SJ [LSQ LEZI QSFMPMX] GLEPPIRKIW 8SKIXLIV [I GER OIIT 4EPS %PXS XLI WTIGMEP TPEGI [I ORS[ ERH PSZI 4IV EFSZI - JSYRH XLI HMWGYWWMSR SJ XLI TSPMGI TVSTSWEP XS YWI ZMHIS VIGSVHMRK XS FI ZIV] MRXIVIWXMRK EW MX MW ER EVIE [LIVI MRHMZMHYEP VMKLXW ERH PMFIVXMIW SZIVPET [MXL SYV RIIH XS TVIZIRX GVMQI ERH OIIT TISTPI WEJI - VIWTIGXIH XLI XLSYKLXJYP ETTVSEGL XEOIR F] XLI 'SQQMWWMSR MR EWOMRK UYIWXMSRW EFSYX XLI HMWGPSWYVI SJ XLI VIGSVHMRKW EW [IPP EW MRHMZMHYEPW VMKLXW XS EGGIWW VIGSVHMRKW XLEX QE] WLS[ TSPMGI [VSRKHSMRK SV [LMGL GSYPH FI YWIH EKEMRWX XLI MRHMZMHYEP MRETTVSTVMEXIP] +MZIR Q] I\TIVMIRGI [MXL TVMZEG] PE[W ERH GSRXIRX PMGIRWMRK IWTIGMEPP] HYVMRK XLI XMQI - WTIRX EW +IRIVEP 'SYRWIP SJ 6IHHMX - FIPMIZI - GSYPH GSRXVMFYXI XS XLMW HMWGYWWMSR MR LIPTJYP [E]W 6IHHMX SJXIR WIVZIW EW E WSYVGI SJ JMVWXLERH [MXRIWW EGGSYRXW JSV FSXL XLI TSPMGI ERH XLI QIHME [LMGL LIPTW WIVZI SYV GSQQYRMX]W MRXIVIWXW MR HMWGSZIVMRK XLI XVYXL ERH TYRMWLMRK [VSRKHSIVW %X 6IHHMX - [SVOIH SR TSPMGMIW XLEX TVSXIGXIH XLI YWI SJ XLI JSVYQ JSV WLEVMRK MRJSVQEXMSR ERH TIVWTIGXMZIW [LMPI EPWS FIMRK QMRHJYP SJ TVIZIRXMRK XLI WMXI JVSQ WLEVMRK TIVWSREP ERH TVMZEXI MRJSVQEXMSR WYGL EW TLSXSW [MXLSYX XLI GSRWIRX SJ XLI TIVWSR FIMRK TLSXSKVETLIH - FIPMIZI XLEX XLMW I\TIVMIRGI FEPERGMRK MRHMZMHYEP VMKLXW [MXL GMZMP PMFIVXMIW [SYPH FI ER EWWIX JSV XLI 'SQQMWWMSR Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 - VIEH XLVSYKL XLIWI HSGYQIRXW XLI PEWX XMQI - ETTPMIH JSV XLMW 'SQQMWWMSR ERH [SYPH FI LETT] XS VIEH XLVSYKL XLIQ EKEMR +MZIR Q] ]IEVW SJ I\TIVMIRGI EW ER EXXSVRI] - EQ ZIV] WOMPPIH EX VIEHMRK EREP]^MRK MRXIVTVIXMRK ERH ETTP]MRK XLIWI X]TIW SJ VITSVXW TPERW ERH HSGYQIRXW DocuSign Envelope ID C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-008147259A22 Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: X I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. —DocuSigned by. Signature: "- 79002BDAC3F4466 (Optional) Additional Attachment(sl Date:3/20/2018 If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box x and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Rebecca Eisenberg Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 Rebecca L. Eisenberg, Esq. 2345 Waverley St. Palo Alto, CA 94301 (415) 2358078 rebecca@privateclientlegal.com OVERVIEW: Trusted legal advisor and counsel for organizations & individuals. Detailoriented, empathetic, efficient, team player. EDUCATION: Harvard Law School, J.D., June 1993 Editor, Harvard Law Review. Harvard Law Record, journalist and columnist. contributor and editor. ABA, President of Harvard Law Chapter. Graduated Cum Laude. Stanford University, B.A. Psychology/Decision Sciences, June 1990 Phi Beta Kappa elected junior year. Departmental distinction. Boothe Prize for Excellence in Writing. Cap & Gown Honor Society; Phi Psi Honor Society. President, Stanford Undergraduate Psychology Association (SUPA). Peer Tutor, Calculus, Stanford Center for Teaching & Learning. Orientation Coordinator, Program Advisor, Stanford Office of Residential Education. Peer Counselor, the Stanford Bridge (suicide and counseling hotline). Teaching Assistant, Prof. Philip Zimbardo, sophomore, junior and senior years. BAR: Active member (167748) of the California Bar and the Federal Bar, Central District of California, admitted Dec. 1993. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Private Client Legal Advisors, San Francisco, CA Principal & Founder, 1/2013 Present Operate boutique legal services firm, providing following services: Serve as outside GC for nonprofit organizations, technology companies, angel funds, entrepreneurs and executives. Locate, hire and manage specialized outside counsel; serve as intermediary between client and firms. Assist a variety of clients with matters involving regulatory compliance, employment matters, compensation, Fair Pay Act compliance, HR policies, financings and corporate transactions, as well as commercial agreements, licensing, employment disputes, litigation management, dispute resolution, public relations, and other business and legal affairs on behalf of founders, executives, nonprofits, companies and startups. Advise parents and various school representatives regarding legal rights and compliance under Title IX, FERPA, the CPRA, ADA, IDEA, California Ed Code and other local, state and federal laws and regulations. Serve as Palo Alto Education Law Expert to KTVU News San Jose. Analyze, negotiate and advise firms, companies and individuals on their financerelated documents warrants, convertible notes, stock purchase agreements, articles of incorporation and related corporate documents; provide actionable advice for stakeholders regarding different options and potential outcomes based on quantitative analysis of liquidity flowing through cap tables, interest accruing over time, types of collateral, and otherwise. Handle governance issues on behalf of a variety of organizations, including Board Meetings, public filings, and regulatory and legal compliance; ensure compliance with privacy laws and disclosure mandates. Provide legal consulting on Human Resources issues, including compensation, compliance and risk reduction. Vouch Financial Inc., San Francisco, CA General Counsel, Head of Human Resources & Corporate Secretary 5/14 to 3/15 first GC & Head of HR (4th employee), handled all legal & HR matters, including: Built and established legal department and legal function, including budget and hiring plan. Served as Board Secretary, drafted board resolutions, shareholder consents and board meeting minutes. Ensured compliance with all governance regulatory compliance including privacy and disclosure requirements. Secured new company office space, negotiated real estate transactions, handled office improvements and renovations in costeffective and efficient, yet highly successful manner. DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 Handled 2 rounds of venture capital financing, as well as venture debt line; advised on all financial transactions. Established compliant HR system & structure, with a focus on risk reduction, recruiting & retention; established all legal and HR form agreements, company manuals and policies; trained employees on compliance. Created compensation programs with focus on compliance, recruiting and retention. Ensured regulatory and legal compliance with lending regulations (state and federal). Drafted company outward and inwardfacing policies, including privacy policies, user agreements, loan agreements, guarantor agreements, terms of use, license agreements, electronic communications agreements, credit consents and other legal agreements for website users, borrowers and guarantors. Negotiated all contracts with strategic business partners, investors, lenders, customers, and vendors. reddit Inc., San Francisco, CA General Counsel, Head of Finance and Head of Human Resources, 1/12 to 1/13 andled all legal, finance and HR matters for reddit, including: Negotiated and executed successful spinoff of reddit Inc. from Advance/Conde Nast. Served as Board Secretary; drafted & distributed resolutions, consents and board minutes. Legal, Human Resources and Finance departments. ensured regulatory and legal compliance, trained employees, drafted all employee agreements and policies. Handled, managed and trained staff members to respond to all Subpoenas, DMCA requests, infringement letters and other inbound legal communications. Established compensation systems and ensured compliance and consistency. Create . handled investment round and all corporate legal matters. Negotiated all commercial agreements; drafted all standard contracts; handled all other legal matters. Trulia, Inc., San Francisco, CA General Counsel, 3/10 to 12/11 andled all legal issues for this fastpaced Internet startup in the real estate industry, including: Handled M & A transactions, including acquisition of startup Movity. Handled financial transactions, including closing highfigure loan financing. Handled, drafted, negotiated all other corporate and commercial transactions, including business development, sales, licensing, comarketing and other commercial contracts, as well as real estate leases and transactions. Handled human resources issues, including handbooks, terminations, separation agreements and stock issues. Managed IP portfolio, including patents and trademarks. Managed litigation, including several patent infringement lawsuits; obtained very favorable settlement. Handled legal issues in product development, including terms of use, privacy policies and issuing associated with User Generated Content. Served on Senior Management Team, contribute to corporate strategy. Pure Digital Technologies, Inc., San Francisco, CA General Counsel, 9/089/09 Handled all legal issues for this consumer electronics technology company that provides the popular line of Flip Video handheld digital video camcorders. Handled successful Exit: Merger of Pure Digital with Cisco Systems, Inc in $615 million transaction. Led $630 Million merger with Cisco, in addition to all other corporate transactions. Successfully settled multimillion dollar (claimed) patent suit, managed all other litigation and threatened litigation. Handled all commercial transactions, licensing, sales and business development deal support (technology, software, content, comarketing), including with Facebook, Product (RED), YouTube, MySpace, AOL and other industry leaders. Led HR legal organization, provided advice, contracts, separations, consulting, conflict management. Handled intellectual property portfolio: patents, trademarks, copyrights. Leader on executive management team, provided strategic decision making, interfaced with Board of Directors. Managed and hired resources, handled legal budget of approximately $4 million. AdBrite, Inc., San Francisco, CA Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary of the Board , 3/079/08 andled all legal matters for this Internet startup in the online advertising space. Handled corporate governance/securities: minutes, resolutions Negotiated/drafted all commercial transactions: licensing, sales, real estate Handled Intellectual Property: Managed IP portfolio, all patents, copyrights, trademarks, DMCA. Successfully avoided litigation/managed risk: disposed of issues before they lead to lawsuits; create policies. DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 Provided executive management, leadership. PayPal, Inc., an eBay Company, San Jose, CA Senior Counsel, Senior Director, Assistant Secretary 7/013/07 Joined company as second attorney, and assisted with IPO, Secondary Offering and Public Company Merger. Corporate development: assisted with IPO, secondary offering and public company merger with eBay Inc. Commercial Transactions: Handled all commercial transactions for the company. Sales: Supported sales team for $1.5 billion revenue company; create standardized documents and train salesforce. Intellectual property: Advised executives on intellectual property matters & compliance, handle IP licenses and strategy. International: supported business clients in Asia, Europe and Canada. Product Development: Analyzed all product specifications; drafted licenses and terms. User Agreement and Privacy Policy: drafting and maintenance, enforcement. Marketing and Content: Reviewed all marketing and other content; advised company on issues and risks. Management: Build and managed commercial legal team comprised of ten attorneys and staff. Risk management, litigation management, departmental processes. Ecast, Inc. (Internetbased music and games company), San Francisco, CA Vice President of Legal and New Market Development,9/996/01 Helped raise more than $18 M for the company, worked with investors. Managed strategic and business development as well as most legal and corporate development. Successfully closed deals including: digital music licensing with all 5 major labels, film/gaming licenses, wireless distribution deals , $7 million dollar software license/equity investment agreement with UK company. As the first licensed attorney to join the executive team of this fastpaced startup, also served as lead on risk management, compliance and marketing review, as well as delivered competitive analysis and business strategy. Cole Valley Group Consulting, San Francisco, CA Consultant: Internet business strategy, M&A advising & marketing , 10/9510/99 Provided strategic, technical marketing and business development services for numerous clients including Pixar, Quokka, Yoga Journal, Adjacency, Inc. (now Sapient), StarMine, Cyborganic Media, MediaCast, Sound Exchange Records, Electric Minds, Verbum and ChemisTree, among other startups and new media companies. Wrote over 10 business plans for startups, which as a group raised over $30M in venture financing; consulted start ups and established companies on mergers & acquisitions and other exit strategies; advised on intellectual property strategies. Consulted on intellectual property and strategic legal matters, including contributing to Rembrandts in the Closet, book on IP business strategies written by SmartPatents CEO (now Aurigin). CBS MarketWatch, San Francisco, CA 4/01 financial news site; contributed over 100 columns. Columns covered both technology strategic issues as well as high tech legal issues, including a high profile series on media. Awarded WELL journalism award for column which revealed privacy strategy behind WebMD/Healtheon merger. The San Francisco Examiner Internet business columnist , 6/9710/99 Wrote Net Skink, a biweekly column on Internet issues featured in the Sunday Cyborganic Media Director, Product Management and Corporate Development , 11/9510/97 Very early member of startup team on this tooearly MYSPACElike company (community and content aggregator) Produced and managed Hired, trained, managed and edited group of 12 individuals creating, updating and managing Web site GeekCereal.com. Contributed to Cyborganic business plan, helped raise angel funding. U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, Houston, TX DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 Judicial Law Clerk, Chief Judge Carolyn Dineen King, 8/95 11/95. U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, Washington, DC Judicial Law Clerk, Honorable Gladys Kessler, 8/947/95. U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Los Angeles, CA Judicial Law Clerk, Honorable A. Andrew Hauk, 8/938/94. Morrison & Foerster, San Francisco, CA Summer Associate, business law and litigation, 1992. Ross & Hardies, Chicago, IL Summer Associate, business law and litigation, 1991. BOARD MEMBERSHIPS: Board of Directors, Legal Momentum (formerly known as the National Organization for Women Legal Defense Fund national board), 20092012. Board of Directors, Craigslist Foundation, Treasurer, Founding member, 1999 2007. Board of Advisors, Kiva.org (Microfinance Nonprofit), 20062009. Board of Advisors, The Webby Awards, and Member, International Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2003 present. PUBLICATIONS: Academic Writing: Rebecca Eisenberg, Beyond Bray: Obtaining Federal Jurisdiction to Stop AntiAbortion Violence, 6 Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 155 (1994). Note, Pornography, Equality, and a DiscriminationFree Workplace: A Comparative Perspective, 106 Harvard Law Review 1075 (1993). Book Note, An Unladylike Response to Legal Conceptions of Women (reviewing Faludi, Backlash), 105 Harvard Law Review 2104 (1992). Popular Media Writing: Weekly column, Net Skink, San Francisco Chronicle Weekly column, Nouveau Geek, CBS Market Watch Regular contributor, Wired, Red Herring, Upside, Fast Company, Time Daily, Entertainment Weekly, Ms. Magazine. List of published clips available by request and online: http://www.omino.com/~dom/clips/ EDUCATION / VOLUNTEER ROLES: Special Gifts / Fundraising / Development Committee, Stanford Homecoming Reunion 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015. Harvard Law School Celebration 55 Committee; Harvard Law School Celebration 60 Committee. Reunion and Fundraising Coordinator, Whitefish Bay High School, Whitefish Bay, WI. Development Committee, Brandeis Hillel Day School, San Francisco, CA Room Parent, Brandeis Hillel Day School, San Francisco, CA Parent Volunteer, Walter Hays Elementary School, Palo Alto, CA Parent Volunteer, Jordan Middle School, Palo Alto, CA AWARDS & SPEAKING ROLES: Education law expert, KTVU News, San Jose. Award Winner, Top 25 Women on the Web. Award Winner, WELL Writing Award, Journalism and Overall Grand Prize. Technology industry Hardball with Chris Matthews , and PBS Computer Chronicles and Internet Café. Expert on consumer protection online; featured in book, Web Rules: How the Internet is Changing the Way Consumers Make Choices by Tom Murphy. Planning Committee and Panel Moderator hip Summit at Harvard Law School. DocuSign Envelope ID: C0473513-1850-4CC5-ADE1-C08147259A22 �r rr4• rcN Human Relations Commission Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Address: Cell Phone: ____ Home / ____ Office Phone: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? ___ Yes ___ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____ City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ABD1DCF-E1F7-4CEE-BC12-542E3C4B30D1                                                  Human Relations Commission Application 2 of 5 Employment Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ABD1DCF-E1F7-4CEE-BC12-542E3C4B30D1                                                                                                                                          Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ABD1DCF-E1F7-4CEE-BC12-542E3C4B30D1                                                                                                                                                                                                Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ABD1DCF-E1F7-4CEE-BC12-542E3C4B30D1                       Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached The full code can be read here: Read the code, and check only ONE option below: _ Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: ____ Home / ____ Office Phone: ______ E-mail: ____________________________________________ The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. Signature: Date: (Optional) Additional Attachment(s) If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your document(s). DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ABD1DCF-E1F7-4CEE-BC12-542E3C4B30D1  �r rr4• rcN DocuSign Envelope ID: 6375E5E6-D59D-40AC-9CA1-86897D39DE59 Personal Information — Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Gabriel P Kralik Address: Cell Pho 1 x Home/ E - Office Ph Are you a Palo Alto Resident? x Yes No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto. who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes x No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? x Yes No California state law and the City's Conflict of Interest Code LINK require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests. Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in. or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of. a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects. or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Yes x No Excluding your principal residence. do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? _ Yes x No How did you learn about this vacancy? Community Group Daily Post x Email from City Clerk City Website Palo Alto Weekly Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Undergraduate Degree: B.S. Chemical Engineering, U. of Notre Dame, 1982;Law Degree: J.D., U. of Notre Dame, 1989. Named to the Santa Clara County Human Relations Commission in 2017; Presently serving as Vice -Chair of the Commission. Gabriel P Kralik Human Relations Commission Application 1 of 5 Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: 6375E5E6-D59D-40AC-9CA1-86897D39DE59 ,6' LEW LIEVH HMWGYWWMSR SJ MRGPYWMZIRIWW MR XLI GSQQYRMX] MRGPYHMRK [MXL VIWTIGX XS LSYWMRKWIRMSVW ERH MQQMKVERXW 8LMW [SVO SZIVPETW [MXL HMWGYWWMSRW ERH [SVO TPER MXIQW SJ XLI 7ERXE 'PEVE ,6' 'SQQMWWMSR -R XLI TEWX ]IEV - LEZI [SVOIH GPSWIP] [MXL XLI &MPP ;MPWSR 'IRXIV SR TVSTSWIH JYRHMRK JSV XLIMV 'SYGL 7YVJMRK ]SYXL LSQIPIWW EHZSGEG] MRGPYHMRK XS WTIEVLIEH E VIWSPYXMSR SJ XLI ,6' EWOMRK XLI &SEVH SJ 7YTIVZMWSVW XS JYRH E RI[ SYXVIEGL TVSKVEQ F] &;' 1] JSGYW MW SR SYXVIEGL MR VIKEVHW XS QIRXEP LIEPXL WIRMSVW ERH ]SYXL [IPJEVI - [SYPH [SVO [MXL XLI 'SQQMWWMSR XS GVIEXI [SVO TPER EKIRHE MXIQW XS EHHVIWW XLIWI MWWYIW ERH MRZMXI TVIWIRXEXMSRW EX XLI 'SQQMWWMSR PIZIP XLEX GSYPH IHYGEXI ERH EHZSGEXI %W ER IRH VIWYPX - [SYPH I\TIGX XS QEOI JSVQEP VIGSQQIRHEXMSRW JSV WYTTSVX EX XLI 'MX] 'SYRGMP PIZIP Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: 6375E5E6-D59D-40AC-9CA1-86897D39DE59 ;LMPI - HS RSX LEZI WTIGMJMG I\TIVMIRGI [MXL XLIWI [SVOMRK HSGYQIRXW - LEZI LEH EGGIWW XS ERH WXYHMIH WMQMPEV VIWSYVGIW EX XLI 'SYRX] PIZIP EW TEVX SJ Q] ,6' [SVO DocuSign Envelope ID: 6375E5E6-D59D-40AC-9CA1-86897D39DE59 Consent to Publish Personal Intormation on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR X I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 555 Bryant St . , #288 Cell Phone: 6508478644 Home / X Office Phone: 6508478644 E-mail: gabekralik@thujaglobal.com The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. (-DocuSigned by: 661rit,t, f 6'aGfc Signature: --996E4C3D16F04E4 Date:3/21/2018 (Optional) Additional Attachment(s) If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Gabriel P Kralik Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 �r rr4• rcN Human Relations Commission Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Address: Cell Phone: ____ Home / ____ Office Phone: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2)provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? ___ Yes ___ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: 4108BBE1-F3F7-4CBF-9C9A-DA1816FCD0DF [JQSVVMWSR$IEVXLPMRORIX HYRGER TPEGI &%)GSRSQMGW 8VMRMX] 'SPPIKI ,EVXJSVH '8 7SQI QEWXIVW [SVO 7TIRX ]IEVW SR XLI ,IEHUYEVXIVW 7XEJJ SJ ;IWXMRKLSYWI [MXL WTIGMJMG VIWTSRWMFMPMXMIW JSV XVEMRMRK ERH HIZIPSTQIRX SJ QEREKIVW MR 1ERYJEGXYVMRK 4YVGLEWMRK - [EW RIKSXMEXMSR GSRWYPXERX XIEGLMRK SZIV TISTPI ,EZI LEH RIKSXMEXMSRW FSSOW TYFPMWLIH ERH [SVOMRK SR JSYVXL %JXIV - VIXMVIH JVSQ ;IWXMRKLSYWI XEYKLX EX 7ER .SWI 7XEXI JSV ]VW [MPPMEQ QSVVMWSR DocuSign Envelope ID 4108BBE1-F3F7-4CBF-9C9A-DA1816FCDODF Employment Present or Last Employer: San Jose State University Occupation: lecturer, college of business Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Very active in my church: 1. Secretary of Parish Stewardship Council 2. Secretary of Finance Advisory Council 3. Chair of Facilities Committee 4. Chair of Dermony Center Repair & Update Committee 5. Head Usher In early years: 1. United Fund in three different cities 2. Very active in church in three different cities 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? Very strong interest in developing people to maximize their potential I designed, developed and presented the first Women in Management Course in the Electrical industry. Objective, in addition to learning management skills was to help develop and "old gals network." william f morrison Human Relations Commission Application 2 of 5 Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: 4108BBE1-F3F7-4CBF-9C9A-DA1816FCD0DF -RGVIEWI [SQIRW MQTPS]QIRX MR 4EPS %PXS IWTIGMEPP] MR QEREKIQIRX (MZIVWMX] [SQIRW MWWYIW JEMV IQTPS]QIRX Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: 4108BBE1-F3F7-4CBF-9C9A-DA1816FCD0DF RSRI DocuSign Envelope ID 4108BBE1-F3F7-4CBF-9C9A-DA1816FCDODF Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Wehsite California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk, OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. DocuSigned by: wtl,tta.t4 f MS014, Signature: ` D'DE9691DCOA4EA Date:4/9/2018 (Optional) Additional Attachment(s) If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). william f morrison Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 �r rr4• rcN DocuSign Envelope ID C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 Personal Information — Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Kaloma A. Smith Address: Cell Ph Home / x Office Ph E - Are you a Palo Alto Resident? x Yes No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto. who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes x No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? x Yes No California state law and the City's Conflict of Interest Code LINK require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests. Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in. or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects. or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Yes x No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? _ Yes x No How did you learn about this vacancy? Community Group Daily Post x Email from City Clerk City Website Palo Alto Weekly Flyer Other: Current commissioner List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Please see attachment Kaloma A. Smith Human Relations Commission Application 1 of 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 Employment Present or Last Employer: University AME Zion Church Occupation: Senior Pastor/ Clergy Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Please see attachment 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? Please see attachment Kaloma A. Smith Human Relations Commission Application 2 of 5 Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 4PIEWI WII EXXEGLQIRX 4PIEWI WII EXXEGLQIRX Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 2S TVIZMSYW I\TIVMIRGI DocuSign Envelope ID C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR x I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 159 California Ave, Unit J109, Palo Alto CA, 9 Cell Phone: 9143744255 Home/ X Office Phone: 6502726472 E-mail: Pastor@universityamez.com The phone number/ address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. ,-DocuSignetl by: Signature: —20007949EA794co (Optional) Additional Attachment(sl Date:3/20/2018 If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box X and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Kaloma A. Smith Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: I have a wide range of experience and training that I feel would make me very useful in the role. Here is a brief synopsis of pertinent leadership experiences: 1. I have been able to successfully lead the University A.M.E. Zion through a significant transformation and growth. When I arrived five years ago, our congregation was down to 19 active members, who were black and seniors. Today we have grown to 120 active members, and we are now a multicultural church with an average age of 32. 2. I have completed the required course of study and educational training necessary for the ordination in the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church. The ordination criteria are eight years of denominational study and formal schooling. This training included focus on community building, interpersonal conflict resolution and more. 3. I work on the national level to address systemic societal issues. I am currently part of the leadership cadre for the March Against Racism in Washington DC on April 4 th in Washington DC to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King. This march is sponsored by the National Council of Churches which represents 38 denominations, 100,000 congregations, and 45 million people. 4. I have been selected to be part of the Next Generation Leadership Cohort of World Methodist Evangelism which is part of World Methodist Council which represent 82 million people from 133 countries. 5. I am part of the Emerging Social Leader Cohort of the Peninsula Solidarity Network. I am the only clergy selected to the cohort from Santa Clara County. 6. I served as the Vice Chairperson for Ecumenical Hunger Program in East Palo Alto. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I am currently the Senior Pastor of the University A.M.E. Zion Church which is the oldest black church in the city of Palo Alto; this role has allowed me to connect with a wide range of community leaders and to be on the forefront of community dialogue around many issues. In the past three years I have led or participated in several initiatives to help foster a healthy conversation in our community: Community Open Forums on Race in America: After the tragic shootings at Mother Emmanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston SC, there was a significant community outpouring of concern about race and where do we move from here. We held several community forums, which each had over 150 people in attendance. These forums allowed us to start the discussion around race and equality in our community and our country as a whole. Out of these community forums, we executed three significant initiatives; the first was the Community Unity Fair at Cubberley Community Center. We partnered with the city of Palo Alto and several local religious and civic organizations to hold a community fair that had children of different racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds coming together to have fun. The goal was to create a space that would allow DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 children meet others from different backgrounds and let them see that we are all the same. The second was viewing and discussing the movie Church. This movie dealt with white privilege and its impact on racism and implicit bias and how it impacts Palo Alto. The discussion was lively and cathartic. The third activity was a community book club that read the book "The New Jim Crow." It was a thought provoking and compelling dialogue dealing with mass incarceration and how it impacts our communities. I have also partnered with the Human Relations Committee in the planning of two initiatives in 2016 and 2017 named "Being Different Together." The original 2016 was a panel discussion and forum held at the Mitchell Park Library. I was part of the planning team along with being the moderator for that event. This event was a great success and well attended; it sparked us to ask the question, How could we continue the positive momentum and equip community leaders with tools to address implicit bias In 2017 we planned a 4 part Being Different Together." We worked with Dr. Joseph Brown from Stanford University to bring the implicit bias training that Stanford developed to the Palo Alto community. We were intentional inviting and encouraged persons from varied perspectives to be part of this community dialogue. It was terrific to have so many different views in the room. It made the discussion more meaningful and authentic. This initiative was a great success because of the positive community response. It also allowed people to be reflective of their implicit bias and it equipped them with tools to take back to their various constituency. I have also been active in promoting and developing ecumenical and interfaith connections in Palo Alto. Under my leadership, the University A.M.E. Zion Church has led our community in several activities to encourage religious tolerance. One of our events was sponsoring the 2016 Multifaith Peace Walk and Picnic to remember 9/11. The Multifaith Peace Walk started at Congregation Etz Chayim/Spark Church, then it went to University Church, followed by walking to Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic Church and concluded with American Muslim Voice hosted Peace Picnic at Mitchell Park. Each of the stops put together a brief presentation on how we can achieve peace in our society. The march was a fantastic show of solidarity in our community with over 700 participants, and over 35 community faith and civic organization represented including the Chief of Police from the city of Palo Alto. Finally, I am part of the of the Social Justice for Emerging Leader cohort for the Peninsula Solidarity Network. The Silicon Valley Foundation sponsors the Social Justice for Emerging Leader cohort. This program gathers community leaders from many faith traditions to research, discuss and dialogue with subject matter experts on issues that specifically affect our area. We have spent significant time examining issues such immigration, hyper capitalism, and housing issues. 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 Building healthy and sustainable communities is one of my passions. Whether it is in my role as Senior Pastor at University or in the Palo Alto community, I desire to build bridges and give voice to all stakeholders, equitably and efficiently. I believe this lines up with the stated purpose of the Human Relations Commission of fostering public awareness and understanding of human relations by any means. I believe the first step in any movement forward or reconciliation is an open dialogue, and it hopefully will foster compassion and communication for all parties involved. We live in very complicated times, and I believe for Palo Alto to continue to be a healthy and dynamic city, the work of the Human Relations Commission is vital. People in the community need to know there is a place where they can speak on complicated and nuanced issues we face today. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive: The March 8th meeting of the Human Relations Commission dealt with the issue of Palo Alto Police Field Based Video Policy. I believe this is one of the most critical issues in modern policing. The use of these technologies adds a layer of accountability and protection to the police officers. It's important that our city has a comprehensive policy in place to protect its citizens and employees. In today's modern political climate policing incidents can be significant flashpoints and having video evidence can hopefully allow for more clarity in the investigation of these incidents. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? Palo Alto is indeed a global city, attracting people from all over the world. Our diversity is one of our greatest strengths, but it is an underutilized resource. Many people in Palo Alto have limited community based around work, ethnic groups or children activities. We as a city need to find ways to encourage and build deeper relationships based on the fact that we are all Palo Alto residents. We need to find ways to help those who are new to the community to dive into the deep end and connect with others. We also need to find ways to encourage longtime residents to be more receptive and accepting of newcomers. If I have the honor of being on the Human Relations Commission, my goal would be to develop resolutions, events, programs, and initiatives to encourage broader community in the city we call home. DocuSign Envelope ID: C4619C96-457B-4723-B7BF-F4E706BFF269 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E0E8E38-E33F-4DAD-B3D9-86513A814E09 Personal Information - Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Valerie Hunt Stinger Address: Cell Ph x Home / Office Ph E - Are you a Palo Alto Resident? x Yes No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes x No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? x Yes No Califomia state law and the City's Conflict of Interest Code LINK require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Yes X No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? _ Yes x No How did you learn about this vacancy? Community Group Daily Post Email from City Clerk City Website Palo Alto Weekly Flyer Other: David Carnahan List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: B.A., Economics, Goucher College Graduate work in Economics & Statistics, Boston College MBA, University of Santa Clara Middle East Civilization, French Lang., Foothill College,Honors Inst. Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission, 200 alRelR?6 srCbr4igiSon Application MaillfriVciajwatfteiffgausiness Advisory Board (CRDF Recognition Medal Recipient), 2007-2014 11 A 1 1 /1 /1 1 /1 1 of 5 DocuSign Envelope ID 3E0E8E38-E33F-4DAD-B3D9-86513A814E09 Employment Present or Last Employer: Consultant, Biotech; Consultant, Developing Economies Occupation: Retired Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: My commitment has been to programs promoting diversity, economic development, and access to public services. Most relevant is my appointment to two City Commissions. In my term on the HRC, I have promoted diversity by leading the response to Council Resolution #9653. Currently I am working on initiatives for gender equity, gender identity, and immigrant engagement. Previously I initiated, Being Different Together, to address implicit bias. In my two terms on the LAC, I was actively involved researching and compiling the LSMAR, the strategic plan for our city libraries; communicating with neighborhoods and Council members; implementing the strategy to improve the delivery of library services. I have worked and volunteered in developing economies, with HIV/AIDS awareness, gender issues, and small/micro entrepreneurship. In one effort, I developed and delivered a program of basic business training for the poorest of the poor and HIV/AIDS awareness moving individuals from subsistence level to economic well-being. 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? The Human Relations Commission provides an avenue, for me, to be involved in the promotion of civic values on my home turf. My hope for Palo Alto is that the resources and infrastructure exist to give a diverse population a fair chance and a framework to act on his/her own initiative. My professional and volunteer experience give evidence, I hope, to the planning, implementation, and collaboration skills I would bring to the Human Relations Commission. My interest in the Commission is broad. I am proud to live in Palo Alto. It is important to me that, as the city grows, we continue to care for diverse populations and budget to provide human services. Going forward, I do have specific interest in affordable housing and supporting socio-economic diversity. Even now, we are a community in change. Some voices are unheard. The HRC can bring attention and focus to these voices. The HRC can prioritize and provide visibility to the agencies with expertise serving diverse segments. Valerie Hunt Stinger Human Relations Commission Application 2 of 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E0E8E38-E33F-4DAD-B3D9-86513A814E09 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: LINK Commission development is one issue, which I would like to foster. Commission appointment is frequently the entry to civic service. Appointees may or may not be familiar with the city, how the city operates, the resources available, the resources unavailable. The HRC meets once a month, effectively one planning meeting and 11 monthly meetings. There really isn't time to come up to speed. The newly appointed Commissioner has to come in running. The HRC, when fully staffed, has seven Commissioners and access to professional staff, who have a full complement of responsibilities beyond the HRC. The work plan needs everyone participating at full capacity. A formalized approach to the Commission's authority, processes, city information resources, and community partners could assist both new Commissioners and standing Commissioners to function optimally. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? My goals for the HRC would be (1)to be an efficient and well -running Commission and (2)to address diversity in Palo Alto. For the first, . Formalize Commission operating procedures • Provide for Commission Development For the second, • Continue to satisfactory endpoints those diverse, supportive, inclusive and protective initiatives started, for example, - Collaborate with the County to provide meaningful support services for LGBTQ community - Make meaningful steps towards gender equity - Explore the need for a leadership training for new immigrants - With local partners, explore Welcome America programming •Add initiatives to the FY2019 work plan, or e.ainle establish Human a ions Commission Application Mtpd§WesiWng and allied services as priorities, that is, to 3 of 5 identify where we can make the most significant enhancements in the nrnvicinn of hniicinrr and cnnnnrt to fully inrnrnnrata thncP whn lives Human Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope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ocuSign Envelope ID 3E0E8E38-E33F-4DAD-B3D9-86513A814E09 Consent to Publish Personal Intormation on the City ot Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR x I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. DocuSigned by: Valw;1 5 -le Signature: ••••--D.D534463925412 (Optional) Additional Attachments) Date:3/18/2018 If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Valerie Hunt Stinger Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 �r rr4• rcN 4p lication Deadline: April 23 at 4:30^, Human Relations Commission Personal Information — Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: M4RK biJT I5S Address: ) 61 Q/./pN% rs 1 4 o L 76( Cf 9 y 30 I CellPhone:(C p) 3os (27ifs Home / Office Phone: E-mail: 4 Ut% f) 4 /4 f 60 - (JAI Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes _ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes)( No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? XYes _ No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Altu which you believe is likely tu, 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? _ Yes No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? _ Yes X No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Community Group _ _ Daily Post Email from City Clerk City Website Palo Alto Weekly Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: P�� S� SeC �'l4CL pe(cd- ul1 C7/4-(< /11( Page 1 Human Relations Commission 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment LINK Muni Code 9.72 — Mandatory Response Program LINK Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan LINK 1'( P (/elf o Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part. "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The fuh code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: Signature: Page 4 Human Relations Commission �r rr4• rcN Human Relations Commission Application 1 of 5 Personal Information Note: The HRC regularly meets the second Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Name: Address: Cell Ph ____ Home / ____ Office Ph E- Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ____ Yes ____ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? ____ Yes ____ No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ____ Yes ____ No California state law and the Ci require appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you or your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2)provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? ____ Yes ____ No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? ___ Yes ___ No How did you learn about this vacancy? ____ Community Group ____ Email from City Clerk ____ Palo Alto Weekly ____ Daily Post ____City Website ____ Flyer Other: List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: DocuSign Envelope ID: FA29F0FA-5FFB-45B9-8319-4BB100074954 5MJIRK <YI 4L ( MR 'LIQMWXV] 7V (MVIGXSV SJ %REP]XMGEP 'LIQMWXV] 'IPP KVSYT PIEHIV XVEMRMRK [MXL 6MZIV SJ 0MJI 'LVMWXMER 'LYVGL DocuSign Envelope ID FA29F0FA-5FFB-45B9-8319-4BB100074954 Employment Present or Last Employer: DiCE Molecules SV, LLC Occupation: Researcher Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: As an active member at River of Life Christian Church, I have participated many church activities including organizing and leading filed trips and supporting group for those needed people. The most recent one was to help a family in planning / coordinating a memorial service and organizing on -going supporting activities to comfort the family members. Participated high school volunteer activities for students' clubs, including logistics, driving and team gathering. A frequent participants in volunteering at local professional activities at CABS (Chinese American Pharmaceutical Society). 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? One of the commission focuses on integrating our residents from various background into our community on resources / benefits, especially education excellence is compatible and of specific interest to me. As I have been with biopharma industry for > 20 years at Bay Area, I fully understand the importance of making resources / benefits equally available to every employee in a company and every single resident in our community. Since I moved to Palo Alto in 2005, I really appreciate what our city has offered to our community. With ever evolving of our community, especially with many new comers with various background, it is our responsibility to share what we can offer and more importantly integrate them into our community to make our city a more attractive community for everybody living here. One key area is the education for the young families. It is them that can make our community more dynamic and energetic. Let's figure out how to help them in facing the steep house price while raising a family in our community. Qifeng xue Human Relations Commission Application 2 of 5 Human Relations Commission Application 3 of 5 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archived video from the Midpen Media Center: 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? DocuSign Envelope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uman Relations Commission Application 4 of 5 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Human Services Needs Assessment Muni Code 9.72 Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: FA29F0FA-5FFB-45B9-8319-4BB100074954 2% DocuSign Envelope ID FA29F0FA-5FFB-45B9-8319-4BB100074954 Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Wehsite California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk, OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Addr Cell Pho Home / x Office Phone: E-mail: The phone number / address can be non-public and different than the address collected on page one. ,-DocuSigned by. Signature: ` IA2OFBCO2D8E486 Date:4/10/2018 (Optional) Additional Attachment(s) If you would like to submit a resume, work sample, etc. along with your Application, Check this box and click "Attach" to upload your document(s). Qifeng Xue Human Relations Commission Application 5 of 5 City of Palo Alto (ID # 8987) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 4/30/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: NVCAP Working Group Selection Title: North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan: City Council Appointment of Working Group Members From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation As directed by Council, Staff has returned and recommends that Council appoint 11 members and two alternates to serve on the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group based on the attached applications. (Based on prior City Council discussion, the Working Group will also include one representative from the Planning & Transportation Commission, one from the Parks and Recreation Commission, and one from the Architectural Review Board, for a total of 14) Executive Summary The City is undertaking preparation of a Coordinated Area Plan for the North Ventura Area and on March 5, 2018, the City Council directed staff to solicit applications for a Working Group to advise staff, boards/commissions, and the City Council during the planning process. At the same hearing, the City Council identified selection criteria for the working group, and indicated that three of the 14 members would be appointed representatives of relevant Boards/Commissions. The Council also requested appointment of two alternates. Members of the public were notified of this opportunity via the City’s website, project email list, notice cards and the City’s social media. Applications were due by the close of business on April 9, 2018 and a total of twenty-three applications were received by the April 9th deadline (Attachments A through X). One application was received on April 10th (Attachment C). Staff recommends that the Council select 11 members and two alternates from among the attached applications. The Working Group will begin meeting in June. Background City of Palo Alto Page 2 The City’s recently adopted Comprehensive Plan (November 2017) includes Policy L-1.7 which calls for the use of coordinated area plans to guide development in areas of Palo Alto where change is anticipated. The associated program, L4.10.1, specifical ly calls for the preparation of a plan for the North Ventura and surrounding California Avenue area for a walkable neighborhood with a mix of uses, including multi-family housing. In anticipation of the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the City appli ed for and received a grant from the Valley Transportation Agency for funding for the preparation of the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP). City Council authorized the preparation of the Plan on November 6, 2017 and adopted a resolution of local support for the grant. On March 5, 2018, the Council approved preliminary goals, objects, schedule and boundaries for the NVCAP. The approved preliminary goals, objectives, schedule and boundaries can be found on the following webpage: https://bit.ly/2INrx2q. The Council also provided direction to staff to begin recruitment for the formation of a 14 member working group to advise the staff, boards/commissions, and the Council during the preparation of the plan. Consistent with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.10.030, a working group, with seven to fourteen members, must be formed as part of the planning process. The working group will be advisory, providing recommendations on the broad vision and goals, respond ing to staff recommendations, and serving as a conduit and resource to the larger community. All working group meetings would be open to the public and subject to the Brown Act. Because the City is interested in including residents and businesses with real property interests in the project area and vicinity, the group cannot (i) “make a final governmental decision”, (ii) “compel or prevent a governmental decision”, or (iii) make “substantive recommendations” that are “regularly approved without significant amendment or modification” by a City public official or City Council “over an extended period of time,” due to State conflict of interests rules (FPPC Regulations 18700(c)(2)(A)). Selection Criteria & Application Process On March 5, 2018, the City Council provided direction for the makeup of the working group as follows (appointees can meet multiple criteria):  (3) Residents living within the planning area boundaries or the greater North Ventura neighborhood;  (2) Residents living within the greater Ventura neighborhood;  (2) Residents living within the Mayfield neighborhood;  (2) Business Owners who work or own a business within the planning area boundaries or nearby (mix of small and larger businesses);  (1) Property Owner;  (1) Resident living within Barron Park; City of Palo Alto Page 3 The Council also indicated that three additional positions would be reserved for members of the Planning & Transportation Commission, the Architectural Review Board, and the Parks and Recreation Commission (appointed by the chair of each board/co mmission), and suggested appointment of two non-voting alternates who could step in if a voting member resigns or needs to be replaced. On March 13, 2018, staff issued a request for applications for interested parties who wished to be considered for appointment. The application was posted on the project website https://bit.ly/2CG8nIl and summarizes the established criteria (composition and qualifications) for appointment of the group. Email announcements were sent out to individuals who had signed up for the project email list, the Comp Plan Update email list, and interested stakeholders. The announcement was also shared on the City’s social media accounts. Postcard announcements were also mailed to addresses located within the project boundary and properties located within 600 feet. The working group applications were due to the City by close of business on April 9, 2018. Attached Applications for Council Consideration Twenty-three applications were received from people interested in serving on the working group by the due date. One application (Marian Cobb) was received on April 10 after the deadline. The application has been included for Council consideration given that only twenty - three applications have been submitted. (The applicant has been notified that Council may or may not consider her appointment because the submittal was after the deadline.) The PAMC specifies that the working group be comprised of seven to fourteen members and that membership should include residents, business and property owners, and persons who represent broader community interests. The Council identified their desired composition by motion on March 5, 2018 and has the discretion to interpret or modify the application criteria and working group composition within the limitations of the code. Staff believes the City’s interests would be best served by a working group with a variety of p erspectives, including members with a neighborhood focus and members with a citywide focus. Meetings of the working group will be noticed and chaired by the staff and/or consultant and appointed members should be committed to working collaboratively to provide advice and support during the planning process. Ideally, the working group would represent a diversity of interests and expertise, including homeowners and renters, business and property owners, employees and people with a range of ages, backgrounds and professions. As reflected in the project goals (https://bit.ly/2INrx2q), the NVCAP represents a rare opportunity to proactively plan for a “walkable, mixed use, transit - accessible neighborhood” that balances community wide objectives with the interest of City of Palo Alto Page 4 neighborhood residents and small businesses. Staff recommends that a representative of the Sobrato Organization, the owner of the Fry’s property and the NVCAP funding contributor, be selected for one of the seats. To assist the City Council in the appointment process, the applications are pro vided as attachments and summarized below. The summary table lists each applicant alphabetically by last name and indicates which category would apply based on information provided by the applicants. In addition, the table notes if the applicant’s property (whether residential and/or nonresidential) is located within the NVCAP project boundary. The applicant backgrounds include a diverse range, such as parents with school age children, architects and owners of multiple properties. There are two applicants who do not fit in any of the categories but have experience with Palo Alto and planning. Summary of NVCAP Working Group Applications At t a c h m e n t s Names (3) Residents within NVCAP or greater N. Ventura neighborhood (north of Ventura Ave) (2) Residents within greater Ventura neighborhood (2) Residents within Mayfield (1) Residents within Barron Park (2) Business owners or work in NVCAP or surrounding area Property owners (not single family home) Does not fit in any category A Adams, David ✔ NVCAP ✔ B Baltzer, Stephanie ✔ NVCAP C Cobb, Marian1 ✔ D Dellaporta, Angela ✔ E Donlay Chris ✔ NVCAP F Flynn, Kirsten ✔ ✔ G Gabali Christine ✔ ✔ H Hirsch, David ✔ I Holzmer, Terry ✔ J Kaczmarski, Waldemar ✔ NVCAP K Keller, Arthur ✔ L Lockhart, ✔ NVCAP ✔ NVCAP 1 Application received April 10, after April 9 due date City of Palo Alto Page 5 Peter M Mankey, Rebecca Parker ✔ ✔ NVCAP Names (3) Residents within NVCAP or greater North Ventura neigh. (north of Ventura Ave) (2) Residents within greater Ventura neigh. (2) Residents within Mayfield (1) Residents within Barron Park (2) Business owners or work in NVCAP or surrounding area Property owners (not single family home) Does not fit in any category N Patel, Yatin ✔ ✔ O Pittman, Lakiba ✔ NVCAP ✔ NVCAP P Price, Gail ✔ Q Rosen, Heather ✔ R Smith, Lund (WSJ Properties) ✔ NVCAP S Song, Yunan ✔ NVCAP T Steele, Tim (Sobrato Org) ✔ NVCAP U Templeton Carolyn ✔ ✔ NVCAP V Welton, Maryanne ✔ W Wood, Marcus (Hohbach Realty) ✔ NVCAP X Zhang, Siyi ✔ Notes: Check marks are based on information provided by the applicants; this information has not been independently verified. NVCAP = Located within NVCAP boundary The Council also directed that the working group include representatives from the Planning and Transportation Commission, Architectural Review Board and Parks and Recreations Commission City of Palo Alto Page 6 Appointment. Staff is currently consulting with the three boards and commissions and will provide and update on the appointments once they are made. Timeline The working group is expected to hold monthly public meetings, allowing Council members and the public to monitor and comment on their work as it proceeds. Staff proposes that the first working group meeting be held in June 2018. It is anticipated that the group would meet monthly through December 2019. Environmental Review The recommended actions are not considered a “project” requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: Attachment A: Adams, David NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment B: Baltzer, Stephanie NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment C: Cobb, Marian NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment D: Dellaporta, Angela NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment E: Donaly, Chris NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment F: Flynn, Kirsten NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment G: Gabali, Christine NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment H: Hirsch, David NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment I: Holzemer, Terry NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment J: Kaczmarski, Waldemar NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment K: Keller, Arthur NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment L: Lockhart, Peter NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment M: Mankey, Rebecca Parker NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment N: Patel, Yatin NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment O: Pittmann, Lakiba NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment P: Price, Gail NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment Q: Rosen, Heather NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment R: Smith, Lund NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment S: Song, Yunan NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment T: Steele, Tim NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment U: Templeton, Cari NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment V: Welton, Maryanne NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Attachment W: Wood, Marcus NVCAP Working Group Ap plication (PDF) Attachment X: Zhang, Siyi NVCAP Working Group Application (PDF) Received North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: bet✓rd. RcL&n s Are you a Palo Alto resident? E YES 0 NO APR 0 v 2018 Departm & Cornmu MLo f44-ro, c,9 4'G- 3d Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? (31 YES ❑ NO If yes, which neighborhood? V€ t eara Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? lif YES 0 NO If y, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES gi NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or If yes, what is the property address Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES i NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter 12 Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ® Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities la Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: VG�uLL#r&. kas jekifs 4s50:. March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: c G,,-mac'f- a 6a i -s ce..- L /taw& fLnda{L/s ¢k several_ PYc/c c_ ,Keay- `c o u er 6- bI a ra-r Z12.1 c.SsveS 44,44 395 PQ HLL.L, HS1= ,27I)w se Ave Ma 39 • S P fl cA,- d Q,� err cry LA- t ' °`9 �P P // � � t �� S�'�"�ta� r SS URS -&&aic.16 /-72.0-1 a- p A st dec.u.*ca.�.t, v,t "ta.4, f a cteha 1 t� Ize a. -et et.ita. g 44L L pree-cat �c d -"J L� (SS'UQS' a i ci- 4 cox-tit/✓scc c - t/_Dsr2. GSSaa U L o 0 21$ cJ Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and Ihow you have connected with others in the community: �1� a /L �-� � 1__ uteur! A4.20.4-6.Q.r r7� Vun�uro� RQs; ``S Tl5, oc ez,td `io-o-e. I`ec 1 qua-cLJt p re s -�a. Lac o� a b c.cf' N VCS P emu �n aist0. , r I A.a.4- 2 e...A. -ea C a dn. rt GZ[( QeW G6s (-ver & C .22i s , ( rk-o- i. 640- - - tCJ o�-q an' Qc( a a� 2 3 t t i c�.r cv et cact Gtr-cs-bus GC fa �i2 res s 1� coo-0,44. d[urrat c—.ct`i - c me„Lo pa.4z V R . "� S Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? [ RS erv-er 020 c eaf o w . /c Cc z7 cn r r v -c r�c� an !J L"w� !-r w2 . f/ c.2QffG� -s+2�G rte!_ a r -e . � / ka Q .,e pert _,c e - c . j ps) 504.. o L 6 a. d�5 a.K � /Laves- L Q S for. (-04-ft r-i-t,c„tic i a C Lira_ b L& 4 -eke. ze_r ki ur •�rar.Q) Ile U5 cr:f�c ,- ( i t L f e cca.L"e o w.�urs ox t O L ,4t42 46 . r a -t"- Cr - {u� W a '- it j group dite -6-o z r490.S o n. crLs sf cam' d CC- ,Kett) .fir- cf..cC ofJv #11 -v -e_ C L -��e, z0yU. How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from the City City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly 0 Social Media 0 Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address Phone: Email Address: 114 Are you a Palo Alto resident? [1 YES .i NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? LJ YES NO If des, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? If rtes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 12 -1 -ES ❑ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? _1:16 crxt vP_- What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? =J YES If yes, what is the property address? NO Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES . NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? .YES n NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: FOIEWITT.l' () 3 REC' March 13, 2018 By Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields; Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: 6,0'2 1 ad 6tt_4 1c 7 . Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? J, 7/911 -- How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) 0 Email from the City ❑City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media Other: _c - Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 Late Application Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design. land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues. transportation and mobility, parks and open space. or other relevant fields: I am a licensed Landscape Architect and practiced for 20 years after which I switch careers. During my time in Landscape Architecture I worked on projects ranging in scale from residential design to planned community design. I have a BA in Landscape Architecture from UC Berkeley and a MA in Landscape Architecture from Harvard University. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations. and how you have connected with others in the community: I have limited experience in community involvement due to family and work obligations. I am looking to change this starting with applying to the Working Group for North Ventura Neighborhood. At present I have reduced my work schedule & my family obligations have changed. This now allows me time to begin being involved in my community and civic projects. Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? I am interested in serving on this working group because I am committed to improving and responding to the changing needs of our City and its neighborhoods as it grows. I am a third generation resident of Palo Alto. I have seen a lot of changes in Palo Alto and I'm passionate about our City. There are many new and existing demands placed on our neighborhoods currently as the city expands. It is important we create neighborhoods that reflect all needs of its residents while making safe and beautiful living environments. I would like to contribute to Palo Alto and our neighborhood using the knowledge I have in Landscape Architecture combined with the perspective of being a long time resident of the community. I find this an exciting & dynamic time in Palo Alto history and would like to be a part of this redevelopment of the North Ventura Area Plan. How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from thee City ❑silty Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media ❑ other72051reiva Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS D%JE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Angela Dellaporta  Mailing Address: Palo Alto, 94306 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? X YES ☐ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? XYES ☐NO If yes, which neighborhood? Ventura Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES X NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business?  What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐YES XNO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? X YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ☐YES X NO If yes, which department/body?   Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June2018 and December 2019? X YES ☐ NO However, I will be out of the country June -July 2018 and 2019 Check any that apply to you: Renter X Homeowner  ☐ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools X Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities Palo Alto teacher (Gunn High School) 1982 - 2012 X Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: I am a member of the Ventura Neighborhood Association Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: I care about open space; I hike often, and bike often; I believe in sustainability and in caring for our planet, and in thinking globally and acting locally. I take public transportation whenever it is feasible. I served for a year on the Safe Routes to School committee when my daughter was in 6th grade (2000- 2001), but that's my only actual experience in these areas. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: As an English teacher at Gunn High School from 1982 to 2012, I felt (and still feel) rooted in my community through my students. I loved encountering students as I rode my bike to school; meeting them with their parents at the grocery store or at a restaurant; and speaking up for them when they needed an advocate. I had the opportunity to work closely with students in Peninsula Youth Theater, in Peer Helping classes and in a variety of clubs, as well as in the classroom. I supported them in advocating for causes they believed in (from saving the manatees to freedom of speech) and helped them reach out to those who were socially or emotionally isolated. Since my retirement, I have become active in the Ventura Neighborhood Association; trained as a neighborhood Block Preparedness Coordinator; volunteered as an ELD tutor and as a mentor for students in the Advanced Authentic Research program; and begun to promote and organize a Social Justice Pathway for students at Gunn. Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? A thriving community needs a meeting place, an agora, if you like, where locals can encounter one another serendipitously, without the isolating effects of cars and roads. I believe that children need space to run and to interact with nature – within walking distance of their homes – and that their parents deserve to have a cup of coffee or a glass of wine with friends while t heir children play. I also believe that children and teenagers – well, everyone – should see that teachers and nurses, artists and restaurant workers are all valued members of their community, and that they should encounter people of all stripes and differences as part of their daily lives. The NVCAP Working Group gives us an opportunity to create a setting that will welcome the neighborhood's residents not just to a living space or shopping venue, but to a sense of belonging. It is a chance for our neighborhood to become a place where, by design, the ecosystem is valued, culture thrives alongside commerce, ideas grow, local residents know one another, and everyone is welcome. I would love a chance to help create that place. How did you learn about the Working Group formation? Attending City Council meetings, and Ventura Neighborhood Association meetings. Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5the floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Ctifts O h/L A )4A+01 V3o6 Are you a Palo Alto resident? Lh YES ❑ NO Are" a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? Ly YES ❑ NO If yes, which neighborhood? N ��` Venniv-Y.<ti Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES Lr NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES P'1\10 If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surroundin area? ICJ YES ❑ NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are ccurr>ntly serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES EU'NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available andd mmitted to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? E YES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Remoter M'Aomeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ E erience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities DMember of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: �/10.vt p,r6 vet,i<-. trot`f? March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: /V o d,t r- 8'(44 t h . �-2 h t =Y v� �r ti // Y - f C rvi— 1/1--,,t) L/ h -- !mac jw Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: — tv f d / , �� a e -17Z `` J 1 S•�.vly-�C �I ^' v rr ry y, lJ � /I i h j1� e1t��:7 j 6 it Ufa r,l�l�/��•--f '-1 •�-�d ,pfi -� J Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? )I M(444 t �� How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from the City ❑City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media Other: c, 4.7 vh« %zr Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 s: 44 1 March 13, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? ☐ YES ☐ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? ☐ YES ☐ NO Check any that apply to you: ☐ Renter ☐ Homeowner ☐ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ☐ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ☐ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: ________________________________________________________________________) March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email from the City City Council Meeting Palo Alto Weekly Social Media Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? BYES 0 NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? RYES ❑ NO ifyes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 1 YFS 0 NO , r If yes, what is the name of your company/business?- What is the address of your company/business? 3 Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES X NO Ify_el, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES X NO !flu, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES NO !flu., which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: — ) March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: k 1)syJ a r , L u C 1 ( Div ucilik7qOIL) KB AN Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: i�a rn 'VA Lh�iCl� "INN v °Wee\ w; c�ra rn�l f-cx; c_._ .&-rz ir\ ve t . Work l -`!\-1 b Why are you interested in servin on the Workin Group? —10 c3: -V ot& iV-eta r9) f .4 ) c.4.. ve,... How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) 0 Email from the City ❑City Counc-I Meetin ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media 'Other: (Ze C't.11).Mi Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org TINA pee APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? gYES 0 NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ❑ YES rXNO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES ' NO if y ., what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES I NO If y ., what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES yr NO If Lel, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES I NO If y, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? BYES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: O Renter Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: } March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: htv. Itseti-PgrAdsv Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: �xte �T-C 5. 7 Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? . kt1 c 19 How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email from the City City Council Meeting Palo Alto Weekly 0 Social Media %Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 Education/ Experience Education Master of Architecture, Harvard Graduate School of Design, 1968 The Cooper Union School of Architecture, 1966 Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, Harvard College, 1957 Registration Architect, New York State, 1973, NCARB Certified, AIA NYC Urban Design experience as Senior Urban Designer and Project Administrator for the Mayor's Office of Development: Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY: Administered major Brooklyn downtown mall and buss -way including design administration, multiple agency approvals, and construction administration. Initial East River waterfront park and floating restaurant in Brooklyn at the old Fulton Ferry Terminal location. Responsibility included designing the Park and coordinating all city approvals. Proposal for the relocation of Baruch College of NYC to the Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn, a transportation hub. Varied Architectural Design and Construction Projects -Mid- Late Career in NYC: Design and Construction Services of various NYC pedestrian improvements for neighborhood commercial streets: including sidewalk paving design, lighting, graphics, trees, seating, and utility upgrades Design and Construction Services for numerous and varied low and mid -rise residential projects including substantial renovations. Last 15 years, focused on new buildings for supportive and affordable housing for non-profit developers. Throughout my career, Design and Construction Services for Community use facilities such as youth buildings, library rehabilitations, historic (Landmarked) structures, school rehabilitation and addition, religious building and several rehabilitations of commercial buildings in minority community areas. t 1 IR III' oi a R. '14 u4'( 1t! 1 7 hits B.111. Planning Competitions: NEW YORK: 9/11 Memorial Competition in NYC designed as a sacred place, a public park space sunken below the street level, a place to contemplate the disaster while giving homage to all of the victims, faces and names etched into glass and prominently displayed. The footprint of the original towers is defined by two contrasting features, as large as the original buildings, one with a sloped water fountain with multiple rough hewn stone monuments denoting strength, the other a solid bosque of fragile -looking white paper birch trees as a symbolic contrast. Rockaway, Queens NYC: The design of a new neighborhood in Rockaway, Queens NY, a reconstruction of the ocean waterfront community destroyed by hurricane Sandy. The design included a modern day grid of streets with low-rise housing at the beach edge with mid -rise housing blocks defining its outer, major public street edge A commercial street between the two types of housing connects the entire community, with ball fields at one end and a natural park with inland water and trails at the other. Except for emergency vehicles, garbage collection and moving vans, the internal streets are reserved for local community use. Private vehicles are garaged below the mid -rise structures. The entire project is as sustainable as possible, using solar, wind, co -generation and geothermal energy sources. Future storm surges are engineered to be collected in streets with permeable paving, separated from the low-rise housing constructed on earthen berms. Housing construction includes prefabricated lift -up slabs and all utilities are contained in a central ventilation chamber for ease of long-term maintenance and stability of the structures to resist future storms. But the essence of the community is providing the traditional street life in this mid -density type of urban environment made possible by controlling vehicle access. Land Economics or Development - acting as Architect and part -principal of development teams including financing, design, construction and sales Two Harlem, NYC projects: one, the gut renovation of 4 four story abandoned brick houses converted to 8 duplex condominium residences; the other, two abandoned 5 story 'old law' walk-up tenement buildings designed to act as one building with a new shared elevator core, providing (mostly) 28 large 3 bedroom floor through condominiums. The substantial renovation often abandoned, attached 3 -story brick workers houses in Peekskill, NY utilizing substantial County and State funding to create low to modest income home ownership. The development of a new 5 -story, 7 -unit condominium infill building in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. MIAMI: Waterfront Park in Miami including public vendor areas, amphitheater, restaurant, administration facility and gallery, all organized around a linear water feature which connects to the riverfront. Sustainability and Environmental Issues As an Architect in NYC, Sustainability is an essential and legal requirement, regulated as much as it is in California. Because of a more severe climate in New York, there is an extra emphasis on methods of enclosure construction. Architects and engineers are required to provide calculations of the energy efficiency of all construction assemblies for approval by the Building Department. Energy monitoring during use is becoming more prevalent. As this might apply to the Fry's development, it is certainly known that attached dwellings are more efficient than free-standing, single family dwellings. This would suggest that the Working Group ought to be aware of this distinction while reviewing land use planning options. This form of construction is also more efficient and economical to build. And as the building density is increased with this type of construction, more open space is made available. (See the Greenway sketches attached.) Community Activities, Volunteer Work, Civic Organizations, Community Connections I have been a resident of Palo Alto for 7 years, but the first two years were focused on constructing our house in Crescent Park. So my list of community work must begin in my past neighborhood of Park Slope, in Brooklyn, NY where my wife and I lived since 1970. This neighborhood was developed at the end of the 19th century. It is located adjacent to Prospect Park, designed by Frederick Law Olmsted (Central Park, Stanford original campus). The neighborhood is composed of a grid of tree -lined streets and 4 -story brownstones (party wall dwellings) with an occasional 12- story mini -high rise on the wider avenues My first activity as a resident was to join with some of the other community architects and historians to develop the documented justification for the neighborhood to become a City Landmark. It passed, making it one of the first such designations in New York. Then I was asked to join the Park Slope Civic Council. I fought for and won the elimination of the large garbage dumpsters, which were proliferating on the major commercial street; was active in the house tours, which attracted new home buyers to the community and participated as a night time volunteer for a homeless shelter in a local church. Then I was invited to join the board of the Brooklyn Center for the Urban Environment (BCUE), an organization that provided afterschool environmental classes for local children. I volunteered to supervise the design and sign (pro-bono as an architect) for the documents required to remodel the space in the Tennis House, an historic building in the Park, for BCUE's use as classrooms and administration space. My local initiatives here in Palo Alto have included my involvement in planning and design issues: • Avenidas expansion: I attended both the ARB and HRB hearings, met with the director of the project at Avenidas in an attempt to scale back the massive new design to be better related to the Birge Clark original historic fire and police building. When I made little progress, as the project was well into the lengthy approvals required, I wrote an article for Palo Alto Online to air my thoughts. Comments were fairly positive. • Believing that the discussions which have led to the 50 foot height limitation was an overly restrictive ruling that ought to be studied based on the impact on particular sites and based on more liberal regulations and other reasonable architectural conceptions, I wrote another article for Palo Alto Online to express these thoughts. It was generally panned, but also engendered a few brave supporters. As an architect I have designed numerous buildings utilizing more generous regulations in NYC, such as 'dormers' projecting into setback requirements and the use of the 'sky exposure plane', which allows an increase in height on deeper lots. I believe that such rules could apply to Palo Alto and be incorporated in the zoning. • Noting that at a recent Council meeting there was little support to use the many existing parking lots surrounding University Avenue to provide for the crying need for affordable housing, Palo Alto Online reviewed the Council's rejection of this possibility. I wrote a response in support of this use, which, as city owned land, could provide for a significant cost savings and be passed on to the occupants through reduced rents. • I have attended Palo Alto Forward meetings and followed this groups' agenda, agreeing with much of their direction, especially their objection to regulations that provide unnecessary parking in new developments. a car light proposal. However I am opposed to the idea that Palo Alto needs to rush into'densifying' the city wherever possible. • Which leads directly to the Fry's site initiative, where an increase in density is reasonable because of the size of the site and the need for a significant public open space. My interest in this site preceded the schedule for creating the Working Group. I spent hours experiencing the area, studying its potentials and limitations, watching the steady flow of bicycles on Park Boulevard, noting the traffic jam turning onto the access to Page Mill, noting that the existing Fry's site does not include several buildings at Lambert Avenue and Ash Street, an impediment to making a direct connection to Boulware Park. The result of this independent study is explained in the attached Greenway sketch drawings. I showed these to a committee of involved Ventura representatives who were appreciative of my effort. I would like to continue this dialogue and involvement as a member of this Working Group. • Other community connections include pickleball at Mitchell Park on sunny weekends, bridge every Tuesday at the Unity Church on Middlefield, lectures at Stanford and nights out with neighbors, at the Pear Theatre or Lucy Stern. My Interest in Serving on the Working Group The large-scale Fry's site and it's significantly important location in North Ventura suggest the opportunity for a creative urban plan which can vastly improve this neighborhood. This potential determined my interest in this project. No other current development in Palo Alto has such a mandate. There are two distinctly different neighborhoods in North Ventura: the exclusively residential portion of the community south of Lambert Avenue, handicapped by its thin width wedged into the constricting boundaries of El Camino and Caltrain and the northern portion which, unlike most other Palo Alto communities, has developed as a mixed -use neighborhood with commercial and residential structures intermingling from Lambert Avenue to California Street. The Fry's lot is at the nexus of these two differing land use characteristics. By its shear size it could become the resolution of these contrasting uses the way a town square traditionally unifies a small town or a courtyard organizes a college campus, both creating a special community identity. Whatever is finally determined to represent the combined opinions of the Working Group, my participation will be to advocate that the Planning Department's 'vision for the future' will become the creation of a'very special sense of place' that satisfies both the program expectations of the immediate community (new and old) and may even develop into an attraction and destination for the broader Palo Alto population. (Attached please find a preliminary sketch titled The Cal -Ventura Greenway to illustrate one concept for how the shape of this vision might develop.) The Cal -Ventura G reenway David Hirsch, RA Fahmida Ali Di Yang Location: Palo Alto, California Neighborhoo d: Ventura The Cal - Ventura Greenway is an approxima tely 1/4 mile bike and pedestrian linking e lement, connecting Pa rk Bo ule vard to Bo ulware Park through the present Fry's site. It is a unique ly designed public amenity tha t will integrate the ne w, mo stly reside ntial de velo pment of this site with the Cal - Ventura neighborhood from Page Mill to Ea st Meadow. The conce pt of this de ve lo pment recognizes that Pa lo Alto must pro -ac tive ly crea te the design and designa te the pa thway fo r this qua lity landsc aped urban stru cture prior to the housing de velo pment to ac hieve the higher purpose of the neighborhood qua lity of life. This process, with the expanded use s of public spac e, will also bene fit the future users, the residents a nd co mmercial tena nts of this developme nta nd a dd to its ma rke tability. As a creative landsc ape design experience it will attract visits from the la rger Palo Alto community to explore its unique attributes. The G reenway will achieve the following objectives: 1. To connect the entire Cal - Ve ntura ne ighbo rhoo d with a pe de strian/bike only ro ute c lose to Ca lifo rnia Street and the Ca ltrain sta tion. 2. To re tain Park Bou leva rd and Lambert Street as the major ve hicular link to El Camino Real to maintain a ppropriate traffic flow in the neighborhood. 3. To eliminate Olive Street a ccess to Pa rk Boule va rd to allow a vehicle free public plaza e ntry to the G ree nway. 4. To enc oura ge public acce ss by providing community parking in the rail right-of- way at the n orth entry to the G reenway. 5. To provide public amenitie s to e nco urage G reenwa y a ttenda nce, such as to ilets, sea ting, signa ge, nave plantings, art, etc. 6. To make the appropriate connec tion from Fry's site to Boulwa re Park at the intersection of Ash Street a nd La mbert. 7. To ma ke the passage across Lambe rt sa fe by providing traffic signals. 8. To e limina te Ash Stree t a djac ent to Boulware Park to allow the expa nsio n of the usa ble Park area. 9. To make Boulware Park into a desirable destinatio n by expanding on the activitie s of the park to enco urage multi -aged users. Other Consideratio ns 1. Financing for the G reenwa y and Bo uiware Park will be a n eg oti ati on b etween the city a nd the develo per. 2. The G re enway area is an ea sement on the prop erty, but to be considered as included with the entire Fry's lot as a part of th e zoning f or purp oses of development. it is not a ta king. It is a public 'right of way'. 3. As in Park Pla za, much of the ground floor is to be us ed as small office comme rcial, but may also include local retail and reside nti al. Z oning to be altered to allow for this mixed use. 4. Parking on the railroad right of way to enhanc e the p arking for the Caltrain capa city as well as designated for th e Greenway and th e new offic e/ret ail us e 5. Housing planning and massing to consid er the easterly portion of the l ot to be ta ller than the west to maximize sunlight within th e courtyard op en spa ce . 6. The present designation of housing is a pl aceholder for th e future d esign . 7. Beside s participating in the greenway financing and d esign commitm ent, th e developer should be r equired to d esign at e a cert ain per centage of units as a ffordable. 8. The Greenway presentation and program is a schematic conc ept created to show a v ariety of p ossibilities. A complete landsc ape pr esentation by qu alifi ed professi onals is required to bring it to reality . 9. The maintenance of the Greenway and B oulware Park facilities requ 'res an agr eement between the City of Pal o Alto and the present and ulfmate owners of the d evel opment. 10. Ac cess to Matader o Creek for maintenance purpos es m ust be r etained . Cal -Ventura Gree nway Co ntext Map ;IF 04, q - D et , - n 0 n DI 0 Ulod JDInaigeA a -n n 0 n i Ca l -Ventura Greenwa y Detail Pla n Housing Grass Matadero Creek Pedestrian Way Bike Route R aza/C ate Pla nting/Seating Community G arden Cactus Garde n Bike Parking R estrooms R eside ntial Area Picnic Are a V olley Ball Soccer Feld Basketball Court u Children Playground Cr eek Mainten ance Area Fence Caltrai n Bike Parking Are a . CCD . n Q 0 -0 0 0 0 CD CD D 0 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: 1rry Mbzuvier Are you a Palo Alto resident? ]AYES ❑ NO Ar you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? x YES ❑ NO If de, which neighborhood? /1/6traedi It Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES>NO If , what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do yo ow a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? El YES NO If s what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES''NO If Yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who a e currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES NO If ym„ which department/body? Are you generally available nd ommitted to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter >4lomeowner O Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools /Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities (SCA) f CIO f & c)it'J- ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: W 0 Kc1 lithbo rf oa ettr /r' 1 Ft) rem !fir -- aL1r'Jk !! F:11 1 iGLi �r. 14i- do RPP Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: b-e-e_r\ CA) 'oh-eok 1 roo-,' C6 /V\ t/tAirl'y S I Act) 1/10V -e_4 -k F \Z 1, y-Cek rs o I D r mos�6- -40-cvy-eR6� , .� 11 as CAA Ck PA,/ Acvntowfters assoc,(411 n a \,\MN is c /1/1Catcj, )3(4010- „p--' 4.56-6 'OD Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? Tbt ,A)o r"i'i is (/) M P% it i) b r J ;o D o,j a n "k W ark 4'n S N- ok-Ndo -e I A ot, W a laeAt-ei+s Low, A\10 co i"\ r\� tr /A D W rr ,{ ti\ or -17o( W t f'Ot < < by rya 1 a .c [ t M rkeo. t v At\ ct it\ a o f, �k Flys s How did you lbarn abo t th Workint group formation? (check all that apply) PP YJ mail from the City ty Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly 0 Social Media 0 Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March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arch 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? ☐ YES ☐ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? ☐ YES ☐ NO Check any that apply to you: ☐ Renter ☐ Homeowner ☐ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ☐ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ☐ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: ________________________________________________________________________) March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email from the City City Council Meeting Palo Alto Weekly Social Media Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: E SL L O c 412 -7 - Mailing Address: eArt a At -7o CA 1'11506 6 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? I 'YES 0 NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? *YES 0 NO If rtes, which neighborhood? " I.1 ye- Alr Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? If ym, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES 0 NO If ves, what is the name of your company/business? P Oc/I L y - 5 Cr ABove What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? t `YES 0 NO If ves, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES 12, NO If ves, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? DYES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter !r,„Homeowner Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools E Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: } March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: 0 G c.1 e- 8 c 4 -C V c -4*► 0 sc.,ry e A 4.044 tT - ri ¢S V ebiti L a'MA5c Ap tr P ej, rt a Co NS -m -46p oil fimjy 4ac.Airc. fly -631141 INc, j GiN f i1 Pet -r w-1 TN -e Gf i t Pa we t -a p R 4rkr 3 Jet ecacd /40(1-0-1 d M E- a "It o Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: Zo yid f Per NSet c-4 Lxcr. trri✓ES Afro c f rA-7ro,r-J t3 o y scours p-ry,tior4 'kit -c- cud scour -3 Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? $ 61T ( (L. i»s Tv? 5 Patin etruc-sti raft Air oua- cou Nrs-s) & re EN li 4 L A'1.4 C A ca ! & r A 4,44 s F0,2 -ern_ P7►) FALcast.r f! prrw 4-t 7dG IN flat, uNT II IN eo.a.l uMrrr 9PO I ?t w/7}/ Ttite L r J i t4e?z N 1 oil Al- D o/ t 77#(9 elf TAE 44 L. it . H did you earn a oluf a Worki roue forma ion? (check all that apply) Email from the City ['City Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly 0 Social Media lc Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 March13,2018 NorthVenturaCoordinatedAreaPlanWorkingGroupApplication Name: MailingAddress: Phone: EmailAddress: AreyouaPaloAltoresident?܆YES܆NO AreyouaresidentoftheVentura,MayfieldorBarronParkneighborhood? ܆YES܆NO Ifyes,whichneighborhood? DoyouworkinNorthVenturaorthesurroundingarea?܆YES܆NO Ifyes,whatisthenameofyourcompany/business? Whatistheaddressofyourcompany/business? DoyouownabusinessinNorthVenturaorthesurroundingarea? ܆YES܆NO Ifyes,whatisthenameofyourcompany/business? Whatistheaddressofyourcompany/business? DoyouownpropertyinNorthVenturaorthesurroundingarea?܆YES܆NO Ifyes,whatisthepropertyaddress? DoyouhaveanyrelativesormembersofyourhouseholdwhoareemployedbytheCityofPaloAlto, whoarecurrentlyservingontheCityCouncil,orwhoareBoardMembersorCommissioners? ܆YES܆NO Ifyes,whichdepartment/body? AreyougenerallyavailableandcommittedtoattendapproximatelymonthlymeetingsbetweenJune 2018andDecember2019?܆YES܆NO Checkanythatapplytoyou: ܆Renter ܆Homeowner ܆ParentofSchoolAgedChildorStudentinPaloAltoSchools ܆ExperiencewithIssuesRelevanttoYouth,Seniors,orPeoplewithDisabilities ܆Memberofotherlocalbusiness/neighborhood/communityorganization(pleasespecify: ________________________________________________________________________) Rebecca Parker Mankey Ventura ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;Ventura Neighborhood Association March13,2018 Pleasebrieflyindicateanyeducationorexperienceyouhaveinthefieldsofplanningandurbandesign,land economicsordevelopment,sustainabilityandenvironmentalissues,transportationandmobility,parksand openspace,orotherrelevantfields: Pleasedescribeyourinvolvement/experienceincommunityactivities,volunteerwork,civicorganizations,and howyouhaveconnectedwithothersinthecommunity: WhyareyouinterestedinservingontheWorkingGroup? HowdidyoulearnabouttheWorkingGroupformation?(checkallthatapply) EmailfromtheCity CityCouncilMeeting PaloAltoWeekly SocialMedia Other: Submitto: DepartmentofPlanningandCommunityEnvironment Attention:ElenaLee 250HamiltonAvenue,5thfloor PaloAlto,CA94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONSDUEApril9,2018 I have no formal education in any of these fields but consider myself a well-read amateur. I do have a degree in Business Administration with a concentration in Accounting from San Jose State University. I worked for ten years in regional CPA firms in San Jose. My field is corporate taxation. I am a Palo Alto native, I have two kids at Gunn High School, I am on the board of the Gunn Choir Boosters, I am the Co-Chair of the Bayshore Progressive Democrats, I am an active member of the Democratic Socialists of America, I am an active volunteer for the California Democratic Party, my daughter and I both work at local businesses that are Palo Alto institutions, I am still attached to my parent group from when my kids were at Parents' Nursery School, my husband is a teacher for PAUSD currently working at Duveneck where our kids (and my mother) went to school, and I aspire to follow my grandmother into Palo Alto city politics and volunteer work. You will never convince me that Palo Alto isn't the best place on the planet.I love it here and can't blame anyone who wants to move here. If I didn't live here, I would want to move here too. The entire Bay Area needs to build housing. Palo Alto needs to get in the game, but we have to do it our way. Palo Alto has changed so much since I was a little girl and we have lost most of our individuality. We have lost most of our independent retail to be replaced by the same stores you can find anywhere in the world. We have become generic. We are going to grow, we are going to change, but we should work to maintain more of our local character. Most of my native friends have moved away; I have decided to stay and fight for my Palo Alto. ; REBECCA PARKER MANKEY Palo Alto CA 94306 OBJECTIVE Palo Alto native, Ventura resident, and local business employee seeks a seat on the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group. SELECTED EXPERIENCE Accountant, May 2015 to present - Gryphon Stringed Instruments ● General Accounting, Management, and most other nonmusical tasks Accountant, January 2014 to May 2015 - Thompson Accounting ● Forensic and Tax Accountants Accountant, June 2004 to December 2013 Crawford, Pimentel & Co., Inc. Certified Public Accountants ● Prepared corporate, partnership, nonprofit, individual, estate, and gift tax returns including multi-entity and multi-state returns ● Provided accounting assistance to complete returns and to assist clients with difficult transactions ● Reviewed and compile company information to prepare GAAP basis financial statements, including footnotes EDUCATION San José State University, 2004 Bachelor of Science, Business Administration with a concentration in Accounting Lucas Graduate School of Business, San José State University, Open University Master of Science in Taxation - Tax Research class completed OTHER ● Co-Chair, Bayshore Progressive Democrats ● Board Member, Gunn High School Choir Boosters ● Volunteer for Bernie Sanders and for the California Democratic Party ● Excellent communication skills and strong public speaking and writing skills ● Leadership and team management experience North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? YES ❑ NO fc1 l G /111 (W q 43 o, Air you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? MYES ❑ NO If ves, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? v' If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? DMIyou own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? YES ❑ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? (v04444) Do you own property in North Ventura or the s--u.rrYroundin area? d YES ❑ NO �c44 i4 Dt/�+tL,(l If yes, what is the property address? �1N6�( a5 Glove. Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are 9tirrently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES NO If ves, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend erjoroximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? and/committed ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: See of &t Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: See atkAc64141 Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? Sep aflacuvtew$ How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email froa the Citry City ouncil Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media gal Other: Kiv1itit MIT Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 ATTACHMENT FOR YATIN PATEL'S APPLICATION FOR NORTH VENTURA COORDINATED AREA WORKING GROUP Education / Experience: I earned a Managerial Economics degree from the University of California, Davis as an undergraduate. Subsequently, I worked as an IT Consultant with Pricewaterhouse Coopers (Pwc) Consulting / IBM Consulting for approximately five (5) years. After my time with PwC / IBM, I earned a JD from Marquette University Law School and am a member of the State Bar of California. I practiced as a real estate litigation and transactional attorney for approximately five (5) years before focusing full-time on our family hotel business which I have been working at since I was in grade school. While in law school, I pursued coursework relevant to development and transactional real estate. Community Activities / Volunteer Work / Civic Organizations: I do not have recent experience in community activities, volunteer work, or civic organizations. Honestly, as a young person, I am beginning to realize that a lot of what happens at City Hall is very important to our community and that civic engagement is so important. I recognize how important it is to remain active and engaged in the community to fully understand how important decisions are made. I have not fully done my part in the past but serving on the Working Group would be a great start for me to be active in the community. I experienced some community outreach and what that process looks like when we joined neighborhood association meetings to solicit and understand the Ventura Neighborhood Associations' point of view on our proposed hotel development at 3200 El Camino Real. This process was good for me because it really helped me to understand community concerns and to try to collaborate to address concerns in a respectful, open way. Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group The Fry's Area is across the street from our family's hotel (Hotel Parmani). I welcome the opportunity to work with my immediate neighbors and the community at -large to make sure that this important stretch of South Palo Alto is planned as well as it can be by including as many voices as possible. Our family has been in business in this part of Palo Alto since 1981 and I think I could bring value to the discussion on how to improve the area south of Page Mill Road. I recognize how important it is to work with neighbors and discuss things in a civilized manner to achieve a common goal. My unique perspective of working in technology, running a family business, and practicing law equips me well to understand varying perspectives and I am excited about the possibility to bring an open mind to the table. Achieving a solution that works for the community, not just specific parties, is important to me. People want to be heard and I believe I am a great listener who can truly listen and understand what concerns various stakeholders may have. Then trying to devise solutions is what a good working group can do. It will be important to discern various stakeholders' concerns in order to ask the right questions and come to a consenus. I believe my background equips me well for this role. Thank you for your consideration of my application and I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely Yatin Patel North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: ,aka' foa P:` an Are you a Palo Alto resident? OYES 0 NO Palo A 1 -to, ca ci.4k304 • Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? L YES 0 NO vtierttira If Yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? If ves, what is the name of your company/business. � A j��6 What is the address of your company/business? flu Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? IA YES 0 NO If Yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? 1 Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? !`I YES Li NO If ves, what is the property address? c5cain.4.. & 5 abXVe Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES VNO If ves, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? g YES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter II2 Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools 'Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: } March 13, 2018 111 2 8 /016 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: fyi j — Chat/ Of- tturnael of 'tmc Crs nr ssc01 t -t -ac s 0cci�ula • pa. Ur 11� ¢ & rels C lu bot-Fka inqropuit.su ra . VO 4, etitly ut,PQ,10 1,1- [- 615-m vak» ug' h yCS, ±kQ 4o 4 l -to C2 (Der i (53► —a2 c#y L= brarLQ S rusr e&C( bQ tee_) �pWhy are you interested in serving on the Working Group? �-fe � �s fi' u1to 14c-tr . How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) [✓'Email from the City [amity Council Meeting [+Palo Alto Weekly 0 Social Media 'Other: 7 tP [Z(11301(5 L NE-IQhh6Yktdi 5^C_l ti -t1 L Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 09/11/2007 15:17 PAGE 02/06 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: l' A. Fr ic.e. Mailing Address: f(4Q f1 /-h-e7 eA Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? HIES C NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ®`YES ❑ NO If es which neighborhood? Set rror7 PaocilC Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES iB`NQ If ym, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business In North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES Q'1/41O If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? _ Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES ENO If ys what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES 240 If tel, which department/body? Are you generally available and ommitted to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? EYES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools f jts, T» p" L ["Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities 2 Member of Cher local bus,Jness/neighborhood/communi organization (please specify: Gornmwn, rs or(,rn�r»r Aba Ivices $ocv ) ven sm» K C! u A/ P4/0 A/ -/-o Fad ) 1—e4,9 tie of U2Q,l en 1,' tiers ►nemtiep. Gook 5f pJ<' le'ne 'C pct/ N J Pail& Ahin Feww.tyvk March 13, 2018 09/11/2007 15:17 PAGE 03/06 G A .P,IGL Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields. See ut-4-f'a - Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community* Se* a- iacieta Why are you Interested in serving on the Working Group? See aifat _ How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ) mail from the. City 12City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly [] Social Media p'Other: rePe era -e rrbta 7r -e:171 -Fri encl. Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, Sth floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE Aprii 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 3 09/11/2007 15:17 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application (Gail Price) Response to questions: PAGE 04/06 Education and experience in planning and urban design. land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, park and open space or related fields. I have over 22 years of experience in community planning and transportation planning, including several years as the Executive Director of the Santa Clara Valley chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA). I have significant experience in local and regional planning. 'My responsibilities have included current and advance (policy) planning, writing the Land Use and Transportation chapter of the Sunnyvale Comprehensive Plan, oversight of several consultants preparing Environmental Impacts Reports and Program EIRs, I have completed CEQA reviews of small and moderate sized projects, creating Master Plans for commercial/ industrial sites and conceptual plans for fixed rail/trail alignment in Montgomery County Maryland and conceptual plans for light rail and bus rapid transit in East San Jose. I have reviewed numerous current commercial site plans and buildings and worked with applications to create attractive and functional buildings and sites, including landscaping and open. spaces. I have also managed a structured parking facility, requiring coordination with City of Sunnyvale, Calttrain and the Valley Transportation Authority. Additionally, I have designed numerous community engagement programs for a range of projects and researched and written a variety of policy documents, which have been presented, to local Councils and regional planning and transit agencies in Montgomery County, Maryland and Santa Clara County. I have served on the VTA Board of Directors, Chair of the e Santa Clara County Behavioral Health Board and a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission Investigating the County Jail. I have local and regional professional and personal connections, which always informs my work. For all projects, I have conducted research about projects facing similar issues in various communities, which has required on -going familiarity with planning and design concepts and literature. I continue to be involved in various community groups related to housing and transit and I am familiar with planning and design literature. I have also worked at the San Jose Museum of Art, which has had a strong impact on my knowledge of art and design and has enhanced my appreciation and knowledge about design and aesthetics. I have worked with community members, developers, and urban design professionals on scores of projects, which have included design of community spaces and development of community benefit packages for the community. Many projects have required a combination of expertise and patience in order to get them approved. 1 09/11/2007 15:17 PAGE 05/06 Involvement and experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations and how you have connected with others in the community Since first moving to Palo Alto in 1990, I have been actively engaged in community issues that have included childcare advocacy, transit and community planning, social justice issues and reform. educational reform and mental health issues. I am involved with the Kiwanis Club of Palo Alto and have engaged in many activities, including the Kiwanis Angel Award for several years. I am currently A Board member of the Community Working Group/Abode Services, which focuses on creating permanent supportive housing for the homeless, and those at risk of homelessness. This is one segment of a broad spectrum of affordable housing needs within Santa Clara County. I am an affordable housing and transit advocate. I have worked on several service projects in the community via the Kiwanis Club of Palo Alto. 1 am an active member of the Palo Alto Rail Group promoting a thorough analysis of various grade -separation designs are considered in Palo Alto to address both local and regional transit needs. The size and location of the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan will have numerous mobility, circulation, and transit issues associated with It. The degree of my engagement and knowledge about Palo Alto has been highlighted by 13 years as an elected official: 8 years on the Palo Alto School Board and 5 years on the Palo Alto City Council. Both positions have enabled me to study a range of issues and to work to create reasonable solutions, As a City Council member, among other issues; l was a strong proponent for the creation of the Rail Corridor Plan and the creation of the Transportation Management Association. Both of these outcomes are related to ways to reduce have appropriate land use adjacent to the transit corridor and to create sustainable mobility that reduces green house gas emissions related to single occupancy autos. I am currently a Cool Block Captain and am working on disaster and emergency preparedness and incorporating sustainable practices. All of these activities illustrate my involvement and various connections to community members throughout Palo Alto. Why are you interested in working on the Working Group? I believe that my long history of community engagement combined with my professional experience in planning, transportation and urban design make me a strong candidate for the working group. Over the years, I have given considerable thought to the many opportunities that the North Ventura area provides to the community, especially its prime location for a combination of housing and retail in close proximity to transit. The ongoing housing crisis and the lack of various new options makes this area plan a particularly important one to help address these critical issues. There are various segments of "affordable housing" that are not being adequately addressed and it underscores the value of Gail A. Price 419/18 2 5 09/11/2007 15:17 PAGE 06/06 thoughtfully and comprehensively planning this area. I enjoy strategic planning and working to solve complex issues. We have very few larger parcels currently available in Palo Alto. The creation of an innovation and exciting coordinated plan and design will be a fantastic community asset. It will be an exciting opportunity to work in partnership with the community (with a variety of opinions), developers, architects, business and government agencies and elected officials to produce a visionary plan. I am familiar with the issues and the importance of an inclusive community process to ensure many viewpoints are considered during the development of the plan. 1 have the time to be an engaged and productive member of the Working Group. Gail A, Price 419118 3 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: l iirt&r Posen Mailing Address: U IV Cft gw3ofcp Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? AYES ❑ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? Are/you L NO 1 f If yes, which neighborhood? Y'en i Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES I NO If }m, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you ow, a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES aif NO If }Les, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES L 'NO If }g_§., what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are c rrently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES adNO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and ommitted to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? &LAVES 0 NO Check any that apply to you: 1" Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization {please specify: March 13, 2018 VEMIEUTM NIAR 2 8 2016 0 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: 1 otirn an orfforret, aril -tea- aVerza Oturrs v; rbnrvkew t- i ssves and Lori tee__, This q,Y rile expo a W rieg Glean fir Pith dean lxIctfer NWPP, MA and eh,vivon.merc impact assessments. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: 1 have spuin 47 in -the Orea. and Went *it rvia,(0111-1 14 oc 1 amed4,- No ` 'omr& U1�e here. In law soh �� AO came 19iTjefit- • 1 am also active in load, pinfi cs aid k ve he with Load �el,ech oils A4400044-- } � i n� Pa�-l�.o� as various nor- Pr�rfs Leh as t�AF�,��yl-, Ala Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? ,v yUs Ce'~Gh� I have e n her- to see &&t13eS " a -4- t to ft Ito has hdct over -the ice- -few Qars and ( ai Interered and inv6sted in In«= It 1/6O r. w` More- Invol red.. I,n In ass ve s `jun& also ln+en�-�ed In 3efF � on Ike acex-- d� a the s -run -tins Lilt �I u�t d How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) 0_44 t3 n LA ad 61 re°. 0,Ernail from the City ❑City Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly D Social Media per ve' Pld Other: %oStCara llrl mai L._ Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: un� Smith Are you a Palo Alto resident? ❑ YES g NO 1`'1ov�faifl View, CA 9Lip -1r< Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ❑ YES E] NO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES ,mil NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES i NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surroundine area? g YES l 1 NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES 1A NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? g1 YES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter g Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ® Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ® Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: ASSict v f SCc1t /'aster %ti -fd ) i ember Cuperf'io foil ry' House C 101 Peblii o T 1kr S J;cdn Vall y /\SS+Stcn1( S at ''MCA March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: a" (ece;Ved yn e e) a. reC S`raY �n;vefsl anA my TIA,Siefk5 d free frrvrn USC in Real Esi41 eievelopivent xve d,evei opeI 5e erd l p rD ec-t5 tI e 1c(s1 to year 1 sU con ,fro, , i ocAo S vlq -rte Pctt Very ins lane\ vse pLooinjji 604 1 L Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: T. haV nvdve ,yl Carrt►rlunr tether at 1 e415. / irk; *4 Sa Ibr�SQ clan i Za enS far e nt, rye ct cL4 t life, There. cS power in corn'in a f 0,0 result ,).1 oc rn l b4'W o kneo►t inn ,-)icleixo ham- bee/ a yner her n Cuper no f?©1 g years am curry also serui0.5 aSStsleit 1 Sco�st►l�ia " a 64 -dial/ as �f/ coact) at -110-- \-l'I cA h std o-rs hotse CaiJT . f' RQ idi J - Io l -s lest 6 ye� at,1c3 hire beer 1014) l» yr,/ c�+1X %wad/IA*2S � /� V pr iiktt, Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? Our Cor ny, W3S p ehe5) pwh5 Severn\ litre}S u I1ui ;-e a ill See vl +{,;j dry becotne cL vi6asif 63Mir)une ly USES OMC\ ameni ries I, t pio o e Si + t QYbI ). US ivtc ,` jif7 J, man al -fermate moCLS 4 liary0(1-4 hoa How did you learn about the Working Group formation? {check all that apply) El Email from the City ❑City Council Meeting E Palo Alto Weekly El Social Media Xl Other: mee-ft tM nu tnn L 1 Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 r►t% non irk, a rr CLr wdti a min oP a.CceSS March 13, 2018 Rece "eql APR 02 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name. Yunan Song Departmcn, o: '+ann+ric� g. Community cnvirnnmert Mailing Address: Paloalto, CA 94306 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? 2 YES 0 NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? YES 0 NO Ventura f rtes, which neighborhood? 0o you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES [1 NO SAP Lab -LC if yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Palo Alto, CA 94304 Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES 0 NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Co you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? 0 YES [1 NO I' yes, what is the property address? _PaloAgo, CA 94306 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? 0 YES ® NO If yes, which department/body? • re you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? 1 YES l NO Check any that apply to you: Fl Renter ® Homeowner l Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify! March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: I have a master of science degree in computer. I don't have any degree or working experience in these related fields. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: I am an active volunteer in Silicon Valley month of service. I have participated many community service projects, eg - Joined Rebuilding together SF where we remodel and paint the house for people with disabilities. - Build playground for elementary school in East Palo Alto - Volunteer as a teacher for a day in elementary school in Mountain View. - Build the garden for Addison Elementary School. - Foodbank packing - Volunteer at There with Care @Menlo Park. Both my husband and I live and work in Palo Alto. Our kids go to schools in Palo Alto and join all kinds of activities here. Our daily life is all connected lo the community -- neighbors, co-workers, small businesses in town, kids' classmates and there families, etc. I would like to know others thoughts hcw to make our community better. And I am also on Nextdoor. Why F:re you interested in serving on the Working Group? Make our community better. How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from the City JCity Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media ❑ Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: 6,A^-'' tVe.j) `9D)1"1 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? E YES C�'NO Are you a res ent of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? El YES 4SO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you ow a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? III YES NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? YES ❑ NO If yes, what is the property address? ciEAU m1), 4 4l \2 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are c ently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and ommitted to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ❑ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: S'1/4)`''kl'iL 6A-) (:)11 2-2 L� wt, 2"-- 2, , �, �� `3` Qt Q4(J Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: : Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? ,1,1? rrzw 6,J,_vov„zgit,6>zo .rp-J1-1 %ttAA- Coo.JA/u.4- J How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from the City ❑City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media Other: Vy✓ ) 0 Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Carolyn “Cari” Bloodworth Templeton Mailing Address: Palo Alto, CA 94306 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? YES NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? YES NO If yes, which neighborhood? Barron Park Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? YES NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or surrounding area? YES NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or surrounding area? YES NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? YES NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES NO Check any that apply to you: Renter Homeowner Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: Barron Park Association, Ohlone PTA, Santa Clara County Democratic Central Committee, Peninsula Democratic Coalition, Bayshore Progressive Democrats (founder), League of Women Voters, WIRE for Women, Emerge California ) North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application – Cari Templeton Page 2 of 3 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: As a career Technical Program Manager, I have over 20 years’ experience leading complex, cross- functional, multi-million dollar projects to success, through planning, communicating, getting buy-in, soliciting feedback, and working cross-functionally with designers, engineers, and stakeholders. During my 10+ years at Google, I managed development of internal apps for the Google Real Estate and Workplace Services (REWS) team, where I gained experience with public and private transit, facilities, and growth planning. In Palo Alto last summer, I drafted the parking and drop-off protocol that allowed my daughter’s chorus to stay at the First Baptist Church of Palo Alto (FBCPA) after parking complaints threatened to evict them. Regarding parks, I have raised my two children (10yo girl and 8yo boy) here in Palo Alto, and together we have enjoyed over 20 parks, bike paths, hiking trails, campgrounds, and open spaces throughout the city, for recreation, celebration, and relaxation. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: Community and Neighborhood Organizations • Barron Park Association, traffic workgroup member • WIRE for Women, a network for women in government in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties • Mentor to women in technology through groups such as UPWARD • Diversity working groups at Google, focused on women and neurodiversity in tech • Regularly attend and view City Council meetings, School Board meetings, and other groups, clubs, and commissions throughout Palo Alto and neighboring cities Schools and Community Activities • Former student at Preschool Family (PSF), a co-op preschool and parenting education program • Recent graduate of Stanford University, exposed to transit and community programs • Volunteer at Ohlone Elementary, PTA, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and after school programs • My children attend numerous extra-curricular enrichment programs in Palo Alto, including dance at Cubberly, PASA swimming at Palo Alto schools and Stanford, music and theater lessons at FBCPA and Grace Lutheran churches, and summer camps at the JMZ, Mitchell Park, Foothills Park, and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Political • Santa Clara County Democratic Central Committee, endorsement committee member • Bayshore Progressive Democrats, founder and director • Peninsula Democratic Coalition, member • League of Women Voters, member • Emerge California, a training program for female politicians, Program Member • Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, board member • Women’s, Veterans, and Rural Caucus of the California Democratic Party, member • Elected state party delegate (CADEM ADEM AD-24) in 2017-present • Elected national party delegate (DNC CD-18 alternate) in 2016 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application – Cari Templeton Page 3 of 3 Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? I want the North Ventura area to be a success for the City of Palo Alto. To do that, we will need to communicate effectively about the project, collect ideas and feedback, and understand what success looks like. I can contribute to this effort because of my familiarity with the North Ventura area and my background as a program manager. • History with Ventura: When I moved to Palo Alto in 2005, my husband and I bought a home in Ventura, where we attended Stanford and started our family. For 7 years, our kids played in the sand and on the play structure at Boulware Park, and we often walked along Park Boulevard to Fry's or down to California Avenue to get coffee, dinner, or shop at the Farmer's Market. • Current connection with Ventura: Though we now live in Barron Park, our family is still connected to the North Ventura area. I work part-time at the startup space near Fry's, my husband bikes to work at the Cloudera building on Park and Oregon, our children take private piano instruction within the boundaries, and we still frequent shops on Cal Ave as well. • Program Management and leadership experience: On top of my direct experience with the NVCAP area, my career as a Program Manager cultivated my strong leadership, collaboration, and communication skills, which would be a huge asset to the working group. Making sure that the North Ventura area is well planned and well executed would be an honor and a privilege. Thank you for your consideration! How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email from the City City Council Meeting Palo Alto Weekly Social Media Other: WIRE for Women mailer, several neighbors recommended I apply Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org March 13, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? ☐ YES ☐ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? ☐ YES ☐ NO Check any that apply to you: ☐ Renter ☐ Homeowner ☐ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ☐ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ☐ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: ________________________________________________________________________) March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community: Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) Email from the City City Council Meeting Palo Alto Weekly Social Media Other: Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: 14, LJ6241, Mailing Address: g,4 301 Phone: Email Address: Are you a Palo Alto resident? -`fES 11 NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? YES NO If ves, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ,I YES ❑ NO If ves, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? E YES ZNO If YeS, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surroundin If ym, what is the property address Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES ONO If ves, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? YES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter Homeowner O Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools l xperience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities O Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: -35- ,eci1/4 Cer-0.4.v1 1J c- �� -2_6, -1- /(?5. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you haver connected with others in the community: Cc K -`C 0 L i Li f Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? pc -op 2 i —` How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) 0 Email from the City El City Council Meeting 0 Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media 2 -Other: ` r F i r k Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 °'/j Legend Priority Development Area • Transportatio n Stations Pro posed NVCAP Expansion (pending) • • 0 Approved NVCAP Boundary This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS 7 :ae Afth ora, 201/1. 413.13 15 2417 iICAP291Em13 (Pec+rrp'8mr.ma'Adrrn PrawrrR•.•9 nrc it1 Thx. doeumerd is • cr aph e nP ...n..m only oil bra . .v.ru.r a.e .. Th. L11d Pab Mb a.amw.ro n+wrrg 1V b any war. CIOS9 q 2010 G1, of Pik, up North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Working Group Application Name: Mailing Address: Phone: Email Address: Siyi Zhang Palo Alto, 94306 Are you a Palo Alto resident? YES ❑ NO Are you a resident of the Ventura, Mayfield or Barron Park neighborhood? ❑ YES 1 NO We live just north of Alma St, right at the project boundary If yes, which neighborhood? Do you work in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ❑ YES J NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own a business in North Ventura or the surrounding area? ▪ YES ® NO If yes, what is the name of your company/business? What is the address of your company/business? Do you own property in North Ventura or the surroundin area? 0 YES ❑ NO if yes, what is the property address? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? ❑ YES ® NO If yes, which department/body? Are you generally available and committed to attend approximately monthly meetings between June 2018 and December 2019? 0 YES ❑ NO Check any that apply to you: ❑ Renter ❑ Homeowner ❑ Parent of School Aged Child or Student in Palo Alto Schools ▪ Experience with Issues Relevant to Youth, Seniors, or People with Disabilities ❑ Member of other local business/neighborhood/community organization (please specify: } March 13, 2018 Please briefly indicate any education or experience you have in the fields of planning and urban design, land economics or development, sustainability and environmental issues, transportation and mobility, parks and open space, or other relevant fields: I am very passionate about sustainability in the urban environment, with strong academic background and relevant work/ project experience. I graduated from Wellesley, MIT, and Stanford with advanced degrees in civil and environmental engineering and currently working at Tesla in utility -scale energy solutions. I was a research fellow at MIT office of sustainability and have contributed to the school's first sustainability plan. I have worked on multiple research projects, such as biking sharing system in Boston, air quality assessments using cell -phone mobility data in New York City, dispatch optimization of the Stanford Marguerite bus fleet. Previously I have also worked as an air quality consultant for a reputable environmental consulting firm in San Francisco, conducting emission calculations and modeling for CEQA air quality due diligence for large development projects in California. I believe my skillsets and knowledge align well with the mission of this meeting group. I am hoping to share an unbiased, professional perspective throughout the planning process. Please describe your involvement/experience in community activities, volunteer work, civic organizations, and how you have connected with others in the community:. l co-found MyH2O which is still actively working on clean water access in China. During my fellowship position at MIT Sustainability Office, I conducted on multiple interviews with local prominent biotech companies who shared practical strategies on green laboratory buildings. Since I moved here, I've been an active member of my local college alum group, participating in monthly lean -in circle gatherings in downtown Palo Alto. I treat my participation in NVCAP a great starting point to contribute to the Greater Ventura Neighborhood that I now call home. Why are you interested in serving on the Working Group? My husband and I moved to Palo Alto from Boston two years ago to start our small family here. I am grateful to live in this beautiful place and have always wanted to find a way to engage with local communities, while effectively applying my skillsets. As a young working professional in my late 20s, I wanted to bring in perspectives and ideas of my generation to this project as NVCAP will bring so much potential in invigorating the built environment in Palo Alto. Lastly, being just literally one street away from the project boundary, NVCAP will have a profound impact on how my family lives. I am also eager to take part in the collective decision -making process, to make our neighborhood a vibrant, safe and environmentally friendly place to live, work, and have fun in. How did you learn about the Working Group formation? (check all that apply) ❑ Email from the City ❑City Council Meeting ❑ Palo Alto Weekly ❑ Social Media Other: Mail Submit to: Department of Planning and Community Environment Attention: Elena Lee 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 NVCAP@cityofpaloalto.org APPLICATIONS DUE April 9, 2018 March 13, 2018 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Approval of Action Minutes for the April 9 and 16, 2018 Council Meetings Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes. ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: 04-09-18 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX)  Attachment B: 04-16-18 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 7 Special Meeting April 9, 2018 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:02 P.M. Present: DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Closed Session 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-POTENTIAL LITIGATION Subject: Noise and Other Impacts Arising From Management of Aircraft in the Northern California Airspace Authority: Potential Initiation of Litigation Under Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) (One Potential Case, as Plaintiff). MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Council went into Closed Session at 5:30 P.M. Council returned from Closed Session at 7:19 P.M. Mayor Kniss announced the City will continue to work with neighboring cities for regional solutions to noise and other impacts arising from aircraft. The City will not pursue legal action at this time. Special Orders of the Day 2. Proclamation Celebrating the 80th Anniversary of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the March 26, 2018 Council Meeting. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to approve the Action Minutes for the March 26, 2018 Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Consent Calendar Council Members Kou and Tanaka registered abstention votes on Agenda Item Number 6- SECOND READING: two Ordinances: Ordinance 5432… MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-6. 4. Approval of a Budget Amendment to the Electric and Fiber Optics Funds for the Upgrade Downtown Project, Increasing the Electric Communications System Improvements Budget by $1,000,000 and Decreasing the Fiber Optics Network System Improvements Budget by $1,070,202. 5. Approval of $2.5 Million Grant From the Community Center Impact Fee Fund to Avenidas for the Cost of Rehabilitation and Expansion of the City Owned Building Located at 450 Bryant Street, and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Community Center Impact Fee Fund. 6. Two Ordinances: Ordinance 5432 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and Transportation Commission) of Title 2; Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10; and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.10 (Low-Density Residential (RE, R-2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18; and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps) and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21;” and Ordinance 5433 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 Chapter 10.04 (Definitions) and Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) to Prohibit use of Bicycles and Similar Vehicles on Certain Sidewalks and Undercrossings and Establish Speed Limits on Shared-use Paths When Others are Present. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (FIRST READING: March 19, 2018 PASSED: 5-0 Kniss, Kou, Tanaka, Wolbach absent).” MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBERS 4-5 PASSED: 9-0 MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6 PASSED: 7-0-2 Kou, Tanaka abstain Action Items 7. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code Title 18 (Zoning) to add a new Chapter 18.30(J) (Affordable Housing Combining District) to Promote the Development of 100 Percent Affordable Housing Projects Located Within One-half Mile of a Major Transit Stop or One-quarter Mile of a High-quality Transit Corridor by Providing Flexible Development Standards and Modifying the Uses Allowed in the Commercial Districts and Subdistricts. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution Numbers 9720 and 9721. The Planning and Transportation Commission Suggested an Alternative and did not Recommend Adoption of the Ordinance at Their Meeting on March 14, 2018. MOTION: Vice Mayor Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to continue Agenda Item Number 8– Policy and Services Committee and Staff Recommendations on Next Steps Related to Airplane Noise to a date uncertain. MOTION PASSED: 8-1 Kou no Public Hearing opened at 8:21 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 9:51 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to: DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 A. Find the proposed draft Ordinance within the scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopt the proposed Ordinance amending Chapter 18.30 of Title 18 of the Municipal Code to add a new chapter establishing an Affordable Housing (AH) Combining District and related regulations; B. Direct Staff to improve the Ordinance with the following changes: i. Explore including the RP, RM15, and RM30 zones in the Combining District; ii. Add an additional 1.5 residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to the maximum residential FAR; iii. Allow the Planning Director to recommend a waiver for transitional height standards; iv. Specify a parking requirement of 0.75 per unit, except as preempted by state law, and allow the Planning Director to modify this standard based on a parking study that shows fewer spaces are needed. For special needs housing units, maintain a requirement of no more than 0.3 spaces per unit; and v. Clarify that this Overlay includes all Area Median Income (AMI) standards including up to 120 percent AMI. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B.ii., “add an” with “if requested by an applicant, allow the Planning Director to recommend adding up to an.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “excluding Town and Country Village Shopping Center.” (New Part A.i.) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B.ii., “if requested by an applicant, allow the Planning Director to recommend adding” with “explore, if requested by an applicant, the City Council may authorize adding.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A.i., “Midtown Shopping Center, and Charleston Shopping Center.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to accept the Planning and Transportation Commission’s (PTC) recommendations and direct Staff to: A. Work with the property owner of a site at El Camino Real and Wilton Court to develop a site-specific Planned Community (PC) zoning Ordinance and development agreement for affordable housing; and B. Work with the PTC on the series of additional recommendations developed by an ad hoc committee of the PTC with the following modifications: 1. Pursue a PC with Palo Alto Housing (PAH) to advance the Wilton Court project. 2. Separating affordable housing into two work items: under 60 percent Area Median Income (AMI) (AH60) and 60 percent to 120 percent AMI (AH120); 3. For AH60 consider the following options for retail preservation: i. Where retail is retained, offer a zoning (height) concession; ii. Where affordable housing provider financing precludes retail: The City or a third party may participate in project financing, potentially in exchange for an ownership position; iii. As a last resort, City may waive the retail requirement as provided by the retail preservation ordinance; 4. For AH60 explore City financial contributions to develop parking to meet demand based on measured parking utilization rates of comparable properties. The City may exercise an option to build additional parking available to the public; 5. Maintain transition height standards in all the C districts adjacent to residential districts. Explore a community process with outreach before changing transition heights for AH60 housing; 6. Explore an open space standard for AH60, recommending against roof gardens adjacent to low density residential districts; 7. Explore folding AH120 work into the Housing Workplan effort; DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 8. With a goal to develop a by-right process for 100 percent 60 percent AMI projects. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED: 3-6 DuBois, Holman, Kou yes AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to add to the Motion, “remove Section 18.30(J).070.(b).” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to add to the Motion, “replace in Section 18.30(J).070.(b), ‘any uses permitted in the underlying district’ with ‘retail or retail like uses.’” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED FAILED: 4-5 DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kou yes AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to replace in the Motion Part B.iv., “0.75 per unit” with “1.00 per bedroom.” AMENDMENT RESTATED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion “return to Council following the parking study to reevaluate parking requirements.” (New Part B.vi.) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Council has the ability to modify retail parking requirements.” (New Part B.vii.) AMENDMENT: Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to add to the Motion Part 1, “limit the Combining District to rental Below Market Rate (BMR) units.” (New Part A.ii.) AMENDMENT PASSED: 7-2 Fine, Wolbach no AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “with a goal to develop a by-right process for 100 affordable units eligible for tax credits.” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to: A. Find the proposed draft Ordinance within the scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopt the proposed Ordinance amending Chapter 18.30 of Title 18 of the Municipal Code to DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/9/18 add a new chapter establishing an Affordable Housing (AH) Combining District and related regulations: i. Excluding Town and Country Village Shopping Center, Midtown Shopping Center, and Charleston Shopping Center; ii. Limit the Combining District to rental Below Market Rate (BMR) units; B. Direct Staff to improve the Ordinance with the following changes: i. Explore including the RP, RM15, and RM30 zones in the Combining District; ii. Explore, if requested by an applicant, the City Council may authorize adding an additional 1.5 residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to the maximum residential FAR; iii. Allow the Planning Director to recommend a waiver for transitional height standards; iv. Specify a parking requirement of 0.75 per unit, except as preempted by state law, and allow the Planning Director to modify this standard based on a parking study that shows fewer spaces are needed. For special needs housing units, maintain a requirement of no more than 0.3 spaces per unit; v. Clarify that this Overlay includes all AMI standards including up to 120 percent Area Median Income (AMI); vi. Return to Council following the parking study to reevaluate parking requirements; and vii. Council has the ability to modify retail parking requirements. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Kou no 8. Policy and Services Committee and Staff Recommendations on Next Steps Related to Airplane Noise. State/Federal Legislation Update/Action None. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:38 A.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 7 Special Meeting April 16, 2018 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:08 P.M. Present: DuBois, Fine, Holman, Kniss, Kou, Scharff, Tanaka, Wolbach Absent: Filseth Study Session 1. Earth Day Report 2018. Special Orders of the Day 2. Junior Girl Scout Troop 60016 “Bronze Award” Project Declaring May as “Plastic Straw Awareness Month.” Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the March 19 and April 2, 2018 Council Meetings. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve the Action Minutes for the March 19 and April 2, 2018 Council Meetings. MOTION PASSED: 7-0-1 Kou abstain, Filseth absent Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Kou, third by Council Member Tanaka to pull Agenda Item Number 6 - Approve and Authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute a Contract With AECOM… to be heard as Agenda Item Number 8A. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 MOTION: Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member Kou, third by Council Member XX to pull Agenda Item Number 8 - Adoption of a Resolution Opposing a Potential November 2018 Ballot Measure … MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A THIRD Council Members Kou and Tanaka registered no votes on Agenda Item Number 8- Adoption of a Resolution Opposing a Potential November 2018 Ballot Measure… MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-5, 7-8. 4. Two Resolutions: Resolution 9750 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager or his Designee to Sign Related Agreements for Transportation Projects;” and Resolution 9751 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for SB 1 Fiscal Year 2019 Project List for Capital Improvement Program Project PE-13011, Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project.” 5. Approval of Three Contracts With: 1) Delta Dental for Dental Claim Administration; 2) Vision Service Plan for Vision Claim Administration and Fully Insured Vision Plan; and 3) Life Insurance Company of North America (CIGNA) for Underwriting of the City of Palo Alto’s Group Life, Accidental Death and Dismemberment (AD&D), and Long Term Disability Insurance (LTD) Plans for Three Years for Each Contract. 6. Approve and Authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute a Contract With AECOM in the Railroad Grade Separation and Safety Improvements Project (PL-17001) in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $1,278,660 for Planning, Community Engagement, Engineering, and Environmental Analysis Services Related to Railroad Grade Separations (the "Connecting Palo Alto" Program), Subject to Authorization of Individual Task Orders When Funding is Available. 7. Park Improvement Ordinance 5434 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Replacement of the Baylands Boardwalk (PE-14018) (FIRST READING: April 2, 2018 PASSED: 8-0 DuBois Absent).” 8. Resolution 9752 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Opposing a Potential November 2018 Ballot Measure: The Tax Fairness, Transparency, and Accountability Act of 2018.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBERS 4-5, 7 PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8 PASSED: 6-2 Kou, Tanaka no, Filseth absent Action Items 8A. (Former Agenda Item Number 6) Approve and Authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute a Contract With AECOM in the Railroad Grade Separation and Safety Improvements Project (PL- 17001) in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $1,278,660 for Planning, Community Engagement, Engineering, and Environmental Analysis Services Related to Railroad Grade Separations (the "Connecting Palo Alto" Program), Subject to Authorization of Individual Task Orders When Funding is Available. Mayor Kniss advised she will not participate in this Agenda Item because she owns real property near the Caltrain Rail Corridor. She left the meeting at 7:05 P.M. Council Member DuBois advised he will not participate in this Agenda Item because he lives near the Caltrain Rail Corridor. He left the meeting at 7:05 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract in the Railroad Grade Separation and Safety Improvements Project (PL-17001) in an amount not to exceed $1,278,660 for planning, community engagement, engineering, and environmental review services associated with the Connecting Palo Alto project to grade - separate Caltrain crossings in Palo Alto subject to authorization of individual task orders when there is funding available. MOTION PASSED: 6-0 DuBois, Filseth, Kniss absent Council took a break from 8:01 P.M. to 8:11 P.M. Council Member DuBois and Mayor Kniss returned to the meeting at 8:11 P.M. 9. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance (1) Amending Chapter 4.64 (Permits for Retailers of Tobacco Products) of the Municipal Co de to Allow Fees to be set by Ordinance; and (2) Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to add an Application and Permit Fee for the Tobacco Retailer Permit Program. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 Public Hearing opened at 8:14 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 8:15 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Fine to adopt an Ordinance approving amendments to: A. Chapter 4.64 of the Municipal Code (Permits for Retailers of Tobacco Products) to allow fees for the tobacco retailer program to be set by Ordinance; and B. The Public Works section of the Municipal Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2018 to add fees related to the City’s tobacco retailer permit program. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent 10. PUBLIC HEARING: Staff Requests Council: (1) Approve a Golf Management Agreement and Restaurant License Agreement With OB Sports for 39 Months in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $9,008,000; (2) Approve a Budget Amendment in the General Fund; (3) Adopt an Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Amend Golf Fees; (4) Amend the Management Agreement and a Lease With Brad Lozares to Increase the Not-to-Exceed Amount by $40,000 and Amend Both Terms to end April 17, 2018; (5) Amend the Lease With Hee King Bistro to Waive Lease and Utilities Payments of $45,633 and Authorize Buy-back of Inventory/Liquor License Not-to-Exceed $48,311. Public Hearing opened at 8:41 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 8:49 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to: A. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute an Agreement with OB Sports in an amount not to exceed $9,008,000 for golf management services on course, at the driving range, at the Golf Shop, and surrounding areas of the Palo Alto Baylands Golf Links (formerly the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course) for the term of April 16, 2018 through June 30, 2021; B. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute an Agreement with OB Sports for OB Sports to provide food and beverage services under a license arrangement for the term of April 16, 2018 through June 30, 2021 and OB Sports to pay a minimum of $132,013 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 which is subject to mutual increase based on net revenue expectations, including language that the associated liquor license be transferred to an operator of the City’s choice at no charge to the City, upon contract termination; C. Amend the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for the General Fund budget by: i. Decreasing the estimate for revenue from Charges for Service in the Community Services Department by $1,334,642; ii. Decreasing the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve by $1,344,642; D. Adopt an Ordinance amending the FY2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to change the Community Services Division’s Fees for golf; E. Amend Professional Services Agreement C3151541A with Brad Lozares Golf Shop for a change in compensation for an additional $40,000 and amend the term to end on April 17, 2018; F. Amend Lease Number 211 with Brad Lozares for the Golf Shop to end on April 17, 2018; and G. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase the Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E) and operating liquor license from Hee King Bistro in an amount not to exceed $48,311 and absolve Hee King Bistro of past due lease and utilities payments in an amount not to exceed $45,633, including a general release. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to continue Agenda Item Number 12- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) to add a new Section Imposing an Annual Office Limit… to April 30, 2018. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent 11. Resolution 9753 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Taxable Certificate of Participation (COP) Bonds Not-to-Exceed $9.8 Million to: (1) Finance the Golf Course Reconstruction; and (2) Refinance the 2002 Downtown Parking Improvement COP Bonds; Approving, Authorizing and Directing the Execution of Certain Lease Financing Documents; DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 Approving a Preliminary Official Statement; and Authorizing and Directing Certain Actions With Respect Thereto.” MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to: A. Adopt a Resolution approving, authorizing, and directing execution of certain lease financing documents, approving a preliminary official statement, and authorizing and directing certain actions with respect thereto; and B. Authorize execution and delivery of taxable Certificates of Participation (COPs) in an amount not to exceed $9.8 million to: i. Finance Golf Course Reconstruction; and ii. Provide funds for the refinancing of the City’s lease payment obligation related to the 2002 Downtown Parking Improvements Certificates of Participation (COPs). MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to temporarily adjourn the City Council meeting to allow the members of the City Council, in their capacity as the members of the Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation, to consider approval of the proposed financing. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Filseth absent Council Meeting temporarily adjourned at 10:54 P.M. Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation meeting convened at 10:54 P.M. Council Meeting reconvened at 10:58 P.M. 12. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) to add a new Section Imposing an Annual Office Limit and Setting Forth Related Regulations, and to Repeal the Respective Regulations From Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances). The Proposed Ordinance Will Perpetuate the Existing Annual Limit of 50,000 Square Feet of new Office/R&D Development per Year With Modifications Regarding; the Review Process, Unallocated Area Rollover Provisions, and Exemptions. The Planning & Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 4/16/18 Ordinance on February 14, 2018. This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No. 9720. This Item continued to April 30, 2018. State/Federal Legislation Update/Action None. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:08 P.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 The Office of the City Auditor recommends acceptance of the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017. At its meeting on November 14, 2017, the Policy and Services Committee approved and unanimously recommended that the City Council accept the report. The City Auditor’s report to the Policy and Services Committee and the transcript minutes are available on the City’s Policy and Services Committee website. Respectfully submitted, Harriet Richardson City Auditor ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 (PDF) Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Page 2 Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 Office of the City Auditor “Promoting honest, efficient, effective, economical, and fully accountable and transparent city government.” Attachment A PAGE 2 Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 First Quarter Update (July – September 2017) Overview The audit function is essential to the City of Palo Alto’s public accountability. The mission of the Office of the City Auditor, as mandated by the City Charter and Municipal Code, is to promote honest, efficient, effective, economical, and fully accountable and transparent city government. We conduct performance audits and reviews to provide the City Council and City management with information and evaluations regarding how effectively and efficiently resources are used; the adequacy of internal control systems; and compliance with policies, procedures, and regulatory requirements. Taking appropriate action on our audit recommendations helps the City reduce risks and protect its good reputation. Activity Highlights •We published and presented the audit of water meter billing accuracy. •We published and presented the continuous monitoring audit of overtime. •All audit staff participated in a three-day training for audit report writing. •City Auditor Harriet Richardson led a peer review team for Norfolk, Virginia. Audit and Project Work Below is a summary of our audit and project work for the first quarter of FY 2018: Title Objective(s) Start Date End Date Status Results/Comments Enterprise resource planning (ERP) Planning Audit: Data and System Governance and Security Evaluate the adequacy of data and system governance and security in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected for the new ERP system. 05/17 12/17 In Process The audit is in the field work phase, and we expect to complete the audit in late 2017. ERP Planning Audit: Data Reliability and Integrity Evaluate the integrity and reliability of data in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected prior to transferring data to the new ERP system. 05/17 02/18 In Process This will be a series of reports that focus on different aspects of data reliability or specific data sets. Our first two audits will be on data standardization and a specific data set. These are currently in the planning phase, and we expect to complete them in early 2018, with more audits to follow. ERP Planning Audit: Separation of Duties Evaluate the adequacy of separation of duties for various activities in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected for the new ERP system. 05/17 02/18 In Process The audit is in the planning phase, and we expect to complete it early 2018. Attachment A PAGE 3 Title Objective(s) Start Date End Date Status Results/Comments Code Enforcement Audit Evaluate code enforcement policies and practices for responsiveness, consistency, and follow-up. Resident opinions to help inform our audit will be gathered through a custom citizen survey, as described below. 05/17 03/18 In Process The audit is in the field work phase. We expect to complete the audit in early 2018. ERP Nonaudit Service Provide advisory services to the Department of Information Technology regarding its planning of a new ERP system. 09/16 Ongoing We attended 13 strategic and tactical team meetings during the first quarter of FY 2018 and provided verbal and written advice based on our technical expertise and best practice information readily available to us. We also met with IT staff biweekly to discuss specific issues requiring immediate attention. Custom Citizen Survey Conduct a citizen survey, separate from the annual National Citizen Survey™, to obtain resident opinions about code enforcement activities and the built environment. 06/17 12/17 In process The National Research Center mailed the survey to 3,000 residents. We have received the raw data from the National Research Center and are currently compiling it into a report and analyzing the results. National Citizen Survey™ Obtain resident opinions about the community and services provided by the City of Palo Alto and benchmark our results against other jurisdictions. 06/17 01/18 In process The National Research Center has mailed the survey to 3,000 residents and is currently in the data collection phase. We expect to receive the results in mid- December and to analyze them by early January. Audit Plan Update We currently have a limited scope item on our audit plan to evaluate the rules and processes used to establish the business registry and make recommendations to help clean up the data and ensure accuracy in the future. The Development Services Department is planning to do a condensed survey and will request only basic information (e.g., business name, type of business, and location) for the 2018 reregistration process. The department will hire a consultant to collect more complete baseline data of which businesses operate in Palo Alto and make recommendations for how to update the information in the future. Based on that, the Auditor’s Office does not plan to conduct this audit in FY 2018. The Development Services Director will provide a separate update to Council regarding the actions the department is taking to improve the accuracy and completeness of the business registry. Attachment A PAGE 4 Other Monitoring and Administrative Assignments Below is a summary of other assignments as of September 30, 2017: Title Objective(s) Status Results/Comments City Auditor Advisory Roles Provide guidance and advice to key governance committees within the City. Ongoing The City Auditor serves as an advisor to the Utilities Risk Oversight Committee and Information Security Steering Committee. We are also serving as an advisor for the strategic and technical planning groups for planning the new ERP system (see comment in the Audit and Project Work section above). Sales and Use Tax Allocation Reviews 1)Identify businesses that do business in Palo Alto that may have underreported or misallo- cated their sales and use tax and submit inquiries to the state for review and tax reallocation. 2)Monitor sales taxes received from the Stanford University Medical Center Project and notify Stanford of any differences between their reported taxes and state sales tax information, in accordance with the development agreement. 3)Provide Quarterly Status Updates and Sales Tax Digest Summaries for Council review. Ongoing 1)Total sales and use tax recoveries for the first quarter of FY 2018 were $10,381 from our inquiries and $7,732 from the vendor’s inquiries, for a total of $18,113 for the quarter and fiscal year-to-date. Due to processing delays at the State Board of Equalization, 50 potential misallocations are waiting to be researched and processed: 13 from our office and 37 from the vendor. 2)We receive calendar-year sales tax information for the Stanford Medicine development project about six months after the end of the calendar year. We will report the 2017 sales tax information for this project in our June 2018 quarterly report. The City has received $2,896,941 for calendar years 2011 through 2016 as a result of this agreement. 3)Quarterly sales tax reports are published on the Office of the City Auditor website at www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/aud/reports/default.asp. Status of Audit Recommendations Sixty recommendations were open at the beginning of the first quarter of FY 2018, plus an additional 26 that were reported to us as closed but that we had not yet verified. Of those 26, we verified 24 as closed and 2 as still open. We verified that another 9 were closed, and we added 13 recommendations during the first quarter of FY 2018, for a total of 66 recommendations still open at the end of the first quarter. All but one of the past-due status reports are scheduled to be presented to the Policy and Services Committee before December 2017. Below is a summary of the open audit recommendations as of September 30, 2017: Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Citywide Cash Handling and Travel Expense Issued 09/15/10 Due – 02/18 08/22/17 11/10/15 09/23/14 09/10/13 10/22/12 04/19/11 Recommendations: 11 Open: 1 Implemented during quarter: 0 Review practice of reimbursing employee meals when not in a travel status and report the amounts as income to employees to conform to Internal Revenue Service requirements. Attachment A PAGE 5 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Inventory Management Issued 02/18/14 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 09/23/14 Recommendations: 14 Open: 4 We reported 12 of the 14 recommendations as completed last quarter but had not yet verified the status. This report confirms that 12 of the 14 were completed but 2 of the 12 are still in progress, in addition to the 2 that were still open. •Implement City’s inventory management policies and procedures •Update and enforce inventory count policies and procedures to ensure consistent and accurate inventory records •Identify, formalize, and communicate inventory management goals and objectives to City departments •Ensure staff identify and use key SAP inventory management reports and appropriately configure and update SAP parameters that affect inventory levels Utility Meters: Procurement, Inventory, and Retirement Issued 03/10/15 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 Recommendations: 15 Open: 1 We reported 14 of the 15 recommendations as completed last quarter but had not yet verified the status. This report confirms that all 14 were completed. •Correct purchase order documents to accurately reflect engineering specifications NOTE: Two recommendations are closed because they are deemed to be no longer relevant. Police Department: Palo Alto Animal Services Issued 04/22/15 09/20/17 03/22/16 Recommendations: 8 Open: 0 Implemented during quarter: 8 N/A – all recommendations are closed Parking Funds Issued 12/15/15 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 Recommendations: 8 Open: 3 Implemented during quarter: 1 •Develop policies and procedures to clarify roles and responsibilities and ensure accurate calculation and reporting of parking-in-lieu fees •Establish policies and procedures to clarify roles and responsibilities for parking programs and parking permit funds •Identify financial and performance data required for effective evaluation of parking program Attachment A PAGE 6 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Issued 05/10/16 Past Due None Recommendations: 15 Open: 15 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Allocate sufficient resources to implement and maintain and monitor compliance with the City’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program •Update the safety manual/supplemental tools •Review departmental procedures and safety requirements to ensure they align with citywide policies and procedures •Identify useful safety statistics, their recipients, and reporting frequency, and develop an automated process for providing the statistics •Identify and provide industry-specific ergonomics and general wellness training opportunities •Address the disability leave benefits incorrectly reported as compensation to CalPERS •Review claims that had differences in additional city benefits and correct any errors identified •Determine optimal structure, update tools and procedures, and allocate sufficient and skilled resources to ensure accuracy of benefit eligibility and work status of injured employees •Ensure that data for managing disability leave is accurately captured through SAP time reporting •Provide online access to claims data and establish procedures for granting, monitoring, and removing access and safeguarding data •Streamline workers’ compensation reporting process and improve accuracy/completeness of claim forms •Monitor and follow-up on third-party administrator’s performance against key contract terms •Streamline third-party administrator’s reporting processes •Clarify workers’ compensation in City budget •Identify useful performance measures and establish procedures to ensure reliable reporting Attachment A PAGE 7 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Cable Franchise and Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Fees Issued 06/14/16 Due – 02/18 08/22/17 Recommendations: 9 Open: 7 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Assess ongoing need for PEG fees; place fees in restricted account until decisions are made about use of fees •Determine whether to allocate unrestricted funds, instead of PEG fees, to subsidize the Media Center’s operations. •Send letters to cable companies to demand payment of underpaid franchise and PEG fees •Work with cable companies to ensure accuracy of address databases and assign separate billing codes for each Cable Joint Powers service area •Develop criteria for assessing the accuracy of future cable franchise and PEG fee payments and require more detail with payment remittances •Assign responsibility for the cable communications program and provide effective oversight of the program •Draft an ordinance to update the Palo Alto Municipal Code based on clarified assignment of responsibility Community Services Department (CSD): Fee Schedule Audit Issued 02/14/17 Due – 05/18 11/14/17 Recommendations: 3 Open: 3 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Revise City’s cost recovery policy to align with relevant laws and reconfigure the Questica budget system to support fees that recover more than 100 percent of costs •Establish procedures in CSD to align with the City’s updated cost recovery policy •Configure SAP or the new ERP system to align cost centers with CSD programs Continuous Monitoring: Payments Issued 04/13/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 7 Open: 7 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Build a continuous monitoring process into the new ERP system to identify potential duplicate invoices and seek recovery of duplicate payments •Update invoice processing policies and procedures to facilitate identification of duplicate payments •Review unconfirmed potential duplicate payments and prioritize recovery of confirmed duplicate payments •Update policies and procedures to clarify guidance for creation of vendor master records and develop standardized coding vendor records •Build a continuous monitoring process into the new ERP system to identify duplicate, incomplete, or unused vendor records •Develop a requirement for the proposed ERP system to support entry of multiple vendor addresses when needed •Clean vendor master file before merging data into new ERP system Attachment A PAGE 8 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Green Purchasing Practices Issued 04/13/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 8 Open: 8 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Clearly define department(s) responsible for implementing green purchasing policies and determine if additional staffing and funding are needed to implement the policies •Align Municipal Code with green purchasing policies •Develop consolidated procedures to implement green purchasing policies •Educate City staff on green purchasing policies •Evaluate quality of 40 percent postconsumer fiber paper towels, monitor janitorial contractor’s use of cleaning and paper products, and evaluate feasibility of including additional green products in janitorial contract •Evaluate if new e-procurement system or other technology solution can help with tracking and reporting green purchases and establish appropriate green purchasing performance measures •Require vendors to provide data on amounts of green products and services that City purchases from them •Develop and implement a process to formally document the assessment of battery-electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles Utilities Department: Cross Bore Inspection Contract Issued 06/01/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 4 Open: 4 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Prioritize uninspected sewer pipelines for inspection and disclose potential inspection challenges in future contract solicitations •Identify and update missing data in laterals database •Incorporate relevant provisions from National Association of Sewer Service Companies’ contract template in future sewer inspection contracts •Identify gaps in staff expertise and develop a training and certification plan for field staff who will monitor field inspections Attachment A PAGE 9 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Accuracy of Water Meter Billing Issued 08/16/17 Due – 05/18 None Recommendations: 11 Open: 11 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Correct billing errors identified •Investigate 123 other meter records with discrepancies and correct as necessary •Review and correct meter records for meters larger than 2 inches •Explore options for addressing equity in meter size rates •Until new ERP system is implemented, implement a temporary monitoring or reporting system to identify and correct discrepancies that may result in billing errors and ensure new ERP system has controls to prevent and identify such discrepancies •Develop a policy and procedures to report significant, systemic infrastructure changes to Council and update City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU) Rules and Regulations as needed •Seek direction from Council before proceeding with installing additional electronic meters •Determine if installed eMeters should be replaced and if billing adjustments are required Continuous Monitoring: Overtime Issued 09/06/17 Due – 05/18 None Recommendations: 2 Open: 2 Implemented during quarter: 0 •Explore potential of developing a continuous monitoring process for overtime •Form a work group to design standardized overtime management processes in the new ERP environment Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline Administration The hotline review committee, composed of the City Auditor, the City Attorney, and the City Manager, or their designees, meets as needed to review hotline-related activities. We did not receive or close any hotline complaints 9 0 0 00 2 4 6 8 10 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Number of Implemented Recommendations by Quarter 31 22 13 0 20 40 60 80 100 Number of Open Recommendations FY 18 FY 17 Prior Fiscal Years Attachment A PAGE 10 during the first quarter of FY 2018, and no prior complaints remain open. The chart below summarizes the status of complaints received in each fiscal year since the hotline was implemented. Source: City of Palo Alto hotline case management system as of September 30, 2017 7 3 2 15 9 00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 Status of Complaints Received by Fiscal Year Closed Complaints Open Complaints Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: HARRIET RICHARDSON, CITY AUDITOR DATE: APRIL 30, 2018 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6 – Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 This memo corrects the Status of Audit Recommendations section of the Office of the City Auditor’s Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2017 to show that the number of open recommendations should be 6 instead of 7 for the Cable Franchise and Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Fees Audit (report page 6). HARRIET RICHARDSON City Auditor CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 The Office of the City Auditor recommends acceptance of the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017. At its meeting on February 13, 2018, the Policy and Services Committee approved and unanimously recommended that the City Council accept the report. The City Auditor’s report to the Policy and Services Committee and the transcript minutes are available on the City’s Policy and Services Committee website. Respectfully submitted, Harriet Richardson City Auditor ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 (PDF) Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Page 2 Attachment A Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 Office of the City Auditor “Promoting honest, efficient, effective, economical, and fully accountable and transparent city government.” Attachment A PAGE 2 Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Second Quarter Update (October – December 2017) Overview The audit function is essential to the City of Palo Alto’s public accountability. The mission of the Office of the City Auditor, as mandated by the City Charter and Municipal Code, is to promote honest, efficient, effective, economical, and fully accountable and transparent city government. We conduct performance audits and reviews to provide the City Council and City management with information and evaluations regarding how effectively and efficiently resources are used; the adequacy of internal control systems; and compliance with policies, procedures, and regulatory requirements. Taking appropriate action on our audit recommendations helps the City reduce risks and protect its good reputation. Activity Highlights  Coordinated with the external financial auditor to release and present the City’s financial statement audits.  Coordinated with the Department of Human Resources to develop a flyer and business card to begin advertising the Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline and the Employee Advice Line, and the difference between them (copies attached).  Received our triennial external peer review with a fully pass rating. Audit and Project Work Below is a summary of our audit and project work for the second quarter of FY 2018: Title Objective(s) Start Date End Date Status Results/Comments Enterprise resource planning (ERP) Planning Audit: Data and System Governance and Security Evaluate the adequacy of data and system governance and security in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected for the new ERP system. 05/17 04/18 In Process The audit is in the report writing phase, and we expect to complete the audit in early 2018. ERP Planning Audit: Data Reliability and Integrity Evaluate the integrity and reliability of data in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected prior to transferring data to the new ERP system. 05/17 06/18 In Process This will be a series of reports that focus on different aspects of data reliability or specific data sets. Our first two audits will be on data standardization and a specific data set. These audits are currently in the field work phase, and we expect to complete them in early 2018, with more audits to follow. ERP Planning Audit: Separation of Duties Evaluate the adequacy of separation of duties for various activities in the current SAP system and make recommendations to ensure that identified deficiencies are corrected for the new ERP system. 05/17 06/18 In Process The audit is in the field work phase, and we expect to complete it early 2018. Attachment A PAGE 3 Title Objective(s) Start Date End Date Status Results/Comments Code Enforcement Audit Evaluate code enforcement policies and practices for responsiveness, consistency, and follow‐up. Resident opinions to help inform our audit will be gathered through a custom citizen survey, as described below. 05/17 06/18 In Process The audit is in the field work phase. We expect to complete the audit in early 2018. ERP Nonaudit Service Provide advisory services to the Department of Information Technology regarding its planning of a new ERP system. 09/16 Ongoing We attended 17 strategic and tactical team meetings during the second quarter of FY 2018 and provided verbal and written advice based on our technical expertise and best practice information readily available to us. We met with IT staff biweekly to discuss specific issues requiring immediate attention. We also issued a memo to the IT Director that summarizes our advice and enhancement opportunities. Custom Citizen Survey Conduct a citizen survey, separate from the annual National Citizen Survey™, to obtain resident opinions about code enforcement activities and the built environment. 06/17 01/18 In process The National Research Center mailed the survey to 3,000 residents. We have received the raw data from the National Research Center and are currently compiling it into a report and analyzing the results. National Citizen Survey™ Obtain resident opinions about the community and services provided by the City of Palo Alto and benchmark our results against other jurisdictions. 06/17 01/18 In process The National Research Center has mailed the survey to 3,000 residents and is currently in the data collection phase. We expect to receive the results in mid‐ December and to analyze them by early January. Annual Performance Report Provides citywide information for key areas, including spending, staffing, workload, and performance 08/17 01/18 In process Departments provided data, which we are compiling into the annual report. We will present the report to the Council at its annual retreat on February 3, 2018. Citizen Centric Report Provides City and community information, performance results, and summary revenue and expenditure data in an easy‐to‐ready four‐page format. 12/17 01/18 In process Staff collected data and are compiling it into the report, which will be presented at the annual Council retreat. Attachment A PAGE 4 Other Monitoring and Administrative Assignments Below is a summary of other assignments as of December 31, 2017: Title Objective(s) Status Results/Comments City Auditor Advisory Roles Provide guidance and advice to key governance committees within the City. Ongoing The City Auditor serves as an advisor to the Utilities Risk Oversight Committee and Information Security Steering Committee. We are also serving as an advisor for the strategic and technical planning groups for planning the new ERP system (see comment in the Audit and Project Work section above). Sales and Use Tax Allocation Reviews 1) Identify businesses that do business in Palo Alto that may have underreported or misallo‐ cated their sales and use tax and submit inquiries to the state for review and tax reallocation. 2) Monitor sales taxes received from the Stanford University Medical Center Project and notify Stanford of any differences between their reported taxes and state sales tax information, in accordance with the development agreement. 3) Provide Quarterly Status Updates and Sales Tax Digest Summaries for Council review. Ongoing 1) Total sales and use tax recoveries for the second quarter of FY 2018 were $232,280 from our inquiries and $21,135 from the vendor’s inquiries, for a total of $253,415 for the quarter and $271,528 fiscal year‐to‐date. Due to processing delays at the State Board of Equalization, 34 potential misallocations are waiting to be researched and processed: 11 from our office and 23 from the vendor. 2) We receive calendar‐year sales tax information for the Stanford Medicine development project about six months after the end of the calendar year. We will report the 2017 sales tax information for this project in our June 2018 quarterly report. The City has received $2,896,941 for calendar years 2011 through 2016 as a result of this agreement. 3) Quarterly sales tax reports are published on the Office of the City Auditor website at www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/aud/reports/default.asp. Status of Audit Recommendations Sixty recommendations were open at the beginning of the second quarter of FY 2018, and none were closed. One status report was past due as of December 31, 2017, but is scheduled to be presented to the Policy and Services Committee in February 2018. Four status reports that were past due at the end of the first quarter of FY 2018 were presented in the second quarter of FY 2018. Below is a summary of the open audit recommendations as of September 30, 2017: Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Citywide Cash Handling and Travel Expense Issued 09/15/10 Due – 02/18 08/22/17 11/10/15 09/23/14 09/10/13 10/22/12 04/19/11 Recommendations: 11 Open: 1 Implemented during quarter: 0 Review practice of reimbursing employee meals when not in a travel status and report the amounts as income to employees to conform to Internal Revenue Service requirements. Attachment A PAGE 5 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Inventory Management Issued 02/18/14 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 09/23/14 Recommendations: 14 Open: 4  Implement City’s inventory management policies and procedures  Update and enforce inventory count policies and procedures to ensure consistent and accurate inventory records  Identify, formalize, and communicate inventory management goals and objectives to City departments  Ensure staff identify and use key SAP inventory management reports and appropriately configure and update SAP parameters that affect inventory levels Utility Meters: Procurement, Inventory, and Retirement Issued 03/10/15 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 Recommendations: 15 Open: 1  Correct purchase order documents to accurately reflect engineering specifications NOTE: Two recommendations are closed because they are deemed to be no longer relevant. Parking Funds Issued 12/15/15 Due – 05/18 11/02/17 Recommendations: 8 Open: 3 Implemented during quarter: 0  Develop policies and procedures to clarify roles and responsibilities and ensure accurate calculation and reporting of parking‐in‐lieu fees  Establish policies and procedures to clarify roles and responsibilities for parking programs and parking permit funds  Identify financial and performance data required for effective evaluation of parking program Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Issued 05/10/16 Past Due – Scheduled for 2/13/18 None Recommendations: 15 Open: 15 Implemented during quarter: 0  Allocate sufficient resources to implement and maintain and monitor compliance with the City’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program  Update the safety manual/supplemental tools  Review departmental procedures and safety requirements to ensure they align with citywide policies and procedures  Identify useful safety statistics, their recipients, and reporting frequency, and develop an automated process for providing the statistics  Identify and provide industry‐specific ergonomics and general wellness training opportunities  Address the disability leave benefits incorrectly reported as compensation to CalPERS  Review claims that had differences in additional city benefits and correct any errors identified  Determine optimal structure, update tools and procedures, and allocate sufficient and skilled resources to ensure accuracy of benefit eligibility and work status of injured employees  Ensure that data for managing disability leave is accurately captured through SAP time reporting Attachment A PAGE 6 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations  Provide online access to claims data and establish procedures for granting, monitoring, and removing access and safeguarding data  Streamline workers’ compensation reporting process and improve accuracy/completeness of claim forms  Monitor and follow‐up on third‐party administrator’s performance against key contract terms  Streamline third‐party administrator’s reporting processes  Clarify workers’ compensation in City budget  Identify useful performance measures and establish procedures to ensure reliable reporting Cable Franchise and Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Fees Issued 06/14/16 Due – 02/18 08/22/17 Recommendations: 9 Open: 7 Implemented during quarter: 0  Assess ongoing need for PEG fees; place fees in restricted account until decisions are made about use of fees  Determine whether to allocate unrestricted funds, instead of PEG fees, to subsidize the Media Center’s operations.  Send letters to cable companies to demand payment of underpaid franchise and PEG fees  Work with cable companies to ensure accuracy of address databases and assign separate billing codes for each Cable Joint Powers service area  Develop criteria for assessing the accuracy of future cable franchise and PEG fee payments and require more detail with payment remittances  Assign responsibility for the cable communications program and provide effective oversight of the program  Draft an ordinance to update the Palo Alto Municipal Code based on clarified assignment of responsibility Community Services Department (CSD): Fee Schedule Audit Issued 02/14/17 Due – 05/18 11/14/17 Recommendations: 3 Open: 3 Implemented during quarter: 0  Revise City’s cost recovery policy to align with relevant laws and reconfigure the Questica budget system to support fees that recover more than 100 percent of costs  Establish procedures in CSD to align with the City’s updated cost recovery policy  Configure SAP or the new ERP system to align cost centers with CSD programs Attachment A PAGE 7 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Continuous Monitoring: Payments Issued 04/13/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 7 Open: 7 Implemented during quarter: 0  Build a continuous monitoring process into the new ERP system to identify potential duplicate invoices and seek recovery of duplicate payments  Update invoice processing policies and procedures to facilitate identification of duplicate payments  Review unconfirmed potential duplicate payments and prioritize recovery of confirmed duplicate payments  Update policies and procedures to clarify guidance for creation of vendor master records and develop standardized coding vendor records  Build a continuous monitoring process into the new ERP system to identify duplicate, incomplete, or unused vendor records  Develop a requirement for the proposed ERP system to support entry of multiple vendor addresses when needed  Clean vendor master file before merging data into new ERP system Green Purchasing Practices Issued 04/13/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 8 Open: 8 Implemented during quarter: 0  Clearly define department(s) responsible for implementing green purchasing policies and determine if additional staffing and funding are needed to implement the policies  Align Municipal Code with green purchasing policies  Develop consolidated procedures to implement green purchasing policies  Educate City staff on green purchasing policies  Evaluate quality of 40 percent postconsumer fiber paper towels, monitor janitorial contractor’s use of cleaning and paper products, and evaluate feasibility of including additional green products in janitorial contract  Evaluate if new e‐procurement system or other technology solution can help with tracking and reporting green purchases and establish appropriate green purchasing performance measures  Require vendors to provide data on amounts of green products and services that City purchases from them  Develop and implement a process to formally document the assessment of battery‐electric and plug‐ in hybrid vehicles Attachment A PAGE 8 Audit Title and Report Date Due Date and Prior Status Report Dates Total Recommendations/ Number Open Summary of Open Recommendations Utilities Department: Cross Bore Inspection Contract Issued 06/01/17 Due – 02/18 None Recommendations: 4 Open: 4 Implemented during quarter: 0  Prioritize uninspected sewer pipelines for inspection and disclose potential inspection challenges in future contract solicitations  Identify and update missing data in laterals database  Incorporate relevant provisions from National Association of Sewer Service Companies’ contract template in future sewer inspection contracts  Identify gaps in staff expertise and develop a training and certification plan for field staff who will monitor field inspections Accuracy of Water Meter Billing Issued 08/16/17 Due – 05/18 None Recommendations: 11 Open: 11 Implemented during quarter: 0  Correct billing errors identified  Investigate 123 other meter records with discrepancies and correct as necessary  Review and correct meter records for meters larger than 2 inches  Explore options for addressing equity in meter size rates  Until new ERP system is implemented, implement a temporary monitoring or reporting system to identify and correct discrepancies that may result in billing errors and ensure new ERP system has controls to prevent and identify such discrepancies  Develop a policy and procedures to report significant, systemic infrastructure changes to Council and update City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU) Rules and Regulations as needed  Seek direction from Council before proceeding with installing additional electronic meters  Determine if installed eMeters should be replaced and if billing adjustments are required Continuous Monitoring: Overtime Issued 09/06/17 Due – 05/18 None Recommendations: 2 Open: 2 Implemented during quarter: 0  Explore potential of developing a continuous monitoring process for overtime  Form a work group to design standardized overtime management processes in the new ERP environment Attachment A PAGE 9 Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline Administration The hotline review committee, composed of the City Auditor, the City Attorney, and the City Manager, or their designees, meets as needed to review hotline‐related activities. We did not receive or close any hotline complaints during the second quarter of FY 2018, and no prior complaints remain open. The chart below summarizes the status of complaints received in each fiscal year since the hotline was implemented. Source: City of Palo Alto hotline case management system as of December 31, 2017 9 0 0 00 2 4 6 8 10 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Number of Implemented Recommendations by Quarter 31 18 17 0 20 40 60 80 100 Number of Open Recommendations FY 18 FY 17 Prior Fiscal Years 7 3 2 15 9 00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 Status of Complaints Received by Fiscal Year Closed Complaints Open Complaints Attachment B Attachment B CITY OF PALO ALTO MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: HARRIET RICHARDSON, CITY AUDITOR DATE: APRIL 30, 2018 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 – Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 This memo corrects the Status of Audit Recommendations section of the Office of the City Auditor’s Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2017 as follows:  Parking Funds Audit (report page 5) – Prior status report date should be 11/14/17 instead of 11/02/17.  Cable Franchise and Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Fees Audit (report page 6) – Number of open recommendations should be 6 instead of 7.  Community Services Department (CSD) Fee Schedule Audit (report page 6) – The number of recommendations implemented during the quarter should be 1 instead of 0, and the number of open recommendations should be 2 instead of 3. The graphs on page 9 showing the number of implemented recommendations by quarter and number of open recommendations should be corrected as shown below: HARRIET RICHARDSON City Auditor CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Triennial External Quality Control Review of the Office of the City Auditor The Office of the City Auditor recommends acceptance of the Triennial External Quality Control Review of the Office of the City Auditor. At its meeting on February 13, 2018, the Policy and Services Committee approved and unanimously recommended that the City Council accept the report. The City Auditor’s report to the Policy and Services Committee and the transcript minutes are available on the City’s Policy and Services Committee website. Respectfully submitted, Harriet Richardson City Auditor ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: External Quality Control Review of the Office of the City Au ditor (PDF) Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Page 2 Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A November 9, 2017 Ms. Sonia Montano Mr. D. Lamar Norwood Audit Supervisor Senior Internal Auditor Office of the Auditor City of Raleigh, NC City & County of Denver, CO Dear Ms. Montano and Mr. Norwood, Thank you for conducting the external quality control review of the City of Palo Alto’s Office of the City Auditor, which the Government Auditing Standards require to be conducted every three years. We are pleased with your opinion that the Office of the City Auditor’s internal quality control system was suitably designed and operating effectively to provide reasonable assurance of compliance with the Government Auditing Standards during the period April 15, 2014, through June 30, 2017. We appreciate your thorough review, your comments about the areas in which our office excels, and your suggestion to further enhance our operations. We are committed to continuously improving and refining our audit processes and, as you noted, have already updated our Audit Policies and Procedures Manual, as well as the Assessment of Audit Evidence section of our Preliminary Findings and Recommendations template, to require audit staff to specifically document in their workpapers their evaluation of the objectivity, credibility, and reliability of testimonial evidence when they are relying on that evidence to support their audit findings and conclusions. We would like to express our appreciation and thanks to the peer review team and the Association of Local Government Auditors for their work and commitment to ensuring that government auditors, through the peer review process, adhere to Government Auditing Standards. I will share your report with the City Council and make it available to the public on our website. Respectfully, Harriet Richardson, CPA, CIA, CGAP, CRMA City Auditor Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 4.6 (Permits for Retailers of Tobacco Products) of the Municipal Code to Allow Fees to be set by Ordinance (FIRST READING: April 16, 2018 PASSED: 8-0 Filseth Absent) This ordinance was first heard by the City Council on April 16, 2018, when it was unanimously approved, without changes. It passed 8-0 with Council Member Filseth absent. It is now before you for the second reading. ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: Tobacco Fee Ordinance (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 Not Yet Approved Attachment A Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Add Application and Permit Fees for the Tobacco Retailer Permit Program The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The County of Santa Clara adopted an ordinance creating a Tobacco Retailer Permit program in 2010 and passed a resolution (Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara, Resolution No. 2010-447) establishing an application fee and an annual permit fee for the program. B. The City of Palo Alto worked with the County of Santa Clara to create a Tobacco Retailer Permit program for the City. In 2017, the City adopted Ordinance No. 5418, which established a tobacco retailer permit program to be administered by the County. The City Council also approved an agreement between the City and the County of Santa Clara to administer the program on the City’s behalf. C. As the City’s Tobacco Retailer Permit program is administered by the County of Santa Clara, the City intends to set its program fees at the same levels as those set by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara. SECTION 2. Section 4.64.100 of Chapter 4.64 (Permits for Retailers of Tobacco Products) of Title 4 (Business Licenses and Regulations) is hereby amended to read as follows (unchanged text is in plain font, additions to code are in underlined-italics font): 4.64.100 Fees. The city or its designee shall not issue or renew a retailer permit prior to full payment of any applicable fees. The city shall, from time to time, establish by resolution or ordinance the fees to issue or to renew a retailer permit. The fees shall be calculated so as to recover the cost of administration and enforcement of this chapter, including, for example, issuing a permit, administering the permit program, conducting retailer education, performing retailer inspection and compliance checks, documenting violations, and prosecuting violators, but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized by this chapter. All fees and interest earned from such fees shall be used exclusively to fund administration and enforcement of this chapter. SECTION 3. The Council of the City of Palo Alto adopts the changes to the Municipal Fee Schedule as set forth in Exhibit “A” and incorporated here by reference. Not Yet Approved Attachment A 2 SECTION 4. The amount of the new fees is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payer bears a fair and reasonable relationship to the payer’s burden on, or the benefits received from, the governmental activity. SECTION 5. Fees in the Municipal Fee Schedule are for government services provided directly to the payor that are not provided to those not charged. The amount of this fee does not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the services. Consequently, pursuant to Art. XIII C, Section I(e)(2) of the California Constitution, such fees are not a tax. SECTION 6. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be effective on the 31st day after the date of its adoption except for Section 3, which shall be effective sixty days after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of ____________________________ Not Yet Approved Attachment A 3 Director of Administrative Services Not Yet Approved Attachment A 4 Attachment A Public Works Tobacco Retailer Permit Program Fee Title FY18 Rate Tobacco Retailer Tobacco Retailer Permit Program – Application Fee for New Applications Rate set by County of Santa Clara (currently $340.00 per application) Tobacco Retailer Permit Program – Annual Permit Fee (including renewals) Rate set by County of Santa Clara (currently $425.00 per annual permit) CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 30, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the FY18 Municipal Fee Schedule to Amend the Golf Fees (FIRST READING: April 16, 2018 PASSED: 8-0 Filseth Absent) This ordinance was first heard by the City Council on April 16, 2018, when it was unanimously approved, without changes. It passed 8-0 with Council Member Filseth absent. It is now before you for the second reading. ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: Golf Course Ordinance (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 Not Yet Approved Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Amend the Community Service Division’s Golf Fees. The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The City of Palo Alto owns a municipal golf course in the Baylands that has recently been renewed with a new layout, new turf, and several other improvements. B. The City’s golf course is one of several in the region, including municipal‐owned courses in San Jose, Mountain View, San Mateo, and San Francisco. C. The City anticipates contracting with OB Sports, a golf management company, to take over management of the renewed golf course, including its pro shop and restaurant. During this period, the City and OB Sports anticipate making further improvements as the golf course re‐opens to the public. SECTION 2. The Council of the City of Palo Alto rescinds the existing golf fees (club & cart rental fees, driving range fees, green fees, and special fees) in the Community Services section of the Fiscal Year 2018 Adopted Municipal Fee Schedule (“Municipal Fee Schedule”) and adopts the amendments to the Municipal Fee Schedule as set forth in Exhibit “A” and incorporated here by reference. SECTION 3. The fees in this Ordinance are for voluntary entrance and/or use of government property. Pursuant to Art. XIII C, Section I(e)(4) of the California Constitution, such fees are not a tax. SECTION 4. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective thirty‐one days after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: Not Yet Approved 2 NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services Not Yet Approved 3 Attachment A Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule Community Services Fees Open Space, Parks, & Golf WEEKDAY Monday‐Thursday Walking Riding Low High Low High Non Resident $50.00 $75.00 $64.00 $100.00 Bay Area Resident $45.00 $65.00 $59.00 $90.00 Palo Alto Resident $40.00 $60.00 $54.00 $85.00 Baylands Cardholder $37.00 $57.00 $51.00 $82.00 Senior (w/ Card) $34.00 $52.00 $48.00 $77.00 Replay Rate $20.00 $30.00 $34.00 $55.00 9 Hole/Twilight Non Resident $32.00 $42.00 $41.00 $56.00 9 Hole/Twilight Resident $28.00 $38.00 $37.00 $52.00 Juniors $12.00 $21.00 n/a n/a Cart Fees/18 Hole $14.00 $25.00 Cart Fees/9 Hole $9.00 $14.00 Not Yet Approved 4 WEEKEND Friday ‐ Sunday Walking Riding Low High Low High Non Resident $65.00 $110.00 $79.00 $135.00 Bay Area Resident $55.00 $95.00 $69.00 $120.00 Palo Alto Resident $52.00 $80.00 $66.00 $105.00 Baylands Cardholder $50.00 $75.00 $64.00 $100.00 Senior (w/ Card) n/a n/a n/a n/a Replay Rate $24.00 $40.00 $38.00 $65.00 9 Hole/Twilight Non Resident $38.00 $50.00 $52.00 $64.00 9 Hole/Twilight Resident $34.00 $46.00 $48.00 $60.00 Juniors $20.00 $35.00 n/a n/a Cart Fees/18 Hole $14.00 $25.00 Cart Fees/9 Hole $9.00 $14.00 RENTAL / PURCHASE ITEMS: Low High Hand Cart 18 Holes $ 4.00 $ 10.00 Hand Cart 9 Holes $ 2.00 $ 7.00 Club Rentals 9 Holes $ 20.00 $ 50.00 Club Rentals 18 Holes $ 40.00 $ 80.00 Driving Range ‐ Small Bucket $ 3.00 $ 10.00 Driving Range ‐ Medium Bucket $ 6.00 $ 15.00 Driving Range ‐ Large Bucket $ 9.00 $ 20.00 Driving Range ‐ Jumbo Bucket $ 10.00 $ 25.00 Driving Range ‐ Medium Bucket Card‐10 $ 60.00 $ 135.00 Driving Range ‐ Large Bucket Card‐10 $ 90.00 $ 180.00 City of Palo Alto (ID # 9146) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/30/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 2nd Reading: CalPERS Contract Title: SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System to ad d Cost-sharing Pursuant to Government Code Section 20516 (FIRST READING: April 2, 2018 PASSED: 8 -0 DuBois absent) (CLK) From: City Manager Lead Department: Human Resources This was first heard by the City Council on April 2, 2018 and was passed unanimously with Council Member DuBois absent. There were no changes made by Council and due to CalPERS regulations both the first and second reading of this ordinance have to be an Action item on the agenda. Attachments:  ORdinance PERS Not Yet Approved 1 AY/HR/2017-07-26 Ord Amending CalPERS Contract Ordinance No. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System to Add Cost-Sharing Pursuant to Government Code Section 20516 The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration, California Employees’ System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment hereto, marked Exhibit A, and such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee is authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City of Palo Alto. adoption. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: City Attorney City Manager Director of Human Resources Director of Administrative Service Not Yet Approved 2 AY/HR/2017-07-26 Ord Amending CalPERS Contract 4- Ca1PERS EXHIBIT California Public Employees' Retirement System -4* AMENDME'\T TO CONTRACT Between the Board of Administration California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council City of Palo Alto The Board of Administration, Califomia Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective January 1, 1942, and witnessed March 9, 1942, and as amended effective January 1, 1948, April 1, 1949, January 1, 1952, July 1, 1954, February 1, 1956, November 1, 1964, September 23, 1968, December 14, 1970, February 1, 1974, July 8, 1974, January 5, 1975, April 1, 1975, September 11, 1977, July 1, 1979, February 21, 1981, July 11, 1981, December 12, 1981, June 12, 1982, September 17, 1983, November 12, 1983, February 11, 1991, October 15, 1994, December 10, 1994, February 27, 1996, October 15, 1998, January 1, 1999, October 14, 1999, July 1, 2000, October 20, 2001, March 9, 2002, September 16, 2006, January 6, 2007, July 17, 2010, June 8, 2012, December 7, 2012 and October 14, 2017 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 18 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective October 14, 2017, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 18 inclusive: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 55 for classic local miscellaneous members entering membership in the miscellaneous classification on or prior to July 17, 2010, age 60 for classic local miscellaneous members entering membership for the first time in the miscellaneous classification after July 17, 2010, age 62 for new local miscellaneous members, age 50 for classic local fire members entering membership in the fire classification on or prior to June 8, 2012 and for those classic local police members entering membership in the police classification on or prior to December 7, 2012, age 55 for classic local fire members entering membership for the first time in the fire classification after June 8, 2012 and for those classic local police members entering membership for the first time in the police classification after December 7, 2012 and 57 for new local safety members. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after January 1, 1942 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Public Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS) and its trustees, agents and employees, the CaIPERS Board of Administration, and the California Public Employees' Retirement Fund from any claims, demands, actions, losses, liabilities, damages, judgments, expenses and costs, including but not limited to interest, penalties and attomey fees that may arise as a result of any of the following: (a) Public Agency's election to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas under this Contract that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under the Public Agency's prior non-CaIPERS retirement program. (b) Any dispute, disagreement, claim, or proceeding (including without limitation arbitration, administrative hearing, or litigation) between Public Agency and its employees (or their representatives) which relates to Public Agency's election to amend this Contract to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas that are different than such employees' existing retirement benefits, provisions or formulas. (c) Public Agency's agreement with a third party other than CaIPERS to provide retirement benefits, provisions, or formulas that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under this Contract and provided for under the Califomia Public Employees' Retirement Law. PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" 4. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); c. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 5. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: a. PROJECT PROFESSIONAL; PROJECT MANAGER; PROJECT TECHNICIAN; PROJECT ASSISTANT; PROJECT LABORER; LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE TRAINEE; LIBRARY PAGE; WATER SAFETY INSTRUCTOR /LIFEGUARD; RECREATION LEADER; AND POOL MANAGER HIRED ON OR AFTER OCTOBER 14,1999. 6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a classic local miscellaneous member in employment before and not on or after January 6, 2017 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 55 Full). 7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a classic local miscellaneous member in employment on or after January 6, 2007 and not entering membership for the first time in the miscellaneous classification after July 17, 2010 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354.5 of said Retirement Law. 8. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited current service as a classic local miscellaneous member entering membership for the first time with this agency in the miscellaneous classification after July 17, 2010 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21353 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full). 9. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a new local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 7522.20 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 62 Full). PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" 10. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a classic local fire member entering membership in the fire classification on or prior to June 8, 2012 and for those classic local police members entering membership in the police classification on or prior to December 7, 2012 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21362.2 of said Retirement Law (3% at age 50 Full). 11. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited current service as a classic local fire member entering membership for the first time with this agency in the fire classification after June 8, 2012 and for those classic local police members entering membership for the first time with this agency in the police classification after December 7, 2012 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21363.1 of said Retirement Law (3% at age 55 Full). 12. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a new local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 7522.25(d) of said Retirement Law (2.7% at age 57 Full). 13. Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Section 21571 (Basic Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits). b. Section 21222.1 (One -Time 5% Increase - 1970). repealed said Section effective January 1, 1980. c. Section 21222.2 (One -Time 5% Increase - 1971). repealed said Section effective January 1, 1980. Legislation Legislation d. Section 21319 (One -Time 15% Increase for Local Miscellaneous Members Who Retired or Died Prior to July 1, 1971). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 2002. e. Section 21325 (One -Time 3% to 15% Increase For Local Miscellaneous Members and Local Safety Members Who Retired or Died Prior to January 1, 1974). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 2002. f. Section 20042 (One -Year Final Compensation) for classic local miscellaneous members, those classic local fire members entering membership on or prior to June 8, 2012 and for classic local police members entering membership on or prior to December 7, 2012. g. Section 21317 (One -Time 15% Increase for Certain Local Safety Members Who Retired for Service Retirement). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 2002. PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" h. Section 21326 (One -Time 1% to 7% Increase For Local Miscellaneous Members and Local Safety Members Who Retired or Died Prior to July 1, 1974). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 2002. i. Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service). )• Section 20692 (Employer Paid Member Contributions Converted to Payrate During the Final Compensation Period) for classic local miscellaneous members and classic local safety members in the following groups: Local miscellaneous members who are Management and confidential employees; Local police members who are Management and confidential employees; Local fire members entering membership on or prior to June 8, 2012 who are Management and confidential employees; Local miscellaneous members represented by local 715, SEIU AFL- CIO and CLC; and Local police members represented by the Palo Alto Peace Officer's Association. k. Section 20434.5 ("Local Fire Fighter" shall include any officer or employee of a fire department employed to perform hazardous materials services as described in Government Code Section 20434.5). I. Section 21548 (Pre -Retirement Option 2W Death Benefit) for local fire members only. m. Section 20325 (Optional Membership for Part -Time Employees). Section 20475 (Different Level of Benefits). Section 21353 (2% @ 60 Full formula) is applicable to classic local miscellaneous members entering membership for the first time with this agency in the miscellaneous classification after July 17, 2010. Section 21363.1 (3% © 55 Full formula) and Section 20037 (Three - Year Final Compensation) without Section 20692 (Employer Paid Member Contributions Converted to Payrate During the Final Compensation Period) are applicable to classic local fire members entering membership for the first time with this agency in the fire classification after June 8, 2012. PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" Section 21363.1 (3% @ 55 Full formula) and Section 20037 (Three - Year Final Compensation) are applicable to classic local police members entering membership for the first time with this agency in the police classification after December 7, 2012. n. Section 20516 (Employees Sharing Additional Cost): From October 14, 2017 and until the effective date of this amendment to contract, .5% for local miscellaneous members in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 521. From and after October 14, 2017, 3% for local safety members in the International Association of Fire Fighters, Palo Alto Fire Chiefs Association, Palo Alto Peace Officers' Association and Palo Alto Police Management Association. From and after the effective date of this amendment to contract, 1% for local miscellaneous members in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 521. From and after the effective date of this amendment to contract, 0.5% for local miscellaneous members in the Unrepresented Management group. From and after the effective date of this amendment to contract, 1.5% for local safety members in the Unrepresented Safety Management group. The portion of the employer's contribution that the member agrees to contribute from his or her compensation, over and above the member's normal contribution ("Cost Sharing Percentage"), shall not exceed the Employer Normal Cost Rate, as that rate is defined in the Ca1PERS Actuarial Valuation for the relevant fiscal year. If the Cost Sharing Percentage will exceed the relevant Employer Normal Cost Rate, the Cost Sharing Percentage shall automatically be reduced to an amount equal to, and not to exceed, the Employer Normal Cost Rate for the relevant fiscal year. 14. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20790, ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on September 11, 1977. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20834, and accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as provided in Govemment Code Section 20834. 15. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 16. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. 17. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 18. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. if more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be effective on the day of BOARD OF ADMINISTRA 4t114 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' REMENT SYSTEM BY ARNITA PAIGE OklIEF PENSION CO FACTS AND PREFUNDING PROGRAMS( ISION PUBLIC E OYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM cOki QO AMENDMENT CaIPERS ID #6373437857 PERS-CON-702A CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALO ALTO V Oa BY gf• PRESIDING OFFI co Witnes ate Attu' Clerk City of Palo Alto (ID # 9175) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/30/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Annual Office Limit Ordinance (First Reading) Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) to add a new Section Imposing an Ann ual Office Limit and Setting Forth Related Regulations, and to Repeal the Respective Regulations From Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances). The Proposed Ordinance Will Perpetuate the Existing Annual Limit of 50,000 Square Feet of new Office/R&D Develo pment per Year With Modifications Regarding the Review Process, Unallocated Area Rollover Provisions, and Exemptions. The Planning & Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Ordinance on February 14, 2018. This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No. 9720 (Continued from April 16, 2018) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code to establish Annual Office Limit (AOL) regulations to replace the interim regulations and find the action within the scope of the Comprehensive Plan EIR certi fied on November 13, 2017. The Planning and Transportation Commission recommended adoption of the ordinance on February 14, 2018. Executive Summary The City of Palo Alto’s annual office limit regulations were adopted in September 2015 to moderate the pace of office/R&D development in the fastest changing areas of the City (Council report: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48971). The regulations City of Palo Alto Page 2 (Attachment B) were originally adopted as an interim ordinance to expire in November 2017. These regulations were extended to a June 30, 2018 to align with the end of the fiscal year and allow for preparation of a replacement ordinance. As part of this work effort, staff met with both the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) and City Council to get feedback and direction for the replacement Annual Office Limit (AOL) regulations. The Council direction 1 provided on September 5, 2017, informed by the PTC’s input, has guided the proposed revisions shown in the draft ordinance (Attachment A). Background In the summer of 2014, as part of a discussion on the Comprehensive Plan update, the community expressed concern that the then-current Comprehensive Plan’s approach to growth management (i.e. an overall “cap” on non-residential development) had not been effective at moderating the pace of growth and development in the robust economic recovery following the great recession. This growth, in turn, had several impacts on Palo Alto residents, including contributions to traffic congestion/delay, parking demand, increased housing costs, and more. Based on these early communications, the City began developing a growth management policy that moderated or metered the rate of development, rather than the overall amount of development in the City. Over the course of six meetings from January through June of 2015, the City Council discussed the concept of limiting the pace of new office/R&D development, which resulted in the adoption of the Annual Office Limit (AOL) interim ordinance in September 2015. Interim Ordinance The Council adopted interim Ordinance #53572 to establish an annual limit on new office/R&D development in the areas of the City experiencing the most rapid change.3 The ordinance applied to office development in fiscal years 2016 and 2017, established applicable land uses, designated the commercial areas affected, identified development exemptions, and outlined other procedural items. The Council also approved a review process for proposals once the 50,000 sq. ft. limit was reached. The ordinance was to be in effect for a limited duration, until November 26, 2017, to pilot the new interim procedures, and the results of which would then help guide in the refinement of the future regulations. In September 2017, Council adopted Ordinance #54174 to extend the existing AOL regulations until the end of fiscal year 2018 (June 30, 2018). This additional time was needed to prepare and bring forward an amended ordinance. 1 09/05/2017 City Council Staff Report #8234 (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/60963) and Meeting Transcripts ( https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62381 ) 2 Ordinance #5357: https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/51037 3 09/21/2015 City Council Staff Report #6045: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48971 4 Ordinance #5417: https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/61686 City of Palo Alto Page 3 AOL Project Activity Subsequent to the implementation of the interim AOL ordinance, there has not been significant office development proposed in the ordinance-affected areas. Although the time period has been relatively short, it appears that the interim ordinance has reduced the amount of applications for net new office projects in the affected areas. A list of the AOL applicable projects is provided in Attachment D. The first round of analysis for qualifying AOL projects was in March 2016 and the 50,000 sq. ft. limit was not exceeded; there were three projects proposed totaling 40,863 sq. ft. In March 2017, the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold was again not exceeded since there were no qualifying office projects ready for approval. For March 2018, there are three projects on file totaling 16,790 sq. ft. of new office development that may be ready for approval. Throughout the three year period, there have been a number of office/R&D projects approved in areas of the City where the annual limit does not apply, and there have been some smaller exempt projects approved. All of this development activity is summarized in Attachment E. Input About the Proposed Ordinance As the interim ordinance was nearing its sunset date, the PTC and the City Council discussed possible changes for a permanent ordinance. The PTC’s input from their meeting in March 2017 was available to the City Council for their meeting on September 5, 2017. At that meeting, the Council provided the specific direction (see Footnote 1 for link to meeting minutes) outlined in the Discussion section below. This direction is reflected in the attached ordinance. Planning and Transportation Commission Review The PTC reviewed the draft ordinance at their February 14, 2018 meeting and expressed general support favoring the removal of the competitive review process and limiting applicability to the three study areas. Some commissioners expressed a perspective that the city should be addressing the traffic and parking issues more directly without limiting office development in the manner proposed in the ordinance and a minority supported introducing a sunset clause to nullify the ordinance after two years, unless affirmatively re -established by Council. The final vote was 4-3 in support of the ordinance in Attachment A. For more specific details, please see the verbatim minutes5 and staff report6 from the PTC meeting. 5 02/14/2018 PTC Meeting Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/6382 4 6 02/14/2018 PTC Staff Report #8936: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63361 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Discussion City Council conducted a Study Session on September 5, 2017 and provided direction on the key components of the AOL regulations, which are provided below. The PTC considered these changes at their meeting on February 14, 2018 and recommended approval without additional modifications. The links to the Council report and meeting minutes from September 5, 2017 are listed in Footnote #1; and the link to the verbatim minutes from the PTC meeting of February 14, 2018 are included in Footnote #5. 1. Areas Subject to the Annual Office Limit The City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would continue to apply to Downtown, California Avenue and El Camino Real corridor. The proposed boundary is unchanged from the interim regulations and a map showing this boundary is provided in Attachment C. The Council considered but rejected the idea of expanding the boundary citywide or to the Stanford Research Park. 2. Square Footage Limit The City Council directed staff to continue using a 50,000 square foot (sf) threshold for the annual limit for office/R&D development. This threshold was initially based upon review of the VTA’s Congestion Management Program (CMP) office/R&D development data spanning 2001 through 2015, and was intended to moderate the pace of development by controlling the “peak” years. From 2001 through 2017, the CMP data shows there were six years when office/R&D development in the commercial districts affected by the interim ordinance exceeded 50,000 sf. (FY2006, FY2007, FY2010, FY2012, FY2014, and FY2015). A table summarizing this development activity is provided as Attachment E.7 The options considered by Council were to modify the threshold or retain the existing one; the Council selected the current threshold. 3. Unused Square Footage Allocations A related issue to the annual limit number is consideration of allowing the roll -over of unused floor area. The Council considered four options, one with no change (i.e. no roll-over) and three that allowed roll-overs, but with various criteria regarding their expiration time and a carryover cap on square footage. Ultimately, the Council directed staff to craft the replacement ordinance so that any unallocated floor area at the end of the fiscal year would carry over for a maximum of one year only. 4. Exemptions 7 The CMP data includes all office and R&D development, including projects that are exempt from the AOL ordinance. This explains the square footage difference in the CMP data (Attachment E) and the approved AOL projects (Attachment D) for FY2016. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Small office projects up to 2,000 sf and medical office less than or equal to 5,000 sf are exempt from the current AOL regulations. The Council did not express concerns about the existing exemptions, but did want to see a pro vision added for nonprofit office use. Accordingly, the Council directed staff to include a provision to exempt deed -restricted nonprofit office uses less than 5,000 sf. For additional background information, a summary of exempt office projects that have been approved since the adoption of the regulations in late 2015 is provided in Attachment E. 5. Review Process The current interim ordinance requires a competitive process when the 50,000 sf threshold is exceeded. Specifically, the interim ordinance requires the Planning Director to apply specific criteria and rank the eligible projects, after which they are forwarded to Council for consideration. This process is untested because thus far the 50,000 sf threshold has not been exceeded. Staff anticipates that this process may be challenging to implement because of its subjective nature. This process is also time-intensive and does not provide any certainty to applicants regarding whether otherwise code-complying projects will be approved now or in the future. Based on all of these factors, the Council directed staff to prepare a replacement ordinance using a first-come first-served approach rather than a competitive process. This approach would prioritize project approvals in order of when the application is ready for approval. Any number of projects could be approved, depending on their size, up to and until the 50,000 sf threshold is reached, plus any carry over floor area from the previous year. This approach would obviate the need for approvable projects t o wait until after March 31st of each fiscal year. If it happens that there is more than one office project ready to approve, and circumstances are such that not all can be approved due to reaching the annual limit, then the approval priority shall be given in order of the earliest project submittal date. The Council directed staff to draft the ordinance to implement the first-come first-served approach. Policy Implications Like the previous Comprehensive Plan, the newly adopted Comprehensive Plan 2030 in cludes a policy (Policy L-1.10) establishing an overall cap on commercial development. The new Comprehensive Plan policy establishes the cap at 1.7 million square feet, which is the amount remaining under the previous 3.2 million square feet cap, and modif ies the cap so it only applies to new office and research-and-development (R&D) uses citywide. This means that for the first time, conversions of existing buildings from other uses (e.g. retail, warehouse) to office/R&D uses will count against the citywide cap.8 8 Policy L-1.10: Maintain a citywide cap of 1.7 million new square feet of offi ce/R&D development, exempting medical office uses in the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) vicinity. Use January 1, 2015 as the baseline and monitor development towards the cap on an annual basis. Require annual monitoring to assess the City of Palo Alto Page 6 An AOL focused on a subset of the City will complement this citywide development cap. The Comprehensive Plan does not include an explicit policy about an annual limit on office/R&D, but was informed by City Council discussions on this topic. Specifically, during the City Council’s deliberations regarding scenarios for analysis in the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the Council elected to study and ultimately to select a scenario with limited job growth in large part because of their stated intention to establish the interim AOL as a permanent ordinance. Resource Impact Staff does not anticipate any resulting resource impacts for the City with the adoption of the proposed ordinance. Timeline The existing AOL interim regulations will expire on June 30, 2018, and in order to have a replacement ordinance in place by that time, Council would need to take action no later than early May. With Council approval of these revisions or further modifications on the first reading, the second reading would be scheduled as a consent calendar review for adoption. Following the second reading, the ordinance would become effective 31 days after . Following the Council’s action, staff will update the Administrative Guidelines for the program to refl ect Council’s decision. Environmental Review This proposed ordinance is within the scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified and adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No. 9720. The Final EIR includes a discussion of using a limit for office/R&D development as a tool for growth management (Section 2.1.2, Chapter 2 “Preferred Scenario”). No additional environmental analysis is warranted at this time. For all projects that are proposed and are subject to the AOL regulations, project specific analysis would be completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (PDF) Attachment B: Existing Office Limit Regulations (PAMC 18.85) (PDF) Attachment C: Map of Area Affected by Annual Office Limit (PDF) Attachment D: Approved and Pending Projects Subject to AOL (DOCX) Attachment E: Summary of Office Development FY2001-2017 (PDF) effectiveness of development requirements and determine whether the cap and the development requirements should be adjusted. Continue to exempt medical, governmental and institutional uses from the cap on office/R&D development. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Attachment F: Annual Office Limit Administrative Guidelines (PDF) 1 Ordinance No. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Section 18.85.200 (Annual Office Limit) to Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Imposing an Office Annual Limit of 50,000 Net New Square Feet in Designated Areas of City, and Repealing Those Provisions Related to the Annual Office Limit in Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances) The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The City of Palo Alto has long been considered the birthplace of Silicon Valley. With its proximity to Stanford University, its international reputation, its deep ties to technology firms, its highly rated public school system and its ample public parks, open space and community centers, Palo Alto continues to serve as a hub for technology-based business. B. Palo Alto is considered one of Silicon Valley's most desirable office markets. Average commercial rental rates increased significantly from 2013 to 2015. In 2013 the average monthly rental rate citywide for office was $4.57 per square foot. That rate increased to $5.12 per square foot in 2015. C. As a result, prior to adoption of the interim annual office limit in 2015, the City saw a steady increase of new Office and Research and Development (R&D) projects. According to data submitted by the City to support the Valley Transportation Authority’s Congestion Management Plan (CMP), since 2001, the City has added 234,002 of net new square feet of office/R& D development in the California Avenue area; 315,586 in the downtown area, and 46,210 in the El Camino Real corridor. D. The rate of change has been faster than anticipated, resulting in changes in the character of the City’s commercial districts. The changes have also resulted in additional parking demand, traffic, and greenhouse gas emissions, and negatively impact the City’s jobs/housing ratio. E. Based on the CMP data, there have been six years since 2001 in which more than 50,000 net new square feet of Office/R&D development have been entitled in these districts combined, and these six years include the last two fiscal years (2014 and 2015) prior to adoption of the interim annual office limit. F. Record high monthly rental rates for office space and low vacancy rates suggest that the rapid pace of development is likely to continue, putting pressure on sites that are not currently developed to their maximum potential, and contributing to a feeling in the community that the character of the City’s commercial districts are changing too fast. G. Based on the above findings, the City adopted interim annual office limit regulations by Ordinance No. 5357, later extended by Ordinance No. 5417, which applied to 2 three fiscal years (FY 2016-2018). Under these interim regulations, the pace of Office/R&D development in the covered areas has moderated. H. Continuing the annual office limit serves the public interest and general welfare, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals and objectives, including improving the jobs to housing imbalance by limiting the growth of employment-generating development. SECTION 2. A new Section 18.40.190 (Annual Office Limit) is added to Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows: 18.40.190 Annual Office Limit (a) Applicability The regulations set forth in this Section shall apply to all Office Annual Limit Land Uses that are established by new construction or through the conversion of existing development (b) Definitions For purposes of this Section, the following terms shall have the definitions below: (1) “Office Annual Limit Area” means the area shown in Exhibit A (attached to Ordinance No. ______), comprising portions of the commercial districts of Downtown, the California Avenue Area and the El Camino Real corridor. (2) “Office Annual Limit Land Uses” shall include any of the following uses, each as defined in Section 18.04.030, in the Office Annual Limit Area: (A) Research and Development; (B) Administrative Office Services; (C) General Business Office; (D) Medical Office greater than 5,000 net new square feet; and (E) Professional Office. (c) Office Annual Limit No more than 50,000 net new square feet of Office Annual Limit Land Uses per fiscal year (July 1 to June 30) shall be approved by the City in the Office Annual Limit Area. (1) The 50,000 square foot limit imposed by this Section shall not apply to exempt projects as defined in subsection (d) of this Section and such projects shall not be counted towards this limit. However, if an exempt medical office project under subsection (d)(1) or exempt City office use under subsection (d)(3) is subsequently converted to a non-exempt Office Annual Limit Land Use, the associated square footage shall be counted toward the 50,000 square foot limit for the fiscal year in which the conversion is requested or occurs. 3 (2) The 50,000 square foot limit shall apply to existing building area previously used by non-office uses and converted to any of the Office Annual Limit Land Uses. (3) The removal of existing Office Annual Limit Land Uses through demolition or conversion shall increase the amount of capacity available for allocation in that fiscal year by the amount of square footage removed. (4) Unallocated square footage of Office Annual Limit Land Uses shall be carried over to the next fiscal year and be available for allocation until the end of that fiscal year only. (5) Notwithstanding subsections (3) and (4) above, at no time shall the annual office limit for a single fiscal year exceed 100,000 square feet. (6) This restriction shall be in addition to any other applicable growth restriction including but not limited to Comprehensive Plan Policy L-1.10. In the event multiple policies apply to a project, the policy most restrictive of growth shall apply. (d) Exemptions The following projects shall be exempt from the Office Annual Limit established by this Section, provided that only one exemption shall be permitted per project site. (1) Small Projects. Projects comprised of 2,000 net new square feet or fewer of Office Annual Limit Land Uses, including accessory office space that is incidental to and customarily associated with a principal use or facility. This exemption shall be increased to 5,000 net new square feet or fewer where the net new square footage is devoted to Medical Office or nonprofit office use with a deed restriction to maintain the use for and by a nonprofit organization. (2) Self-Mitigating Projects. Projects that would both: (1) provide rental housing for more workers than would be employed in the project; and (2) provide substantial transportation demand management strategies (individually or in cooperation with other projects or programs) to improve the current parking and traffic conditions. (3) City Office Space. New office space used by the City of Palo Alto. (e) Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment An applicant may request that the requirements of this Section be adjusted or waived based on a showing that applying the requirements of this Section would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence to support a waiver or modification request under this Section and shall set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation. 4 Any such request under this section shall be submitted to the Director together with an economic analysis or other supporting documentation and shall be acted upon by the City Council. (f) Allocation of Office Square Footage for Projects Subject to the Office Annual Limit (1) Office development capacity for Office Annual Limit Land Uses shall be allocated upon approval of a planning entitlement, or a building permit or Certificate of Use and Occupancy if no planning entitlement is required, in the order that the projects are approved. (A) If a planning entitlement approved by the Director is appealed to the City Council, the project shall be allowed to retain the office allocation provided that the Director’s approval decision is upheld by City Council. If the City Council overturns the Director’s approval decision and denies the project, the office allocation shall be forfeited and made available to other projects. (B) If the planning entitlement or building permit with which the project received an office allocation expires, the office allocation shall be forfeited and made available to other projects. A project that received an office allocation at issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy for the purposes of converting existing developed non-office space to one or more Office Annual Limit Land Uses, shall forfeit its office allocation if the related building permit expires and the office allocation will be made available to other projects. However, if the expiration of the planning entitlement or building permit occurs in a later fiscal year than when the office allocation was made, the forfeited office allocation will only be made available to other projects if it would not cause the annual office limit for that fiscal year to exceed 100,000 square feet. (2) If more than one project will be considered for approval on the same day, then the project with the earliest initial submittal date shall have priority in receiving office allocation. (3) Projects that cannot be approved due to the Office Annual Limit being reached for that fiscal year shall be considered for approval the following fiscal year. (g) Implementation The Director shall have the authority to adopt rules or procedures for the efficient and equitable implementation of these regulations. SECTION 3. Sections 18.85.200 through 18.85.270, all of which pertain to the Annual Office Limit in Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Supersede. This Ordinance supersedes any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance. 5 SECTION 5. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. SECTION 7. CEQA. The City Council finds that the environmental impacts of this Ordinance were disclosed, analyzed and evaluated as part of that certain Final Environmental Impact Report for the Comprehensive Plan Update considered and certified by the City Council on November 13, 2017, by Resolution Nos. 9720 and 9721 (“EIR”). The City Council considered the EIR prior to taking action on this Ordinance, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), together with state and local regulations implementing CEQA. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager ______________________________ Assistant City Attorney ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment Print Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES Sections: Annual Office Limit** 18.85.210 Definitions 18.85.220 Office Annual Limit 18.85.230 Exemptions 18.85.240 Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment 18.85.250 Procedures for Reviewing Qualifying Applications 18.85.260 Selection Criteria 18.85.270 Implementation **Editor’s Note: Sections 18.85.210 through 18.85.270 were added by Ord. 5357, which shall expire within two years of its effective date, 11-26-15 or upon City Council adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update, whichever occurs first. ANNUAL OFFICE LIMIT 18.85.210 Definitions. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the definitions below: (a) Office Annual Limit Area shall include the area shown in Exhibit A (attached to Ord. 5357), comprising the commercial districts of Downtown, the California Avenue Area, and the El Camino Real corridor. (b) Office Annual Limit Land Uses shall include any of the following uses in the Office Annual Limit Area: (1) Research and Development as defined in Section 18.04.030(123); (2) Administrative Office Services as defined in Section 18.04.030(6); (3) General Business Office as defined in Section 18.04.030(61); Page 1 of 5Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES xx 1/16/2018http://library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx (4) Medical Office greater than 5,000 net new square feet as defined in Section 18.04.030 (95); and (5) Professional Office as defined in Section 18.04.030(116). (c) Qualifying Application shall mean an application for a permit or other planning entitlement for an Office Annual Limit Land Use which (1) has been determined to be complete, (2) has completed the necessary analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act and (3) has been reviewed by all required commissions and/or Planning Director, as applicable. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) 18.85.220 Office Annual Limit. During the pendency of this Ordinance no more than 50,000 net new square feet of Office Annual Limit Land Uses per fiscal year shall be approved by the City in the Office Annual Limit Area. (a) For purposes of this Ordinance, the fiscal year shall be defined as July 1 to June 30. (b) The 50,000 square foot limit imposed by this section shall not apply to exempt projects as defined in Section 18.85.230 and such projects shall not be counted towards this limit. (c) This restriction shall be in addition to any other applicable growth restriction including but not limited to Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 and Section 18.18.040 of the Zoning Code. In the event multiple policies apply to a project, the policy most restrictive of growth shall apply. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) 18.85.230 Exemptions. The following shall be exempt from this Ordinance: (a) Small Projects. Projects containing less than 2,000 net new square feet or less of Office Annual Limit Land Uses and accessory office space that is incidental to and customarily associated with a principal use or facility are exempt from the Office Annual Limit. (b) Small Medical Office Projects. Projects containing 5,000 net new square feet or less of Medical Office are exempt from the Development Cap. (c) Self-Mitigating Projects. Projects that would both: (1) provide rental housing for more workers than would be employed in the project; and (2) provide substantial transportation demand management strategies (individually or in cooperation with other projects or programs) to improve the current parking and traffic conditions. (d) Pipeline Projects. Page 2 of 5Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES xx 1/16/2018http://library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx Projects which have been approved, or which are considered "pipeline projects" as follows: (1) Projects which obtained a planning entitlement for an Office Annual Limit Land Use prior to the effective date of this ordinance. (2) Projects which are the subject of a planning entitlement application that was submitted to the City in 2013 or 2014 and deemed complete by the City on or before March 31, 2015. (e) City Office Space. New office space used by the City of Palo Alto. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) 18.85.240 Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment. An applicant may request that the requirements of this Ordinance be adjusted or waived based on a showing that applying the requirements of this Ordinance would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence to support a waiver or modification request under this Section and shall set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation. Any such request under this section shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Director together with an economic analysis or other supporting documentation and shall be acted upon by the City Council. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) 18.85.250 Procedures for Reviewing Qualifying Applications. The following additional processing and approval requirements shall apply to Office Annual Limit Land Uses: (a) No Qualifying Application for an Office Annual Limit Land Use shall be acted upon by the Director or by the City Council between July 1 and March 31 of the following year. (b) If the combined square footage proposed by all Qualifying Applications that are pending on March 31 would not exceed the annual limit, the Qualifying Applications shall be acted upon using the Zoning Code's usual process immediately following March 31. (c) If the combined square footage proposed by all Qualifying Applications would exceed the annual limit, the Director shall rank all Qualifying Applications based on scoring criteria set forth in Section 18.85.260 and make a recommendation to the Council. The Council may accept the Director's recommendation or reevaluate the ranking based on the scoring criteria. Based on their review, the Council shall approve in ranked order one or more Qualifying Applications to achieve a maximum of 50,000 net new square feet. The Council may approve applications as proposed and recommended, and may require modifications of any project to reduce the proposed square footage in order to stay within the 50,000 square feet Office Annual Limit. The Page 3 of 5Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES xx 1/16/2018http://library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx Council's action on all Qualifying Applications shall be made before the end of the fiscal year on June 30. (d) Any application which is subject to City Council evaluation and action pursuant to Section (c) above and which was not approved by the City Council shall be denied unless, at the request of the applicant, it is rolled over to the next fiscal year for processing in accordance with the terms of this Ordinance. Further, in lieu of modifications to the project's Office Annual Limit Land Use, the applicant can elect to roll over the application to the next fiscal year. The City and applicant may agree to extend any applicable processing time periods to effectuate this provision. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) 18.85.260 Selection Criteria. The City Council shall evaluate applications subject to the annual limit using the following criteria based upon weighting set forth in administrative rules or procedures which shall provide that projects meeting criterion (i) shall be selected first and weighted against each other: Impacts (a) The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings; and (b) The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking; and Design (c) The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality; and Environmental Quality (d) Environmental quality; and Public Benefit (e) The value to the community of public benefits offered; and Uses (f) Mixed use projects including substantial housing; and (g) Mixed use projects including retail; and (h) Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios; and Pipeline Projects (i) Any entitlement application involving an Office Annual Limit Land Use deemed complete by the City between March 31, 2015 and June 15, 2015. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) Page 4 of 5Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES xx 1/16/2018http://library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 18.85.270 Implementation. The Director has the authority to adopt rules or procedures to implement the efficient and equitable implementation of this Ordinance. (Ord. 5357 § 1 (part), 2015) Page 5 of 5Chapter 18.85 INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCES xx 1/16/2018http://library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx l a s P u l g a s H i l l R o a d J u n i p e r o S e r r a B o u l e v a r d P a g e M i l l R o a d R o a d E l C a m i n o R e a l S a n A n t o n i o A v e n u e C h a r l e s t o n R o a d O r e g o n E x p r e s s w a y M i d d l e f i e l d R o a d University Avenue y 1 0 1 A l m a S t r e e t El Camino Real n e R o a d F o o t h i l l E x p r e s Hillview East Bayshore West Bayshore Fabian Sand Hill Road Embarcadero Road CJL Stanford Shopping Center Downtown/University Area University Station PAMF Town & Country California Avenue Area Fry's Site Stanford Research Park El Camino Real Corridor El Camino Real Corridor El Camino Real Corridor Alma Plaza Stanford Medical Center Charleston Center R-1 San Antonio Area San Antonio Area Midtown West Bayshore Area Edgewood Plaza East Bayshore Area MSC Embarcadero East Area SOFA I SOFA II R-1 R-1 (7000) East Meadow Circle Wallis Ct Donald Drive Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa DriveCampana DriveSolana Drive Georgia Ave Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ngArthur' Maybell Way Maybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia AvenueAmaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct Ki sCourt Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe Drive Cherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairmede Avenue Arastradero Road Irven Court Los Palos CirLosPalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Los Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive rive El Camino Real Suzanne Ct Lorabelle Ct McKellar Lane El Camino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino Ct West Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay CtVictoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston Road Tennessee LaneWilkie Way Carolina Lane Tennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roosev Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem Drive Duluth Circle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe Drive Miller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive Fairfield Court Ferne Avenue Ponce Drive HemlockCourt Ferne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive San Antonio Road NitaAvenue Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct East Charleston Road LundyLane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street elt Circle LinderoDrive Wright Place Starr King Ci rcle Shasta Drive Mackay Drive Diablo Court Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Nelson Drive Tioga Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Dake Avenue Ferne Avenue San Antonio Court (Private) ChristopherCourt CalcaterraPlace Ely Place Ely Place Adobe Place Nelson Court ByronStreet Keats Court Middlefield Road Duncan Place Carlson Court Duncan Place Mumford Place East Charleston Road San Antonio Road East Meadow Drive Emerson Street Court Bryant Street RooseveltCircle RamonaStreet CarlsonCircle Redwood Circle South Leghorn Street Montrose Avenue Maplewood Charleston Ct East Charleston Road Seminole Way Sutherland Drive Nelson Drive El Capitan Place Fabian Street Loma Verde Avenue Bryson Avenue Midtown Court Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley Street South CourtBryant StreetRamona Street Alma Street Coastland Drive Colorado AvenueByron Street Middlefield Road Gaspar Court Moreno Avenue Coastland Drive El Carmelo Avenue Rosewo od D Campesino Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Ramona Street Bryant Street Towle Way Towle Place Wellsbury Ct AvalonCourt FlowersLane Mackall Way Loma Verde Avenue KiplingStreet Cowper Street South Court Waverley StreetEl Verano Avenue Wellsbury Way La Middlefield Road St Claire Drive Alger Drive Ashton Avenue St Michael Drive St Michael Drive Maureen Avenue Cowper Court Rambow Drive East Meadow Drive Ashton Court Murdoch DriveCowperStreet Murdoch Ct St Michael Court MayCourt Mayview Avenue Middlefield Road Ensign Way Bibbits Drive Gailen CtGailen Avenue Grove Avenue San Antonio Road Commercial Street Industrial Avenue Bibbits Drive East Charleston Road Fabian Way T East Meadow Drive Grove Avenue Christine Drive Corina Way Ross Road Corina Way Louis Road Nathan Way Transport Street Ortega Court East Meadow Drive yneCourt alisman Loma Verde Avenue Allen Court Ross Court Loma Verde Pl Ames Avenue Richardson Court Holly Oak Drive Ames Avenue CorkOakWay Middlefield Road Ames Ct Ames Avenue Ross Road Rorke Way RorkeWay Stone LaneToyon Place Torreya Court Lupine Avenue Thornwood Drive DriftwoodDrive Talisman Drive Arbutus AvenueRoss Road Louis Road Aspen Way Evergreen Drive East Meadow Drive Corporation WayElwell Court Janice Way East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle GreerRoad Bayshore Freeway rive Ellsworth Place San Carlos Court Wintergreen Way Sutter Avenue Sutter Avenue Clara Drive Price Court Stern Avenue Colorado Avenue Randers Ct Ross Road Sycamore Drive Sevyson Ct Stelling Drive Ross Road David Avenue MurrayWay Stelling DriveStelling Ct ManchesterCourt Kenneth Drive ThomasDrive GreerRoad Stockton Place Vernon Terrace Louis Road Janice Way Thomas DriveKenneth Drive Loma Verde Avenue Cl iftonCourt ElbridgeWay Clara Drive BautistaCourt Stockton Place Morris Drive Maddux Drive Piers Ct Louis Road Moraga Ct Old Page Mill Road Coyo t e Hi l l Road Hillview Avenue Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia StreetBowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Arastradero Road Miranda Avenue Avenue uela Avenue Miranda Avenue Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero Avenue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oaks Pl Carlitos Ct La CalleLaguna Avenue ElCerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) LaMataWay Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue oRoad Paul Avenue Kendall Avenue Whitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Laguna Way ShaunaLane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street TimlottLa Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr No rth La Donna Avenue LosRoblesAvenue Rinc Manzana Lane onCircle Crosby Pl Georgia Avenue Hubbartt Drive Willmar Drive Donald Drive Arastradero Road Foothill Exp La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lam bert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley Street Princeton StreetOberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College AvenueWilliams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford Avenue El Camino Real Churchill Avenue Park Boulevard Park Avenue Escobita Avenue Churchill Avenue Sequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue Castilleja Avenue Miramonte Avenue Madrono Avenue Portola Avenue Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford Avenue Birch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan Avenue Jacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda Street Birch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield Lane Birch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue WaverleyStree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado AvenueStreet Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado AvenueAlma Street Alma Street HighStreet t Emerson Waverley Oaks Washington Avenue Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson StreetNevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oregon Expressway Marion Avenue Ramona Street Colorado Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton CourtNevada Avenue Tasso Street Tasso Street Oregon Avenue Marion Pl Webster Street Middlefield Road Ross Road Warren Way El Cajon Way Embarcadero RoadPrimrose Way Iris Way Tulip Lane Tulip Lane Garland Drive Louis Road Greer Road Morton Street Greer Road Hamilton Avenue Hilbar Lane Alannah Ct Edge Rhodes Drive Marshall Drive Fieldin Moreno Avenue Marshall Drive Dennis Drive Agnes Way Oregon Avenue Blair Court Santa Ana Street Elsinore DriveElsinore CourtEl Cajon Way Greer RoadNorth California Avenue gDrive Colorado Avenue Sycamore Drive Amarillo Avenue VanAukenCi rc le Bruce Drive Colonial Lane Moreno Avenue Celia Drive Burnham Way Greer Road Indian Drive Elmdale Pl C Tanland Drive Moreno Avenue Amarillo Avenue West Bayshore Road Sandra Place Clara DriveColorado Avenue Greer Road Colorado AvenueSimkins Court Otterson Ct Higgins PlaceLawrence Lane Maddux Drive Genevieve Ct MetroCircle MoffettCircleGreer Road East Bayshore Road ardinalWay Santa Catalina Street ArrowheadWayAztec Way Chabot Terrace Oregon Avenue Carmel Drive SierraCourt StFrancisDrive West Bayshore Road Tanland Drive East Bayshore Road wood Dr i ve Edgewood Drive WildwoodLane Ivy Lane East Bayshore Road St Francis Drive Wildwood Lane Watson Court Laura Lane Sandalwood Ct O'Brine Lane (Private) Embarcadero Road FaberPlace Embarcadero Road Geng Road Embarcadero Way Emb Sand Hill Road Quarry Road Welch Road Arboretum Road Quarry Road Sand Hill Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Embarcadero Road Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma Street Alma Street PaloAltoA El Camino Real venue Mitchell Lane Hawthorne Avenue Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21 High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Fulton Street Middlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale AvenueTennyson Avenue Melville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Street Byron Street North California Avenue Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Kingsley Avenue Portal Place Ross Road Oregon Avenue Garland Drive Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg AvenueEmbarcadero Road Kingsley Avenue Lincoln AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant StreetRamona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Byron Street Palo Hale Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda Street PaloAl toAvenue Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest AvenueHamilton Avenue Homer AvenueGuinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue AltoAvenueChaucer Street Chaucer Street University Avenue Channing Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda Street Lincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Hamilton AvenueHamilton Court Forest AvenueForest Ct Marlowe Stree Maple Street Palm Street Somerset Pl Pitman Avenue Fife Avenue Forest Avenue Dana Avenue Lincoln Avenue University Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton StreetCowper Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Northampton Drive West Greenwich Pl Middlefield Road Newell RoadGuinda Street East Greenwich Pl Southampton Drive Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wi l s o n S t r e e t Cedar Street Harker Avenue Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue Embarcadero Road Ashby Drive Dana Avenue Hamilton Avenue Pitman Avenue Southwood Drive WestCrescentDrive Cre University Avenue Center Drive EastCrescen Arcadia Place Louisa Court Newell Pl Sharon Ct Erstwild Court Walter Hays Drive Walnut Drive Newell Road Parkinson AvenuePine Street Mark Twain Street Louis RoadBarbara Drive Primrose Way Iris Way Embarcadero Road Walter Hays Drive Lois Lane Jordan Pl Lois Lane Heather Lane Bret Harte Street Stanley Way De Soto DriveDe Soto Drive Alester Avenue Walter Hays Drive Channing Avenue Iris Way tDrive Dana Avenue Hamilton AvenueNewell RoadKings Lane Edgewood Dr i ve Island Drive Jefferson Drive JacksonDrive Patricia Lane Madison Way Edgewood Dr i ve Ramona Street Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Middlefield Road Byron StreetWebster Street Marion Avenue Welch Road Sedro Lane Peral Lane McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Silva Court Miller Court Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Paulsen Ln Community Lane Lane 15 E Court Madeline Ct David Ct Green Manor Oregon Expressway Oregon Expressway Sheridan Avenue Page Mill Road Page Mill Road Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway Cerrito Way Emerson Street Miranda Avenue Lane 20 W Lane 20 E Oregon ExpresswayUniversity Avenue Jacob's Ct CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Clark Way Durand Way Sand Hill Road Swain Way Clark Way Mosher Way Charles Marx Way Orchard Lane Vineyard Lane Oak Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Hi Lane 66 Bryant StreetRamona Street Blake Wilbur Drive West Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Fabian Way Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Palo Road Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way London Plane Way Plum Lane Sweet Olive Way Pear Lane Lane 66 La Selva Drive Grove Ct Stanford Avenue Lane 12 WLane 5 E Lasuen Street Serra Mall Escondido Road Olms ted Road Phillips Road Pistache Place Santa Ynez Street Lane B Lane C El Dorado Avenue Oak Creek Drive Clara Drive Bellview Dr Everett Avenue Homer Avenue La Calle San Antonio Road Matadero Ave Colorado Pl Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa Palo AltoAvenue Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Kenneth Drive Fabian Way Page Mill Road Middlefield RoadChristine Drive Louis Road East C Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Community Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Avenue Maplewood Pl Mackay Drive Santa Teresa Lane Byron Street Varian Way Quail Dr Quail Dr Paloma Dr Paloma Dr Trinity Ln Heron Wy Feather Ln Stanislaus Ln Tuolumne Ln Plover Ln Sandpiper Ln Curlew Ln Mallard LnEgret Ln Klamath Ln Deodar StAlder LnSpruce Ln Rickey's Ln Juniper Way Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Juniper Lane Emerson Street Boronda Lane Tahoe Lane Lake Avenue Donner Lane Almanor Lane Fallen Leaf Street Berryessa Street Cashel StNoble St Hettinger Ln Pratt Ln Emma Court Galvez Mall Federation Way Abrams Court Allardice Way Alta Road Alvarado CtAlvarado Row Angell Court Arguello Way Arguello Way Avery Mall Ayrshire Farm Lane Barnes CourtBonair Siding Bowdoin Street Cabrillo Avenue Cabrillo Avenue Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus DriveCampus Dr i ve Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Capistrano Way Casanueva Place Cathcart Way Cedro Way Cedro Way Churchill Mall Comstock Circle Aboretum Road Aboretum Road Blackwelder Court Campus Drive Cathcart Way Constanzo Street Cooksey Lane Coronado Avenue Cottrell Way Cottrell Way Cowell Ln Crothers Way Dolores Street Dolores Street Dud l ey Lane Duena Street Electioneer Road Escondido Mall Escondido Mall Escondido Road Escondido Road Escondido Road Esplanada Way Estudi l lo Road Fremont Road Frenchmans Road Frenchmans Road Galvez Mall Alvarado Row Galvez Street Galvez Street Galvez Street Gerona Road Gerona Road El Escarpado Gerona Road Hoskins Court Hulme Court Jenkins Cou r t Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Knight Way Lagunita Drive Lane L Lane W Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Street Lathrop Drive Lathrop Dr ive Lathrop Place Lathrop Dr ive Links RoadLinks Road Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomi ta Dr i ve Lomita Cou r t Lomita Mall Los Arboles Avenue Masters Mall Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayf ield Avenue McFarland Court Mears CourtMears Court Memorial Way Mirada Avenue Mirada Avenue Museum Way N Service Road N Tolman Ln Nelson Mall Nelson Road North-South Axis Oberlin St Comstock Circle Escondido Mall Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Palm Drive Palm Drive Pampas Lane Panama Mall Panama Mall Panama Street Panama St reet Pearce Mitchell Pl Peter Coutts Circle Peter Coutts Road Peter Coutts Road Pine Hill Court P ine Hi l l Road Quarry Extension Quarry Road Quillen Ct Raimundo Way R a i mu ndo W a y Raimundo Way Roble Drive Rosse Lane Roth Way Roth Way Roth Way Running Farm Lane Ryan Court S Service Road S Tolman Ln Salvatierra Street Salvatierra St Salvatierra Walk Samuel Morris Wy San Francisco Terrace San Francisco CourtSan Juan St San Juan St San Rafael Pl Santa Fe Avenue Santa Maria Avenue Santa Teresa Street Santa Teresa Street Santa Ynez Street Searsville Road Sequoia Wy Serra Mall Serra Street Serra Street Serra Street Sonoma Terrace Stanford Avenue Stanford Avenue S t o c k Fa rm Road Thoburn Court Tolman DriveValdez Place Valparaiso Street Vernier Place Via Ortega Via Palou Via Pueblo Mall Welch Road Wellesley St Wilbur Way Wing Place Yale St Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Road Loop Road North Yard Road Pep Ring Road Pep Ring Road Pep Ring Road Alpine Access Road Nathan Abbott Way Sam McDonald Road Sam McDonald Mall Vista Lane Bowdoin Lane Arguello Way Governors Avenue Governors Avenue Governors Avenue S Governors Lane Pasteur Drive Lagunita Drive Alma Village Lane Alma Village Circle R e s e r v o i r R o a d Reservoir Road Reservoir Road Ranch Road Ryan Lane O'Connor Lane Gene Ct Brassinga Ct Cole Ct Birch Street Arboretum Road Welch Road Pasteur Drive Pasteur Drive Campus Drive Embarcadero Way This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Commercial & RT Zoning Districts - Office is a Permitted Use w/ Possible GF & Size Limitations ROLM & RP Zoning Districts - Office and R & D is a Permitted Use MOR Zoning District - Medical Office is a Permitted Use PF Zoning District - Office is a Conditional Use GM Zoning District - R & D is a Permitted Use & Office is a Conditional Use Stanford Research Park SOFA I CAP SOFA II CAP Adopted Annual Office and R&D Cap Boundary Areas City Jurisdictional Limits 0'2200' Of f i c e a n d R & D An n u a l C a p B o u n d a r i e s Ar e a M a p CITY OF PALO ALTOI N C O R P O R A T E D CAL I F ORN I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f A P R I L 1 6 1 8 9 4 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto RRivera, 2018-01-25 08:58:46 OfficeRND CAP FINAL ADOPTED (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) Note: Other uses where Office may be an "accessory use" maybe conditionally permitted in Residential Zoning Districts * Providing projects are ready for approval by March 30, 2018. Updated by Planning Division, January 24, 2018 Projects Subject to the Annual Office Limit for FY2016-FY2018 Approved Office Projects Fiscal Year Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2016 2747 PARK BL R&D: New three-story 33,323 sq. ft. research and development building, replacing the existing 4,800 sq. ft. commercial building. Zoning District: General Manufacturing (GM). [14PLN-00388] California Avenue 28,523 sq. ft. 2016 3225 EL CAMINO REAL Mixed-use: New 29,249 sq. ft. mixed-use project, replacing the existing 7,000 sq. ft. retail building, which includes eight residential units and 11,984 sq. ft. of commercial space (retail & office). Zoning District: CS Service Commercial. [15PLN-00003] El Camino Real Corridor 2,932 sq. ft. 2016 2585 EL CAMINO REAL Mixed-use: New three-story mixed use building including 19,954 sq. ft. of commercial space (retail & office) and 13 residential condominium units. Zone Districts: CN, CC(2). [15PLN-00170] El Camino Real Corridor 9,408 sq. ft. TOTAL 40,863 sq. ft. Fiscal Year Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2017 NONE Pending Office Projects Fiscal Year* Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2018 3045 PARK BL R&D: New two-story 29,120 sq. ft. R&D building replacing the existing 17,956 sq. ft. commercial/office building and construct a. Zone District: GM(AD). [17PLN-00073] California Avenue 11,164 sq. ft. 2018 3585 EL CAMINO REAL Mixed-use: New three-story mixed use building including 3,126 sq. ft. of office and two residential condominium units. Zone Districts: CN. [17PLN- 00305] El Camino Corridor 3,126 sq. ft. 2018 400 EMERSON Conversion of a financial services use to office use on the ground floor. [17000-02763, U&O] Downtown 2,500 sq. ft. Total 16,790 sq. ft. Fiscal Year CalAve2 Downtown2 ECR2 SRP Other Areas Total (sq. ft.) 2001 5,828 9,601 2,080 155,930 22,600 196,039 2002 4,490 42,210 1,191 32,433 9,950 90,274 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 4,198 492 4,690 2005 26,320 10,201 0 0 ‐85,639 ‐49,118 2006 1,860 76,268 6,185 0 ‐164,152 ‐79,839 2007 60,703 410 0 5,700 ‐248,958 ‐182,145 2008 0 10,535 0 0 ‐15,442 ‐4,907 2009 1,754 0 0 0 ‐66,000 ‐64,246 2010 0 17,510 33,979 0 0 51,489 2011 0 28,148 0 35,000 5,690 68,838 2012 58,473 48,356 0 26,745 ‐162 133,412 2013 0 26,739 2,775 49,000 0 78,514 2014 45,406 45,608 0 11,571 ‐43,040 59,545 2015 58,840 0 0 0 14,608 73,448 2016 42,189 ‐9,203 12,340 47,141 0 92,467 2017 0 0 0 36,357 0 36,357 Total (sq. ft.) 305,863 306,383 58,550 404,075 ‐570,053 504,818 AOL Area4 Citywide Citywide w/o SRP Total Development (sq. ft.): 670,796 504,818 100,743 Average Annual Development (sq. ft.): 39,459 29,695 5,926 Summary of Office/R&D Development FY2001‐FY2017 Notes: 1. Data shown is from VTA's Congestion Management Program's (CMP) and reflects office and R&D uses that is derived from Planning Entitlements from FY 2001‐ FY 2017. 2. Totals reflect annual approvals of projects subject to the AOL limit plus exempt projects, as listed below: Year Address Exemption Type Office Area Change (sq. ft. )Notes FY2017 429 University Ave Pipeline Project 12,889 FY2018 2600 El Camino Real Small Project ‐Less Than 2,000 SF Added 0 Replacement square footage FY2018 4115 El Camino Real* Small Project ‐Less Than 2,000 SF Added 1,997 FY2018 190 Channing St* Small Project ‐Less Than 2,000 SF Added 1,098 Prepared by Planning Division February 2018 3. Data excludes Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) expansion and Mayfield Development Agreeement Projects, which demolishes approximately 323k of non‐residential square feet and replaces 300k of demolished square feet in Stanford Research Park (SRP). 4. The Annual Office Limit (AOL) affects three commercial areas in the City: Downtown, California Avenue area, and the El Camino Corridor. g ,, FY2018 380 Cambridge* Small Project ‐Less Than 2,000 SF Added ‐1,503 Total 14,481 *Project Not Approve, Currently Under Review Prepared by Planning Division February 2018 INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE February 17, 2016 Pursuant to the authority granted by Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) Section 18.85.208, the following Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Program Guideline (“Guideline”) is hereby adopted and determined to be desirable for the implementation and enforcement of PAMC Section 18.85.200 (Annual Office Limit) of PAMC Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances). All defined terms used in this Guideline shall have the meaning set forth in PAMC Section 18.85.201. Overview: The purpose of this Guideline is to implement the annual limit on Office/R&D development adopted by Ordinance Number 5357 on October 26, 2015. The annual limit was adopted on an interim basis for two years (until November 26, 2017) or until the Comprehensive Plan Update is completed, whichever occurs first. No more than 50,000 gross square feet of new Office/R&D development can be approved within a given fiscal year in the subset of the City shown in Attachment A and adopted as Exhibit A of Ordinance 5357. This Guideline is intended to implement the interim annual limit in Fiscal Year 2015/16 and Fiscal Year 2016/17. Program Guideline: A. Applicability. This Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Program Guideline is applicable to all discretionary development applications proposing an increase in gross square footage devoted to one or more of the following uses,1 when the site is located within the area shown on Exhibit A of Ordinance 5357: • Research & Development as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(123) • Administrative Office Services as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(6) • General Business Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(61) • Medical Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(95) • Professional Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(116). Building permit applications and associated use and occupancy certificates are not discretionary and applications proposing use or reuse of existing building space via non-discretionary applications are not subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit. B. Exemptions. Exempted applications, as defined below, shall be processed in accordance with applicable sections of the PAMC without regard to the 1 The text of the cited definitions is included in Attachment B. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 2 procedures established by this Guideline. The decision to approve or disapprove such applications shall be appealable to the City Council in accordance with existing provisions of the PAMC. An applicant may request in writing a formal determination that a pending application is exempt pursuant to one of the exemptions outlined below at any time. The resulting written determination shall be considered a code interpretation that is appealable to the City Council consistent with Section 18.01.025 of the PAMC. 1. Accessory office space that is incidental to and customarily associated with a principal use or facility. Examples include a small office space used in conjunction with a retail establishment, a hotel, a school, or a religious institution. 2. City office space. 3. Any application proposing less than 2,000 new gross square feet of Research & Development, Administrative Office Services, General Business Office, and/or Professional Office, where such application does not also involve the Medical Office exemption in item (4) below. 4. Any application proposing a project containing less than 5,000 new gross square feet of Medical Office, where such application does not also involve the exemption in item (3) above. 5. “Pipeline Projects” as follows: a. Projects which obtained a planning entitlement prior to the effective date of Ordinance 5357 (November 25, 2015). b. Projects which are the subject of a planning entitlement application that was submitted to the City in 2013 or 2014 and deemed complete by the City on or before March 31, 2015. C. “Self-Mitigating Projects” which provide rental housing for more members of the workforce than would be employed in the project, and which provide substantial transportation demand management (TDM) strategies either individually or in combination with other projects or programs such that parking and traffic conditions in the site vicinity would be improved. D. Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment. An applicant may request that requirements of Ordinance 5357 be adjusted or waived based upon showing that applying the requirements of Ordinance 5357 would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 3 1. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence to support a hardship-related waiver or modification and shall submit an economic analysis along with an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the claim to the Director of Planning. 2. The Director of Planning shall review the request and forward it to the City Council with a recommendation within 60 days. The City Council shall consider the request at a noticed public meeting, along with the economic analysis and the Director’s recommendation, and provide a final decision to grant or deny the request. E. Processing and review of applications subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit. 1. Applications subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit shall be processed in accordance with the PAMC and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), except that neither the Director of Planning nor the City Council shall adopt the CEQA document or act upon any such applications between July 1 and March 31 of each year. 2. The Director of Planning shall review all such applications that are pending final action by the Director of Planning or City Council as of the close of business on March 31 of each year, and determine which applications are eligible for consideration. a. Pending applications only become eligible for consideration if they have been recommended for approval by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC – for Site and Design and rezoning applications only), and if review pursuant to CEQA has been completed. For purposes of this section, subdivision requests accompanying entitlement applications do not need to be submitted or processed. b. Applications that are not eligible for consideration at the close of business on March 31 will be reviewed for eligibility in the following fiscal year unless the 50,000 square foot annual limit has not been reached as described in paragraph (c) below. In this case, additional applications may become eligible and be considered between March 31 and June 30, as long as the 50,000 square foot annual limit is not reached. 3. If the sum total of new square footage proposed by all eligible applications on the close of business on March 31 is 50,000 square feet or less, all of the applications will be acted upon by the approving authority established in the PAMC. For example, the Director of Planning would act upon Architectural Review applications, and that action would be appealable to the City Council. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 4 The City Council would act upon applications requiring Site and Design or rezoning. 4. If the sum total of new square footage proposed by all eligible applications on the close of business on March 31 is greater than 50,000 square feet, the Director of Planning shall prepare the applications for hearing by the City Council as follows: a. At an initial hearing, the Director shall provide the City Council with all pending applications, including required CEQA documents, recommended findings and conditions of approval. Each applicant will be invited to present their project at the initial hearing, and the City Council may provide comments and direction regarding the recommended findings and conditions. The initial review of the eligible projects by the City Council may be spread over more than one meeting if time does not allow review of all projects on one meeting agenda. i. If the City Council is unable to support approval of the required CEQA document or the required findings for any of the eligible projects, it may direct staff to prepare findings for denial or impose conditions that will permit it to make the necessary findings. ii. Projects that are denied based upon not meeting required findings for approval are no longer eligible projects and the applicant must submit a new planning entitlement for a substantially different project for proposed development at the same site. b. At a second public hearing, the Director shall provide the City Council with a recommended ranking of the eligible applications using the scoring criteria included below. The Director may convene a panel consisting of the Chair of the ARB and the Chair of the PTC to assist in the ranking. At the second public hearing, the City Council shall review the Director’s recommendation and select the projects that shall receive an office/R&D allocation. The projects selected shall receive planning entitlement approval at the same hearing, which shall occur before the end of the fiscal year on June 30. The City Council shall approve, deny, or approve as modified the project(s) receiving an office/R&D allocation. c. Any application that is not approved by the City Council solely because it exceeds the office/R&D allocation shall be denied unless the applicant requests that the project be rolled over for consideration in the next fiscal year. In addition, the applicant may request his/her application be rolled over to the next fiscal year if the City Council INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 5 proposes to modify the project by reducing its square footage and the applicant declines to do so. A project can be rolled over only one time. F. Expiration of Office/R&D Allocation. Once a project has been approved, all applicable entitlement timelines apply to the project, including the expiration of approvals. If an entitlement expires, the approved allocation also expires. The allocation cannot be carried over to another development proposal; it must be used for the approved project or it will be lost. G. Review Criteria and Scoring. 1. Eligible applications that were deemed complete by the City between March 31 and June 15, 2015 shall have priority over other projects and shall be evaluated against each other and granted an allocation before other eligible applications are considered 2. Review criteria are established in Ordinance 5347 as follows: Impacts a. The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings; and b. The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking; Design c. The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality; and Environmental Quality d. Environmental quality Public Benefit e. The value to the community of public benefits offered; and Uses f. Mixed use projects including substantial housing; and g. Mixed use projects including retail; and h. Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios 3. The Director’s recommendation shall be based on an evaluation of eligible applications weighting the review criteria as shown in the score card in Table 1, below. All projects will be ranked against each other according to the point totals they receive. 4. The City Council may accept the Director’s recommendation or modify it based on its independent review of the criteria, and shall determine which eligible applications will be approved, approved with modifications, or INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 6 denied, such that the total square footage approved does not exceed 50,000 new gross square feet of the uses listed in Section A, above. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 7 Table 1. Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Scoring (One Score Card Shall be Used to Evaluate Each Eligible Application) Project Address and APN: Net New Square Footage Requested: Brief Project Description: Scoring Criterion Total Possible Score Considerations for Each Criterion Project Score Explanation 1. Impacts 30 a. The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings 10 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project that does not require variances or exceptions from applicable quantitative standards of the code and that is deemed to be most consistent in terms of its mass and scale with nearby buildings. 1 b. The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project resulting in the least traffic and the least potential for unmet parking demand, regardless of whether these impacts are considered significant pursuant to CEQA. 2. Design 20 c. The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project with the highest quality of design. Rankings will consider how the buildings address the street and their compatibility with surrounding buildings. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 8 Scoring Criterion Total Possible Score Considerations for Each Criterion Project Score Explanation 3. Environmental Quality 20 a. Environmental quality 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to project that avoids significant environmental impacts under CEQA and that is designed to enhance the built and natural environment. Enhancements may include, but are not limited to, incorporation of energy conservation, storm water, and sustainability features above and beyond legal requirements, as well as incorporation of vegetation/landscaping and bird friendly design. 4. Public Benefit 20 b. The value to the community of public benefits offered 20 Eligible projects will be compared to each other in terms of their value to the community, with the top project receiving up to 20 points and other projects receiving lower rankings based on their relative benefits. For purposes of this section, the value of public benefits may be qualitative or quantitative.2 5. Uses 20 c. Mixed use projects including substantial housing 10 Projects will be ranked against each other with the most points awarded to the project with the greatest number of dwelling units.3 d. Mixed use projects including retail 5 Projects will be ranked against each other based on their mix of uses, including the quantity of ground floor retail.3 e. Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios 5 Projects will be ranked against each other based on their mix of uses, including retail or personal services uses (galleries or studios) for use by artists, or space for other cultural uses. A project’s public art requirement does not count towards this.3 INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 9 Notes: 1. For purposes of this section, exceptions to the “Build to Line” standard and requests for parking reductions per PAMC Section 18.52.050 shall not be considered. Section 18.52.050 can be used to allow parking adjustments based on provision of on-site amenities, shared parking, senior housing, affordable housing, housing near transit, and TDM plans. 2. Benefits may be intrinsic to the project, such as affordable housing units, publicly accessible open spaces, publicly accessible off-street parking, community meeting space, or subsidized rent for community-serving non-profits. Benefits may also be extrinsic improvements or voluntary financial contributions to larger community initiatives. Some benefits may be quantifiable and some may not. 3. By rewarding provision of uses that may not be permitted in all zoning districts, this section effectively gives some priority to those projects that are proposed within districts that allow the desired uses (when those uses are incorporated into the proposed project). INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 10 Attachment A Map of Areas Subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Attachment B Definitions of Relevant Office and R&D Uses from the Palo Alto Zoning Ordinance Land Use Code Section Definition Research & Development 18.04.030(123) "Research and development" means a use engaged in the study, testing, engineering, product design, analysis and development of devices, products, processes, or services related to current or new technologies. Research and development may include limited manufacturing, fabricating, processing, assembling or storage of prototypes, devices, compounds, products or materials, or similar related activities, where such activities are incidental to research, development or evaluation. Examples of "research and development" uses include, but are not limited to, computer software and hardware firms, computer peripherals and related products, electronic research firms, biotechnical and biomedical firms, instrument analysis, genomics, robotics and pharmaceutical research laboratories, and related educational development. Research and development may include the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of the exempt quantities listed in Title 15 of the Municipal Code, or etiological (biological) agents up to and including Risk Group 3 or Bio Safety Level 3 classifications as defined by the National Institute of Health (NIH) or the Center for Disease Control (CDC). Higher classification levels of etiological (biological) agents are not allowed without express permission of the City Manager, Fire Chief, and Police Chief. Related administrative uses such as finance, legal, human resources, management, marketing, sales, accounting, purchasing, or corporate offices; provisions of services to others on or off-site; and related educational uses may also be included provided they remain primarily supportive of the primary uses of "research and development" and are part of the same research and development firm. Administrative Office Services 18.040.030(6) "Administrative office services" means offices and service facilities performing headquarters, regional, or other level management and administrative services for firms and institutions. General Business Office 18.040.030(61) "General business office" means a use principally providing services to individuals, firms, or other entities, including but not limited to real estate, insurance, property management, title companies, investment, personnel, travel, and similar services. Medical Office 18.04.030(95) "Medical office" means a use providing consultation, diagnosis, therapeutic, preventive, or corrective personal treatment services by doctors, dentists, medical and dental laboratories, and similar practitioners of medical and healing arts for humans, licensed for such practice by the state of California. Incidental medical and/or dental research within the office is considered part of the office use, where it supports the on-site patient services. Medical office use does not include the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of the permit quantities as defined in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Medical gas storage or use shall be allowed up to 1,008 cubic feet per gas type and flammable liquids storage and use shall be INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 12 Land Use Code Section Definition allowed up to 20 gallons total (including waste). Professional Office 18.04.030(116) "Professional office" means a use providing professional or consulting services in the fields of law, architecture and architectural design, engineering, accounting, and similar professions, including associated product testing and prototype development, but excluding product manufacturing or assembly and excluding the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of permit quantities prescribed in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. City of Palo Alto (ID # 9191) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/30/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Potential 2018 Infrastructure Ballot Measure Title: Finance Committee Recommendation Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Address the Funding Gap for the 2014 Infrastructure Plan and Funding for Unplanned Potential Community Assets Pro jects, Discussion of Next Steps for Addressing the Funding Gap Needs, and Potential Refinement of Survey Elements and Objectives for a Follow -up Survey From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council 1. Review the results of the initial public opinion survey and provide direction on next steps in addressing the funding gap for the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects including discussion of priorities with respect to competing future capital investments; 2. Discuss the Finance Committee motion to: a. Move forward with a two percent Transient Occupancy Tax increase, including moving forward with the necessary creation of a ballot statement, polling, testing, and authorizing Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates to perform associated tasks; b. To discontinue consideration of a Sales Tax or a Parcel Tax; and c. To continue to consider and explore a Real Estate Transfer Tax, including the possibility of polling. Background At the City Council’s direction from January 2018, the Finance Committee has been reviewing the funding gap identified in the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects curre ntly estimated at $76 million. The Committee has met three times to discuss the funding needs for capital investments and options for funding strategies. Staff reports considered by the Committee are attached. Ultimately the Committee approved direction to have Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates (FM3 Research) conduct an initial public opinion survey to assess public support for a potential November 2018 ballot revenue measure. FM3 staff will attend this Council meeting City of Palo Alto Page 2 to present the initial survey results and answer questions. Discussion At the April 17, 2018 meeting, the Finance Committee reviewed the initial polling results and discussed options for a potential scope of a more focused survey. Attached to this report are the staff reports and minutes from prior committee meeting s including the results of the initial survey conducted by FM3. After the April Finance Committee meeting, the Rail Committee met on April 18th and discussed the possibility of a Palo Alto voter survey related to potential funding for grade separation. It was suggested that any such polling would most appropriately be conducted separately from any additional survey work related to Infrastructure Funding. Timeline If Council approves for FM3 to conduct the polling, it would be conducted in early May with results presented to the Finance Committee and/or Council in late May or early June. If a ballot measure vote is moved forward for action it would be presented to Council in June. Resource Impact No additional funding is required; the FM3 costs can be absorbed within the existing General Fund budget. Attachments:  Attachment A: February 6, 2018 Finance Committee Report ID #8927: Discussion on Council Infrastructure Plan and Competing  Attachment B: February 6, 2018 Finance Committee Excerpt Minutes  Attachment C: April 17, 2018 Finance Committee Report ID #9107 : Review of Initial Public Opinion Survey for Infrastructure Funding Needs  Attachment D: April 17, 2018 Finance Committee Action Minutes  Attachment E: March 20, 2018 Finance Committee Report ID# 9039: Initial Public Opinion Survey for Infrastructure Funding Needs  Attachment F: March 20, 2018 Finance Committee Minutes City of Palo Alto (ID # 8927) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/6/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Discussion on Council Infrastructure Plan and Competing Priorities Funding Challenges Title: Discussion on Infrastructure Plan Projects, Anticipated Costs and Funding Levels, and Potential Direction on Next Steps Regarding Project Priorities, Timing and Potential Funding Options From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance Committee: 1) Review the background and current status of the Council Infrastructure Plan projects; and 2) Discuss and provide direction on next steps, including priorities with respect to the Council Infrastructure Plan projects and competing capital priorities for the City Manager to utilize when developing the proposed Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Budget and 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program; and potential recommendations to Council regarding development of new funding sources or measures to close the funding gap. Analysis At the January 22, 2018 City Council meeting, the Council referred Item 15 (See Attachment A) to the Finance Committee for discussion and deliberation regarding Capital Infrastructure Plan projects and funding. It is staff’s intent to review the status of the projects contained in the Council Infrastructure Plan as well as the competing financial priorities as identified in the January 22, 2018 report and the City’s FY 2019-2028 Long Range Financial Report. The combination of these two reports outline the current limitations on resources available to satisfy the growing desires of the organization. A more focused approach to services and investments will be necessary. As the Committee and Council continue to discuss major projects and obligations, such as pensions, infrastructure, and grade separations, a constant eye on thinking outside of the box and managing expectations will be key. As noted, there are several projects that are being discussed in the community and viewed as desireable, but that City of Palo Alto Page 2 have not received Council direction as of yet. It is clear funding for additional projects is not currently available unless alternative choices are made. References: City Council FY 2017 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report & FY 2019-2028 Long Range Financial Report (CMR #8754): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62953 Attachments:  Attachment A: CMR ID# 8855 Infrastructure Plan and Projects: Status Update on Infrastructure Plan City of Palo Alto (ID # 8855) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/22/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Direction on Council Infrastructure Plan Funding Challenges Title: Infrastructure Plan and Projects: Status Update on Infrastructure Plan Projects, Anticipated Costs and Funding Levels; Recommendation and Possible Action to Remove the Second Basement Level From the California Avenue Parking Garage to Reduce Costs; and Discussion and Council Direction on Project Priorities, Timing and Potential Funding Options to Achieve a Fully Funded Infrastructure Plan From: City Manager Lead Department: Pu blic Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Review the background and current status of the Council Infrastructure Plan projects; 2. Direct staff to modify the previously approved program for the California Avenue Parking Garage project (PE-18000) to remove the second basement level, resulting in a 542-space parking garage with four levels of above-ground parking and one level of basement parking; and 3. Discuss and provide direction and priorities with respect to the Council Infrastructure Plan projects for the City Manager to utilize when developing the proposed Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Budget and 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program, and directing staff work toward potential development of new funding sources. Executive Summary The Council Infrastructure Plan was adopted in June 2014 in response to decades of inadequate funding for maintenance and renewal of Palo Alto’s infrastructure assets. Significant progress has been made toward the Plan’s implementation, but construction cost escalation, project scope increases, and refined cost estimates have resulted in a current funding gap of approximately $50 million relative to the total current estimated cost of about $235 million. In response, one initial adjustment to the Infrastructure Plan in t his report recommends removal of the second basement level from the California Avenue Parking Garage (PE-18000), which is estimated to reduce the cost of the garage by $6 million to $8 million. The report also describes a number of other potential strategies for closing the remaining funding gap, City of Palo Alto Page 2 including reprioritizing the Council Infrastructure Plan projects, reducing project scopes, reprioritizing projects within the overall capital improvement fund, allocating new revenues, and increasing taxes. Background In 2010, Council appointed the 17-member Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Committee (IBRC). IBRC was appointed in recognition that the City had, over a period of several decades, systematically underfunded maintenance of its existing assets and failed to plan funding for replacement of assets at the end of their useful lives. Estimates of the infrastructure funding backlog varied widely, ranging from $100 million to $500 million depending on which projects and assumptions were included. IBRC was tasked primarily with developing an inventory of the City’s infrastructure backlog and future needs, and with proposing ideas for funding those needs. IBRC released its final report, titled “Palo Alto’s Infrastructure: Catching Up, Keeping Up, and Moving Ahead”, on December 22, 2011. The final report included a number of findings and recommendations for improving the City’s management and funding of its infrastructure needs. Key findings included the following:  “Keep-Up” maintenance of existing infrastructure was underfunded by $2.2 million per year  “Catch-Up” deferred maintenance for existing infrastructure had grown to $41 million  An Infrastructure Management System was needed  A new Public Safety Building was needed on a new site as soon as possible  Fire Stations 3 and 4 should be rebuilt and upgraded on their present sites as soon as possible Following the completion of IBRC’s final report, Mayor Yiaway Yeh declared 2012 the "year of infrastructure renewal and investment,” focusing efforts on the important t ask of identifying long-term revenue sources to renew the City’s physical assets. Council held four retreats in 2012 to discuss the questions raised by the IBRC report. Council took multiple actions to address IBRC’s recommendations, including the follow ing:  Established street pavement condition index (PCI) goal and tripled annual funding  Added $2.2 million per year to the capital fund to address “Keep -Up”  Transferred an additional $36.9 million to the capital fund between FY 2012 and FY 2016 (in addition to the regular General Fund transfer)  Began funding “Catch-Up” capital projects  Funded a capital project to create the Infrastructure Management System Most importantly, in 2013 Council sustained the momentum generated by IBRC’s work by forming the Infrastructure Committee, an ad-hoc Council Committee that met 12 times between March 2013 and May 2014. The Infrastructure Committee evaluated and prioritized the City’s list of unfunded infrastructure projects, reviewed existing funding sources for the City of Palo Alto Page 3 projects, and conducted two public opinion polls evaluating support for the individual projects and a variety of potential tax measures. On June 9, 2014, following several meetings evaluating the Infrastructure Committee recommendations, Council approved a lis t of 9 projects and a variety of funding sources that have since been referred to as the Council Infrastructure Plan. The funding sources included future Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues from four new hotels that were not yet opened and an increase of 2% (from 12% to 14%) to the City’s TOT rate for all hotels. Both TOT sources were to be used to support Certificates of Participation that would fund about 50% of the total project costs. Council called for a special election to increase the TOT rate on June 16, 2014, which passed with 76% approval in November 2014. The Council Infrastructure Plan projects are a subset of the City’s highest priority capital projects contained within the larger capital improvement fund, which contains many other one-time and multi-year projects. The project costs and funding sources from the June 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1: 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan Project Costs Project Cost ($ millions) Public Safety Building 57.0 Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge 1.71 Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation 20.0 Charleston/Arastradero Corridor 7.52 Byxbee Park 2.8 California Avenue Area Parking Garage 9.6 Downtown Parking Garage 13.0 Fire Station 3 Replacement 6.7 Fire Station 4 Replacement 7.5 Total: $ 125.8 Table 2: 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan Funding Sources Funding Source Funding ($ millions) Stanford Development Agreement – Infrastructure 22.1 Stanford Development Agreement – Sustainability 12.4 Infrastructure Reserve 8.5 FY 2014 Surplus 4.0 Parking In-Lieu Fees 4.0 1 The $1.7 million figure for the Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge project represented only the unfunded portion of the $10 million project cost estimate in 2014. 2 The $7.5 million figure for the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor project represented only the unfunded portion of the $10 million project cost estimate in 2014. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Parks Impact Fees 2.8 New Hotel Revenues (COPs) 33.6 TOT 2% Increase (COPs) 30.8 Available Revenue From TOT 0.1 Future Revenue TBD 7.5 Total: $ 125.8 It is important to note that project costs for the Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge and Charleston/Arastradero Corridor projects only include the amounts that were unfunded in June 2014. For comparison to current Council Infrastructure Plan costs presented later in this report, the apples-to-apples figure is $136.6 million (rather than $125.8). Additionally, the project costs in Table 1 do not include staff salaries and benefits. Beginning in FY 2016, staff began budgeting the cost of staff salaries and benefits within the individual capital projects to more accurately plan and account for the total cost of projects. These costs had previously been budgeted in a single capital project that accounted for the salaries and benefits of all staff that work on capital projects and are budgeted in the capital fund. The inclusion of staff salaries and benefits in individual project budgets can appear to increase the overall cost of the projects. In reality, the apparent increase is simply a shift of budget allocation fro m the single “salaries and benefits” capital project to the individual projects. Following the voter approval of the TOT increase, funding for the Council Infrastructure Plan projects was included in the FY 2015 Adopted Capital Budget (some of the projects had been partially funded in previous years). Discussion Council Infrastructure Plan Projects: Project Status Attachment A provides a summary of the scope and current status for each of the nine Council Infrastructure Plan projects. The following figure presents the current anticipated Calendar Year schedule for design and construction of the projects. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Some project status highlights are as follows:  Public Safety Building and California Avenue Garage: The Draft Environmental Impact Report was published on January 8, 2018. The projects have had one formal Architectural Review Board (ARB) hearing, and the second formal hearing for the Garage is scheduled for January 18, 2018.  Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge: The CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Park Improvement Ordinance were approved by Council in November 2017. Caltrans subsequently approved the project’s federal environmental document.  Bike/Pedestrian Plan Implementation: Phase 1 is currently under construction, and fina l design for Phase 2 is in progress.  Charleston/Arastradero Corridor: Phases 1 and 2 are expected to go out to bid in January 2018. Construction contracts subsequently will be brought to Council for approval.  Downtown Parking Garage: The Draft Environmental Impact Report is expected to be published in January 2018. The first formal ARB hearing is expected in February 2018.  Fire Station 3 Replacement: Construction of the new fire station began on January 8, 2018. Council Infrastructure Plan Projects: Design Process, Current Estimates, Funding Shortfall To understand how project costs have increased since the Council Infrastructure Plan was adopted in 2014, it is important to understand the relationship between cost estimates and the design process. Design of most infrastructure projects proceeds through a process of increasing detail and complexity. Typically beginning with conceptual design, the design process moves to schematic design, design development, and construction documents. The discrete steps are most applicable to building projects, but other projects follow a similar progression. At each level of design, construction cost estimates are based on greater detail and increase in City of Palo Alto Page 6 accuracy. These design steps are described briefly in the wo rkflow below: 1) Conceptual Design: The Conceptual Design Phase presents sizing, layout, and massing options for building placement on a site. This involves verification that the program will fit in the building and the building will fit on the site along with parking lot configurations, verification of utility availability, and site access. 2) Schematic Design: The Schematic Design Phase refines the conceptual design by showing the Project’s basic components, scale and location in more detail. This includes plans of the site and improvements; preliminary sections and elevations of the buildings; approximate areas, volumes, and dimensions of features for cost estimating; and preliminary selections of materials and systems. For projects that require review by the Architectural Review Board, plans are typically at the schematic level design when the review occurs. 3) Design Development: Design Development further refines the Schematic Design to a level that can serve as a basis for Construction Documents. This in cludes drawings and outline specifications to establish and describe the size, character and site relationships of major Project components. This phase involves extensive coordination for all building systems such as structural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, lighting, fire protection, security, telecom, audio visual, acoustics, and all site improvements and landscaping. 4) Construction Documents: The last phase refines the Design Development package into a final drawing set with technical specifications suitable for obtaining permits and issuing for public bidding. The final plans, calculations, and specifications must be suitable for construction, including structural, mechanical systems, electrical, site improvements, landscaping, drainage, finishes, and furniture layout. Once completed construction documents are advertised to secure bids for a project, the maximum construction cost is known (assuming the typical 10% construction contingency amount is not exceeded). Construction cost is also known as a project’s hard cost. The construction cost is the largest component of total project costs, but total costs also include soft costs such as design, construction management, architect construction administration, permits, inspection and testing. Staff salaries and benefits are in addition to these hard and soft costs, but are planned for in the capital fund regardless of the projects to which they are assigned. Table 3 presents the total project cost estimates (without salaries and benefits) as they exis ted in 2014 at the adoption of the Council Infrastructure Plan and as they have been updated during the design process. Estimates for the initial Council Infrastructure Plan were based on conceptual information, and they used very rough percentage -based figures to account for soft costs and contingencies. The year in parentheses indicates the construction year basis for each (conceptual) project. At the time of the Council Infrastructure Plan’s development, older City of Palo Alto Page 7 estimates were not escalated to the current year or to future years when construction would actually occur. Table 3: Council Infrastructure Plan cost evolution through design process (all figures in $ millions) Project 2014 Plan Conceptual (Construction year basis) Updated Conceptual Schematic Design Development Construction Documents Bid and Contract Public Safety Building $57.0 (2012) $75.4 $91.0 Highway 101 Bike/Pedestrian Bridge $10.0 (2012) $14.0 $14.0 $16.3 Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation $20.0 (2014) $20.0 $20.0 $20.0 $20.0 Charleston/ Arastradero Corridor $10.0 (2009) $10.0 $10.0 $10.0 $14.6 Byxbee Park $2.8 (N/A) California Avenue Parking Garage $9.6 (2013) $34.8 $40.4 Downtown Parking Garage $13.0 (2013) $23.5 $28.1 Fire Station 3 Replacement $6.7 (2008) $6.7 $8.1 $8.1 $8.7 $8.6 Fire Station 4 Replacement $7.5 (2008) The primary reasons for increased project costs are the significant construction cost escalation that has occurred in recent years and additions to the scope of certain projects. For example, the Public Safety Building was estimated at $47 million in 2012 (with an additional $10 million included in the budget for land acquisition). Applying a Bay Area construction cost escalation factor developed by a local builder, cost escalation accounts for an increase in the estimated project cost from $47 to about $74 million by 2021, the current projected midpoint of construction. This cost escalation does not account for the full increase, as the current Public Safety Building cost estimate shown in Table 3 is $91 million. Attachment B is a chart detailing the impact of construction cost escalation on project costs. Public Safety Building costs have also increased because of the design decision to build two underground levels that will accommodate parking and some of the program space. Some of the increase in the project cost estimate for the Downtown Parking Garage is related to Council’s April 2017 direction to increase the project scope by adding a basement level. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) process can also impact project costs. Both the Public Safety Building and California Avenue Parking Garage have had one formal review by the ARB. In both cases, comments from the ARB have resulted in design changes that are expected to increase project costs. These potential increases are not yet included in the project costs presented in Table 3. City of Palo Alto Page 8 Table 4 summarizes significant scope changes that have influenced the cost of Council Infrastructure Plan projects. Table 4: Project Scope Changes Project 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan Scope Changes to Initial Scope Public Safety Building Separate stand-alone PSB and non- essential services standard parking garage PSB over two levels of basement parking and “operational basement”, all built to essential services standard Highway 101 Bike/Pedestrian Bridge Bridge concept and alignment only At-grade pedestrian truss bridge over the Adobe/Barron Creek confluence; Raised sidewalk on West Side Approach to address sidewalk and bicycle lane concerns; Enhanced lighting Charleston/Arastradero Corridor No stormwater treatment features envisioned Nine green stormwater infrastructure infiltration basins added California Avenue Parking Garage Garage to add 158 parking stalls in addition to replacing existing parking from one surface lot Garage to replace existing surface parking on two lots (C-6 and C-7); Garage to include one additional above-ground and one additional basement level for a net parking stall addition of 335 stalls over the current parking on the two lots Downtown Parking Garage Garage to add 212 parking stalls in addition to replacing existing parking from one surface lot Garage to include a basement level for a net parking stall addition of 252 stalls; addition of 2,188 SF retail space To determine the Council Infrastructure Plan’s funding shortfall, Table 5 compares the currently budgeted amounts for the Council Infrastructure Plan projects with the most current total project cost estimates. Table 5: Council Infrastructure Plan budget and cost comparison (all figures in $ millions) Currently Budgeted Current Estimate Shortfall Public Safety Building 57.0 91.0 34.0 Highway 101 Bike/Pedestrian Bridge 14.0 16.3 2.3 Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation 20.0 20.0 -- Charleston/Arastradero Corridor 10.8 14.6 3.8 Byxbee Park 2.8 2.8 -- California Avenue Parking Garage 9.6 40.4 30.8 Downtown Parking Garage 13.0 28.1 15.1 Fire Station 3 Replacement 8.6 8.6 -- Fire Station 4 Replacement 7.5 7.5 -- City of Palo Alto Page 9 Staff Salaries and Benefits 6.5 6.5 -- Subtotal: $149.8 $235.8 $86.0 Unallocated Contingency** 30.0 0 (30.0) Total: $179.8 $235.8 $56.0* *Additional funding sources of $5.7 million have been identified to help offset this gap. **The FY2018 Adopted Capital Budget includes contingency funding of $30 million that is not yet allocated to projects. For further reference, Attachment C is a matrix that details how the currently budgeted individual funding sources are allocated to each project. The current estimate for the total cost of the Plan is $229.3 million, $235.8 million when salaries and benefits are included. The FY 2018 Adopted Capital Budget includes contingency funding of $30 million that is not yet allocated to projects. In addition to the currently budgeted funding sources, staff has identified $5.7 million in funding that is proposed to be used towards the Downtown Parking Garage and Charleston/Arastradero Corridor projects. The funding sources consist primarily of additional parking in-lieu fees ($2.8 million), SB1 funding for FY 2019 ($1.2 million), and Stormwater Management Fee Green Infrastructure funding ($0.7 million). Assuming use of these funding sources, the Council Infrastructure Plan funding shortfall is currently estimated at $50 million. In addition to the Council Infrastructure Plan, there are a number of other significant potential capital projects that have been identified as a need that do not have funding identified. While successful completion of the Council Infrastructure Plan has been identified as the highest infrastructure priority, the following are some other potential competing funding needs:  Junior Museum and Zoo rebuild (Phase I essentials) (impacts in potential Phase II?)  Animal Shelter replacement or renovation  Caltrain Westside Fencing  Parking wayfinding and other improvements  Parks Master Plan implementation  Cubberley Master Plan development and implementation Some of these projects have more immediacy than others. More detail on potential unfunded projects can be found in the FY 2019-FY 2028 Long Range Financial Forecast (CMR 8676) that was presented to the Finance Committee on December 5, 2017. Additional discussion in the following sections relates to Council decisions and guidance on how to address the Council Infrastructure Plan funding shortfall. Recommendation to Remove Second Basement Level from California Avenue Parking Garage Staff recommends the removal of the second basement level from the Cali fornia Avenue Parking Garage, resulting in a garage with one basement and four above-ground levels. This removal will reduce the number of parking stalls from 636 to 542, and reduce the net increase City of Palo Alto Page 10 in parking stalls (accounting for the existing surface parking stalls on Lots C-6 and C-7) from 335 to 241. The removal of the second basement level is expected to reduce the total project cost for the California Avenue Parking Garage by $6-8 million. The original 2014 scope of the California Avenue Parking Garage project assumed a net increase of approximately 158 parking stalls by building a new garage on a not yet identified surface lot in the California Avenue area resulting in an estimated project budget of $9.6 million and the parking in-lieu fee in effect at that time. In December 2015, staff presented the results of the Public Safety Building Site Evaluation Study that recommended building the Public Safety Building on Lot C-6, and building the California Avenue Parking Garage on Lot C-7 to replace the existing surface parking on both lots and to provide additional parking. At that time, Council directed staff to proceed with design of a 460 parking stall garage that would provide a net increase of 160 stalls. The direction from Council included a req uest for analysis of costs and other impacts for possible options to provide more than the minimum 460 parking stalls. On April 3, 2017, staff presented Council with parking garage options that included number of stalls and conceptual cost estimates. Council directed staff to proceed with a 636-stall garage that would include two basements and four above-ground levels. At that time, the conceptual level project cost estimate for the 636-stall garage was $34.8 million. With schematic design nearly complete, the current estimate is $40.4 million. As work on the California Avenue Parking Garage has proceeded, staff has noted a number of potentially competing factors and policy directives. The direction to proceed with a 636 -stall garage increases the Council Infrastructure Plan’s significant funding gap. The Evergreen- Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program is in its first year and enhancements are being proposed that may simplify short-term visitor parking within the RPP area. A Comprehensive Parking Study for the California Avenue area has just commenced. The new Comprehensive Plan and Sustainability Implementation Plan envision a shift from single occupancy vehicle travel to modes of travel that are expected to reduce demand for parkin g. At the same time, current occupancy counts demonstrate that on-street and off-street parking in the California Avenue District is impacted during the weekday lunchtime hours (although there is significant availability of parking for short-term visitors in the RPP zones). Staff’s recommendation to remove the second basement level of the California Avenue Parking Garage is made in recognition of the factors described above and the parking occupancy data that demonstrate that demand for additional parking is principally confined to the lunchtime hours of 12pm to 2pm. The following information on parking occupancy is provided to inform Council’s consideration of parking inventory in the California Avenue District. Weekday California Avenue District Parking Occupancy Count Data: City of Palo Alto Page 11 On-Street Parking (business district) 10/25/2017, Wednesday Time Supply Demand % Use 9am-11am 406 191 47.0% 12pm-2pm 406 316 77.8% 3pm-5pm 406 253 62.3% 6pm-8pm 406 274 67.5% Off-Street Parking (lots and garages) 11/21/17, Tuesday Time Supply Demand % Use 9am-11am 1064 385 36.2% 12pm-2pm 1064 892 83.8% 3pm-5pm 1064 766 72.0% 6pm-8pm 1064 728 68.4% Evergreen-Mayfield (RPP) 10/25/17, Wednesday Time Supply Demand % Use 9am-11am 985 389 39.5% 12pm-2pm 985 469 47.6% 3pm-5pm 985 425 43.1% Critical Time: 12pm-2pm Combined On and Off Street Parking (no RPP) Time Supply Demand % Use 12pm-2pm 1470 1208 82.2% During the critical 12pm-2pm lunchtime hours, staff’s recommendation to add 241 (rather than 335) parking stalls would increase the combined on and off street parking inventory to 1711, reducing the lunchtime use of parking from 82.2% to 70.6%. Proceeding with the second basement level would add 335 parking stalls and reduce the lunchtime use to only 66.9%, with even greater underutilization during the rest of the day. The following table summarizes the chronology leading to staff’s recommendation: 2014 Dec 2015 January 2018 Staff Recommendation Additional Parking Provided 158 160 335 241 Project Cost $9.6 million $9.6 million $40.4 million $32-34 million City of Palo Alto Page 12 Additional Strategies for Addressing the Council Infrastructure Plan Shortfall Staff recommends that Council consider and discuss the following additional options for addressing the funding shortfall and provide guidance and identify priorities for staff’s use in the development of the City Manager’s FY 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program and possible initiation of work towards development of new funding sources .  Reprioritize or drop projects from the Council Infrastructure Plan: One or more projects could be removed from the Council Infrastructure Plan or deferred beyond the timeframe of the 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program.  Scope reduction: The scope of certain projects could be reduced to decrease project costs. Staff’s recommendation to remove the California Avenue Garage second basement level is one example.  Reprioritize other projects from the capital improvement fund: In developing the FY 2019 capital improvement fund budget, staff could carefully evaluate existing and proposed capital projects that are not part of the Council Infrastructure Plan and propose eliminating, reducing, or deferring some projects. Currently the unallocated fund balance (also referred to as the Infrastructure Reserve ) is estimated to be $11 million at the end of FY 2018. This funding could be directed to the Council Infrastructure Plan; however, this would eliminate flexibility to address other competing needs as outlined earlier.  New revenues: Anticipated new revenues could be allocated to closing the Council Infrastructure Plan funding gap. For example, the new Marriott hotels are projected to generate $3.6 million annually in TOT revenues upon their completion. If 70 percent of these revenues are used to issue deb t, it would provide approximately $35 million of funding.  Tax increase: New tax increases could be proposed to the voters to provide additional revenue. For example, each 1% increase to the TOT rate results in approximately $1.7 million annually. If 70 percent of these revenues are used to issue debt, it would provide approximately $16 million of funding. Timeline Seven of the nine Council Infrastructure Plan projects are in progress and are proceeding according to their individual project schedules with all seven projects to be completed by the end of FY 2022. The California Avenue Parking Garage is currently scheduled to begin construction in November 2018, and construction of the Public Safety Building will begin after the garage is completed. A Council decision on the garage’s second basement level is necessary to maintain the critical path schedule for the California Avenue Parking Garage and the Public Safety Building, and to City of Palo Alto Page 13 avoid additional construction cost escalation. Staff would recommend Council make that decision the evening this agenda item comes to Council. And while Council discussion and possible action in other areas may be warranted at the meeting, Council may also choose to direct a set of issues to Finance Committee for in depth discussion on alternatives. Resource Impact The funding gap of $50 million identified in this report is anticipated to be considered and addressed as part of the City Manager’s FY 2019 – FY 2023 Proposed Capital Budget with the assistance of the feedback and discussion of priorities had by the City Council at this meeting. Specifically, the staff recommendation to remove the second basement level from the California Avenue Garage (PE-18000) is estimated to reduce the cost of the project by $6 million to $8 million. If approved, this would reduce the funding gap to $42 million - $44 million to be addressed as part of the City Manager’s proposed budget. Policy Implications The staff recommendation does not represent a change in existing policies. Environmental Review Individual Council Infrastructure Plan projects are undergoing the appropriate level of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. Staff’s recommendation to remove the second basement level from the California Avenue Parking Garage would reduce the environmental impacts that are being assessed in the Environmental Impact Report for the California Avenue Parking Garage and the Public Safety Building. Attachments:  Attachment A: Council Infrastructure Plan Project Summaries  Attachment B: Local Construction Cost Escalation  Attachment C: Council Infrastructure Plan Funding Budgeted Funding Sources Attachment A: Council Infrastructure Plan Project Summaries Public Safety Building (PE-15001): Summary: The new Public Safety Building (PSB) will house the Police Department, 911 Emergency Dispatch Center, the Emergency Operations Center, the Office of Emergency Services, and the administration needs of the Fire Department. The PSB will be located on Parking Lot C-6 (250 Sherman Avenue) in the California Avenue business district. It will be designed and constructed to meet the requirement of the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act that it be immediately ready and available following a disaster such as an earthquake. The project includes a 135-foot tall emergency communications tower that will be integrated with the 50-foot tall, 3-story PSB structure. Status: The project is in the schematic design phase. On January 8, 2018, the Draft Environmental Impact Report was released for a 45-day public comment period. The building design is expected to be reviewed for a second time by the Architectural Review Board in early March. The Final EIR will be presented to Council for certification in April or May 2018. Construction of the PSB will immediately follow completion of the California Avenue Parking Garage project. The PSB is expected to be operational in 2021. Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge (PE-11011): Summary: The project will construct a year-round pedestrian/bicycle overcrossing of U.S. 101 at Adobe Creek including a new trail connection to East Meadow Drive. The project will improve recreational and commuter connections east and west of U.S. 101 to bike lanes on East and West Bayshore Roads and to the existing Bay Trail. The project will close the existing Benjamin Lefkowitz pedestrian/bicycle undercrossing of U.S. 101 at Adobe Creek, a facility that experiences frequent closures due to flooding each year between October 15th and April 15th. The proposed overcrossing was determined as a high priority and potential future project to improve connectivity and year-round access over Highway 101 per the City’s 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Status: The 65% design and environmental assessment services phase is now complete. On December 11, 2017, City Council awarded a contract amendment for Phase 2 final bridge design services. This action followed Council’s November 27, 2017 adoption of a CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of a Park Improvement Ordinance for the project. Following Council’s action, Caltrans adopted the project’s NEPA Categorical Exclusion. Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation (PL-04010): Summary: The project includes planning, design and construction of bicycle boulevards, enhanced bikeways, shared-use paths, bicycle parking and a citywide bicycle sharing system in accordance with the Palo Alto Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan, which was adopted by City Council in 2012. The project is primarily being implemented through two phases of bicycle boulevard construction. Phase 1 includes the Amarillo Avenue/Moreno Avenue Bicycle Boulevard, Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard Upgrade, Louis Road/Montrose Avenue Bicycle Boulevard, and Ross Road Bicycle Boulevard. Phase 2 includes the Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard Extension, Maybell Avenue Bicycle Boulevard, and Park Boulevard/Wilkie Way Bicycle Boulevard. Status: Construction of Phase 1 began in September 2017 and is scheduled to take approximately one year. Concept plans for Phase 2 were adopted by City Council in 2015 and final design is underway. Construction contract award is expected in fall 2018 and construction is scheduled to take approximately one year. Charleston/Arastradero Corridor (PE-13011): Summary: The project is a streetscape improvement and resurfacing project on the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor from San Antonio Road to Foothill Expressway. The project is split into three phases and is expected to be completed in two years. The project has been a priority to residents since its conception as the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan in 2003. The project goals and benefits include enhancing school commute safety for K-12 students, improving the quality of bike and pedestrian experience, reducing the amount of very high-speed vehicles, and enhancing the streetscape and quality of life in the corridor for local residents and surrounding community. After extensive public outreach in its development, the concept plan line was approved in September 28, 2015. Status: This project will be constructed in three phases based on grant funding deadlines. The bid packages are being finalized, and Caltrans has approved the Authorization to Proceed with construction for Phase 1 and 2. Phase 1 and 2 are anticipated to go out to bid at the end of January 2018 and will need Council approval for the construction contract. Construction is expected to start in May 2018. Phase 3 will start construction in 2019. Byxbee Park (PE-18006): Summary: As envisioned by the original artist and landscape architect, the completion of Byxbee Park was to occur following capping of the remainder of the landfill (Phase 2C) and was to consist of a network of white oyster shell‐lined trails with wooden viewing platforms. Additionally, the parking lot for the park was to be expanded. In view of the significant improvements to Byxbee Park that have already occurred since the landfill closed, the scope of the project is being revisited during the development of the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Status: The Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan, which will include recommendations on the scope of the Byxbee Park project, is currently under development. On September 11, 2017, Council approved funding $400,000 of the project funds in the current fiscal year for urgent improvements and restoration work at the newly acquired Baylands International Telephone & Telegraph Transmitter site. California Avenue Parking Garage (PE-18000): Summary: The parking garage will be located across the street from the Public Safety Building on Parking Lot C-7 (350 Sherman Ave). It will replace and expand the existing approximately 300 surface parking stalls on lots C-6 and C-7. The new parking garage will have four levels of above ground and two basement levels providing approximately 636 spaces. The garage design and environmental impact analysis are proceeding concurrently with the Public Safety Building because they are considered one project under CEQA. Status: The project is in the schematic design phase. On January 8, 2018, the Draft Environmental Impact Report was released for a 45-day public comment period. The garage design is scheduled to be reviewed for a second time by the Architectural Review Board on January 18, 2018. The Final EIR will be presented to Council for certification in April or May 2018. Downtown Parking Garage (PE-15007): Summary: The project will construct a new parking garage at existing surface parking lot D located at 375 Hamilton Avenue, the northwest corner of Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street in the Downtown Business District. It is intended to supplement parking inventory as part of the City’s multi-pronged approach to addressing parking and traffic congestion. The new parking garage will have five levels of above ground and one basement level providing approximately 338 spaces with a ground floor retail area of approximately 2,200 SF. Status: The project is in the schematic design phase. A community meeting was held to gather public input on November 15, 2017. The Planning and Transportation Commission will hold a public hearing for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) in February 2018. The ARB hearing date for the formal application is targeted for February 15, 2018. Fire Station 3 Replacement (PE-15003): Summary: The new Fire Station 3 will replace the aging Fire Station 3 and will meet current California Building Codes (CBC), Essential Services Building Seismic Safety Act, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), National Fire Protection Association, and OSHA standards. Per City Council policy established in 2007, the building will be designed to attain LEED Silver Certification. A study in 2005 found “extensive structural, code, and operational deficiencies,” and recommended replacement or significant upgrade. Status: Construction of the new station officially began on January 8, 2018 and is scheduled to be completed in January 2019. Fire Station 3 has temporarily relocated to a facility at 2000 Geng Road. The crew co-locates with Fire Station 1 during daytime hours and resides at 2000 Geng Road in the evenings. Fire Station 4 Replacement (PE-18004): Summary: The new Fire Station 4 will replace the aging Fire Station 4 and will meet current California Building Codes, Essential Services Building Seismic Safety Act, American with Disabilities Act (ADA), National Fire Protection Association, and OSHA standards. Per City Council policy established in 2007, the building will be designed to attain LEED Silver Certification. A study in 2005 found “extensive structural, code, and operational deficiencies,” and recommended replacement or significant upgrade. Status: The design phase for the project is scheduled to begin in FY 2019. Attachment B: Local Construction Cost Escalation -8.00% -6.00% -4.00% -2.00% 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 (F) 2020 (F) 2021 (F) 2022 (F) BNBi % Change per Year -6.6% Great Recession $100 in 2008 $164 in 2022 Attachment C: Council Infrastructure Plan Budgeted Funding Sources St a n f o r d D e v e l o p m e n t F u n d Pa r k s I m p a c t F e e s Ch a r l e s t o n / A r a s t r a d e r o I m p a c t F e e s Pa r k i n g I n -Lie u F e e Ce r t i f i c a t e s o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n Gr a n t s Go o g l e C o n t r i b u t i o n Ca p i t a l F u n d ( i n c l . T O T ) Pr o j e c t T o t a l ( l e s s S & B ) Sa l a r y a n d B e n e f i t s ( B u d g e t e d + Ac t u a l s ) Pr o j e c t T o t a l ( i n c l . S $ B ) Public Safety Building $4.70 $52.25 $0.89 $56.95 $0.89 $57.84 California Avenue Garage $9.49 $0.49 $9.49 $0.49 $9.98 Fire Station No. 3 $6.00 $3.46 $8.73 $0.73 $9.46 Downtown Garage $9.07 $4.04 $0.56 $13.11 $0.56 $13.67 Fire Station No. 4 $7.50 $1.58 $5.57 $7.50 $0.39 $7.89 Highway 101 Bike Bridge $8.35 $1.00 $6.66 $14.00 $2.01 $16.01 Charleston/Arastradero Corridor $1.55 $0.84 $1.45 $7.95 $10.80 $0.98 $11.78 Bike/Pedestrian Plan $12.40 $0.20 $7.40 $20.00 $0.25 $20.25 Byxbee Park $2.80 $0.19 $2.80 $0.19 $2.99 Contingency Funding $30.00 $30.00 Total $34.47 $2.80 $0.84 $4.04 $93.32 $10.00 $1.00 $33.15 $173.38 $6.50 $179.88 *Values Stated in Millions FINANCE COMMITTEE FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 1 of 67 Regular Meeting February 6, 2018 Chairperson Scharff called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M. in the Community Meeting Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Filseth, Kou, Scharff (Chair), Tanaka Absent: Oral Communications Chair Scharff: All right. Do we have any oral communications? I’m seeing one member in the audience. No card? Agenda Items 1. Review the Draft Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study and Recommend That the City Council Consider Adoption of an Ordinance Based on Study Recommendations to Consolidate and Update the City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program as Anticipated in the City’s Comprehensive Plan Adopted on November 13, 2017. Chair Scharff: Alright, you want to go with the first item, which is Review the Draft Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study and Recommend That City Council Consider Adoption of an Ordinance Based on the Study’s Recommendations to Consolidate and Update the City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program as Anticipated in the City’s Comprehensive Plan Adopted on November 3, 2017. Hillary Gitelman, Director of Planning and Community Environment: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Happy New Year. I’m Hillary Gitelman, the Planning Director. I’m joined by Joshuah Mello, our Chief Transportation Official and Jane Clayton from Hexagon Consultants. Sherry Nikzat is also with us from our Staff. We’re here today to talk about this Nexus Study we’ve prepared in anticipation of updating the City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program. We thought we’d use a program similar to what we, or a process we used similar to when we updated the Housing Impact Fee. In that case we brought to the Finance Committee a Draft Nexus Study, got questions and comments. We went back and did some further work on it, came back to the Committee, and then got a FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 34 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 MOTION PASSED: 4-0 2. Discussion on Infrastructure Plan Projects, Anticipated Costs and Funding Levels, and Potential Direction on Next Steps Regarding Project Priorities, Timing and Potential Funding Options. Brad Eggleston, Assistant Director of Public Works: February 22 at the Council Meeting about the Infrastructure Plan and the funding challenges that we’re faced with. So, just kind of upfront, I’m going to review a few of the more pertinent slides from the January 22 presentation pretty quickly, and then turn it over to Kiely for some more of the presentation. So, this slide we looked at a couple of weeks ago shows the funding sources from the initial Infrastructure Plan with what we had in June of 2014, $136 million in funding sources there. Key thing to point out again is, there’s a range of sources, but about half of this is coming from the Transient Occupancy Tax, including the voter approval increase from 2014 that’s supporting the plan. And then this is the chart that shows kind of our current schedule of when design and construction on the nine Infrastructure Plan projects would occur. To reiterate again, that’s kind of under the assumption that all the funding for all the projects was in place, which is, of course, what we’re discussing. And I just point out that we may want to refer back to this chart as we have the discussion with the Committee to identify projects that are not in process yet, or early enough that we might consider them for deferring as part of the overall strategy. And then, this is where we looked at kind of the bottom line of where we think we stand right now in terms of what we have budgeted in the projects and our current estimates and shortfall. So, you’ll see kind of the bottom line there. We’re at about $180 million budgeted for the nine projects, but our current estimates are at about $235 million, which leads to that shortfall figure of $56 million. We pointed out in the report and at the bottom of this slide that there is about $5.7 million in other funding that’s been identified. They are from sources like parking in lieu funds that can support the projects. So, essentially the gap that we’re facing right now on the Infrastructure Plan is about $50 million, but then I would also point out again that we’re in the design process, working through the Architectural Review Board (ARB) review process on some of these big projects like the Cal Ave garage and Public Safety Building, and those are in flux and I do expect that we will likely see some more increase in estimates on those projects. Chair Scharff: I need to stop you there. Do you have a sense, are we talking a 15 percent increase kind of thing, 20 percent, are we talking? FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 35 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Eggleston: I think we’re talking more like 5 to 10 percent. Chair Scharff: Can you go through each of these projects and basically say, like Public Safety Building, you think that probably goes up 10 percent, or highway bike and bridge, you know, are we at 16.3 or do you think that’s… Mr. Eggleston: I would be happy to do that. Chair Scharff: I think that would be really helpful. Mr. Eggleston: Sure. So, the Public Safety Building, we’ve recently been to the ARB. We’ve got some significant changes to the design as a result of that and we’re working on an updated cost estimate right now. Chair Scharff: You do recall that we said you could come back to Council and override the ARB if we thought it was appropriate? Mr. Eggleston: I do recall, and we’re in the process just now of trying to assess the increases. That’s one that I would estimate could increase somewhere in the range of 5 to 10 percent, maybe less than 10 percent. (crosstalk) Chair Scharff: So, we’re talking about $4 to $10 million or $4 to $9 million? Mr. Eggleston: I’m just giving you a sense of (interrupted) Chair Scharff: No, no, I’m not going to hold you to it Brad. I’m not going to come back and say – I’m just trying to think if we’re going to start thinking about how much money we need to come up with, it’s good to have some sense. Mr. Eggleston: I understand. The bike/pedestrian bridge, I’m not anticipating increases to that project. The bike/pedestrian plan, we’re not expecting increases. Charleston/Arastradero Corridor, there may be a small increase to that project, probably less than $1 million, although that’s also first phase of that is out to bid, so very soon we’ll actually have some bid numbers to compare to estimates. Byxbee Park project, design on that hasn’t even begun yet and the scope is not clearly defined. The California Avenue parking garage, that’s another one where I would expect to see probably increases in the 5 to 10 percent range. Downtown parking garage, there’s no FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 36 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 updated design on that at this time, so there could be changes in the future, but I don’t think they would be very significant. Fire Station 3 replacement, that is the one project of these that we’re kind of locked in, assuming all goes well with our project that’s now under construction, we know the cost of that project at $8.6 million. Fire Station 4 replacement, we haven’t even begun design on this project yet, and that’s an old cost estimate number, so when that does eventually move forward it will probably be significantly higher. Chair Scharff: When you say significant higher, any sense? Mr. Eggleston: Well, let’s see, the Fire Station 3 and 4 estimates were initially compiled at the same time, and we went from $6.7 on Fire Station 3 to $8.6. Chair Scharff: So, another couple of million? Mr. Eggleston: So, probably another couple million. And the last column there is not a project, staff salaries and benefits. Chair Scharff: Alright, thanks. Vice Mayor Filseth: And the JMZ we just allocated another $3.5 million for last night, and that’s not part of… Kiely Nose, Budget Manager: We are getting there next, so good evening. Council Member Tanaka: Well, there’s also the Ranger Pipeline Project, right? Ms. Nose: I’m sorry? Council Member Tanaka: The Ranger Pipeline Project is, what $3 or $4 million over? Downtown. Lalo Perez, Chief Financial Officer: University Parking. So, there’s some General Fund component of it, but the majority of it is Enterprise Funds. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 37 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Ms. Nose: Okay, so good evening. I’m going to continue this presentation and actually layer on the questions the Committee is asking about. Those competing priorities that we’re all aware of. We’ve tried to summarize them for us here. So, first we obviously have what we’ve discussed at length, which is the forecasted $2.6 million gap that we will be making sure we balance towards in our Operating Budget in the General Fund. Additional operating funding needs that are coming up over the near term include labor agreements. So, the Committee is aware, we have probably about six contracts that need to be negotiated over the next twelve months. We have the unfunded liabilities that we want to address as an organization for both pension and retiree healthcare. We are in the negotiation stages with a number of service agreements, and so those may have operating costs and, obviously, coming to the Finance Committee next meeting will be further discussions about our parking programs and any enhancements to that on the operating side. On the capital funding side, as the Committee alluded to last night, the Council approved the Junior Museum and Zoo phase I, so that’s that initial $4 million additional cost. Now, there’s also the potential for phase II. You know, we have the animal shelter as an organization, whether or not we want to replace that or just renovate it. Westside fencing, the Parks Master Plan, probably in the $40 plus million range. The Cubberley Master Plan, we’re just working on developing right now as opposed to, we don’t necessarily know the future. We have a bunch of City-owned assets upcoming, Roth building and Avenidas. So, overall on this slide, in the next probably I would say one to three years, we have just by the ones that we can identify now, at least $20 million, right. If you look at JMZ, animal shelter, Westside fencing, Avenidas, and then you start to balloon out if you add in the Parks Master Plan and narrow down exactly the focus of that. Is it the 7.7 acres over at Foothill, is it the 10.5 acres at Baylands, etc. You start ballooning out into much, much larger numbers. So, now that we’ve given you all the problems, let’s look at some of the potential options. So, this is a review again from January, when we discussed the Infrastructure Plan, so obviously we can look at reprioritizing projects, both within the Infrastructure Plan as well as other programmed capital projects. We will continue to look at new revenues, so we’ve talked about new hotels that are coming on line and that can generate additional tax revenues that we could also leverage from a debt perspective. Or we could also look at tax increases. One example is Transient Occupancy Tac (TOT), an increase in that. So, for example, there is a rate, 1 percent is about $1.7 million. Infrastructure specific plan options that we reviewed, again, as a Council and Committee, just to refresh your memory. The $5.7 that Brad already alluded to is very project-specific funding, so Impact Fees or in-lieu fees, I’m sorry, and SB1 funding. Obviously, we could defer projects. So, if we look at those FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 38 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 projects that are not yet under way, for example, Fire Station 4. Those two new hotels, the Marriott Hotels, with the estimated TOT from them, the additional capacity for debt issuance, assuming 70 percent of TOT, is 35 million on top of the TOT base of the $3.6 that the hotels would generate. Obviously, we can look at draining the reserves in the General Capital Fund. Chair Scharff: Did you just say, do we get the $3.6 on an ongoing basis, and the $35 million? Ms. Nose: You would get the $3.6 on an ongoing basis. That would be your TOT receipts, but then you could also issue an additional $35 million in debt. Chair Scharff: But you still get the $3.6 and $36 million? Ms. Nose: Correct. Chair Scharff: That’s the part that’s confusing me. (crosstalk) I thought you get the $3.6 to pay the $35. Ms. Nose: In the long term, yes. Chair Scharff: So, you don’t get the $3.6? You pay off the $35 million with the $3.6. Mr. Perez: We would get the $3.6 and we would use 70 percent of that amount. Chair Scharff: We get 30 percent of the $3.6? Mr. Perez: Yes. Vice Mayor Filseth: Can I ask a question on that? So, your sort of multiplier here, if I have a dollar then I can finance $10 worth of Capital Expenses. For our good friends to the south, Measure B, the grade separation, they’re using a multiplier of like 25 or 30, okay. What’s the difference? Okay, we’re looking at 30 years and you might be looking at 10 or something like that. Mr. Perez: I’m sorry. Try it again. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 39 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Vice Mayor Filseth: All the financial estimates that I saw on, particularly the grade separation, County-wide and so forth, suggested that they looked at that and said, “If I have a dollar of revenue per year, then I can finance $25 or $30 of capital expenditures as opposed to 10. Why are they using different numbers than we are? Mr. Perez: So, it depends on credit rating, credit rate assumption. (crosstalk) And the amount of leverage they use. So, we’re being conservative at 70 percent. So, somebody could argue that, you know, maybe we could go 80 or 85. James Keene, City Manager: Or 150 percent. Mr. Perez: So… Vice Mayor Filseth: I saw a reference somewhere to 10 years’ worth of horizon on it too. Is that an element to that? We’re looking at 10 and they’re looking at 30, or something like that? Mr. Perez: So, those are, you know, that’s another variable on the amount of time that we’re looking at. Chair Scharff: What are you looking at for this $35? Mr. Perez: For this $35 it would be a 20 year. Chair Scharff: So, it’s 20 years? And if you went 30 years? Mr. Perez: It’s a bigger number. Chair Scharff: It’s a bigger number. So, maybe they’re doing 30 years. Mr. Keene: And our ratio is more like 1 to 14, right? Mr. Perez: That’s correct. Vice Mayor Filseth: Oh, because you get 7 percent on it? FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 40 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Perez: So, you know, and we believe that that’s prudent, at least from my perspective, because if you do have a downturn, then you’re not counting on the operating in front to pick it up. Ms. Nose: Okay, so I think moving on, kind of just providing a list to the Committee of other financial options in terms of raising revenues, there’s a list of potential ballot measures we can explore and discuss further, in terms of estimates, options, timing, etc. And so, we have obviously property tax increase, and to that would be a bond issuance. You could do a parcel tax. You could increase TOT’s as we previously discussed. Documentary transfer tax, we could increase that rate. Utility Users Tax, we modernized it. You will recall that the Council approved a reduction in the rate. We’ve broadened the base, but also reduced the rate. Business license tax, the City does not have. And then we can also continue to increase sales tax, up to our cap. There is a cap that we are, as a local agency, able to hit. Mr. Keene: How much is left in there? I mean, is it 0.25 or is it? Ms. Nose: I want to say it’s about a quarter percent that we have left in capacity. And then this concludes our presentation, but ultimately, I think the goal with the Committee tonight is to discuss all of these priorities, hear your thoughts and feedback and, oh, I have another slide. Next steps. So, tonight we’re going to discuss and prioritize the Committee’s feedback, both of the funding options as well as on the expense side, the projects, the draw so to speak. We hope to return back to the Committee in March to review potential funding strategies, let us do our homework and come back to you guys more educated. Sometime in April continue to work on infrastructure. We also know we need to come back to the Committee on pensions, a new policy surrounding that. We will have hearings in May with the Committee to go over the FY19 City Manager proposed budget. And then we still have June to have City Council actions. Obviously, we will have budgeted option then, but any other further actions that we need to take. So, this is obviously a very high-level timeline. We’re open to feedback and conversation, depending on where this discussion goes. With that I will turn it back to the Chair. Chair Scharff: So, I see it as there are really two buckets here. There’s the bucket of infrastructure projects that we’ve been talking about and that we’ve told the voters we would do. We’re talking about finishing the Public Safety Building, the garages, the bike bridge, the fire station and some pedestrian and bicycle improvements, which we’ve already done some of the FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 41 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 pedestrian and bicycle improvements. And, I don’t have the numbers in front of me. It actually would have been helpful, but our shortfall… Mr. Keene: It’s $56 million right now in the Infrastructure Plan. Chair Scharff: So, wait, I think it’s $56 million, but I think we need to be, I think we should add 15 percent to that. I was listening to Brad and most of his things were 5 to 10 percent, and it’s probably prudent to have another 5 percent in there for some of that stuff. I don’t know if you think that. I mean, if we’re going to start talking about which numbers to figure out how to solve, you don’t want to solve for $56 million and then be short another, you know, $9 million on the Public Safety Building, $1 million, that’s 10. You start adding it up and it starts to really come up. So, you know, if you’re at $56 million and you add 15 percent, what would you be at? Seventy million, right? So, that’s my sense of what we should think about raising for that bucket. And, you know, when I say raising, the other thing we can do is we can look at deferring. I mean, there are those other things. But I think it’s a $70 million shortfall, and you know, the Byxbee Park thing, I’m really concerned about that number. I think it would be great if you could give us a better number on that, and I don’t know how easy it is to do, but that was done a long time ago too, and everything else went up 50 percent, so? Mr. Eggleston: Can I say a couple of quick things about that? One is that that was based on an overall concept for the park and now a lot of work has been done, kind of as part of the closure of the landfill. I think the Council has even seen some presentations and photos of things that look really nice. Ultimately, the work that gets done out there could be, could cost significantly less than this $2.8 million. But the one other thing I would like to say is, it’s completely funded through Parks Development Impact Fees, so it’s not really fungible with the rest of this plan and the issues we face. Chair Scharff: Okay, that’s good to know. So, we really don’t have to worry about that. Mr. Eggleston: I would agree with that. Mr. Keene: So, I think there’s two – I mean, if you were to say $70 million is the number, you’ve run that $70 million on the entire base of the projects that are in there. If you did choose to defer some projects, you may want to decide whether or not you deduct them and then run that percentage, or just stay overall with the $70 million. That being said, Kiely even identified FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 42 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 some of the near known other issues that are out there, animal shelter, the JMZ, that’s another $20 million. Chair Scharff: I was going to say, I view this as solving one problem. And then I do think we have to decide as a Committee, and we have a great opportunity, frankly, to say, okay, we have the animal shelter, we have the History Museum, we have the second phase of JMZ. There’s a whole bunch of buckets, and what I would like to see staff do is put those buckets together with numbers, and we can think about how to fund these things separately, and if we want to fund them. I mean, that’s really the nexus. And I think we should think about some of the Parks Master Plan and stuff. If we do go to the voters, you know, last time we did this, what we did is we had staff poll. What we should do, we put different things together. We said, if we mix fire stations with, fire stations were popular, bike and pedestrian improvements were popular. History Museum was very unpopular. Parking garages were like at 50 percent of the people said they would vote for it. You know, so, there were different things that were more popular and when you put these things together in different buckets when you went to the voters, you got different poll results, frankly. And so, and different taxes. TOT taxes are wildly popular in Palo Alto, it passed at 78 percent. You are very likely to pass that. Other taxes, you know, were less popular and some of the taxes, like bond measures, require two-thirds majority. So, what I think we need them to do is to come back to us with getting some polling people to talk to us about how polling works, how we create a measure, how we look at that, look at what kind of taxes. And, I think we all have to agree that there are really only two ways to fund the infrastructure. We need to, we’re going to need to put a measure on the ballot if we’re going to fund this. Otherwise, I don’t’ see how we get to $70 million frankly, to do it. Now, on the $70 million, we could say that the Marriott Hotels, that would take off 35 of that, right? At which point you need to raise about $35 million, which seems a lot more manageable than $70 million. So, I don’t know if, I mean, that’s something we can discuss, but that’s an obviously easy way to say, and when we talked about the Infrastructure Plan, we did talk about new hotels would go to the Infrastructure Plan. And so, I think that’s really a no brainer to say, let’s make the Marriott Hotels fund the infrastructure. That gives us 35 million, and then we basically need to close the other $35 million. We can talk about if we want to cut stuff. We can talk about what we should go to the voters for, what that should look like, and how much money we should raise. And then I think we should talk about a separate measure, frankly, to fund – and we could mix and match the two, if we wanted to and we might decide to do that as a Committee, to fund the other amount of money on a different measure that does it. Because some of those things FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 43 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 could be more popular, but we’re going to have to figure out from polling what’s popular and what’s not popular. I mean, I have a gut sense of it, but I could be wrong. Things could have changed. I’m basing it on what we polled the last time we did the infrastructure stuff. So, anyway, with that I’ll turn it over to Jim. Mr. Keene: Thank you. A couple of comments. From the Staff point of view, I think it’s pretty clear that the Council has given us a directive as it relates to this core Infrastructure Plan. That’s sort of a policy direction that we have. And, you know, we would generally be focused on how to accomplish that, or accomplish as much of it as we possibly can with available funding sources. On that second bunch of items, while clearly we can see that there is a need, I think those do need some, those really need the direction from the Committee and the Council at this stage to say, you know, we’re really interested in this. We want you to look at how you can, how we include it. For example, last night you essentially gave us that direction on the JMZ as it relates to closing the gap. So, the consideration of how to come up with that $4 million gap, that would be something that we could be working on with the Committee. But things like the animal shelter, what to do, I think those are some directives we would want to get from you all to say, do we want to consider including those as near-term projects, and if so, how would we also sort of poll the community and whatever to see whether or not there are, whether there is an appetite for funding or supporting those. There would probably be a few other of these items. Kiely, I don’t know if we can put the schedule up that we had, the simple schedule for the ones. A couple of items like the JMZ that will naturally be progressing and come forward; for example, the Avenidas Project, we’re coming back to the Council in March and we will have some suggestions as to how you could fund that $5 million gap. But for the most part, I do think that the Committee, the reason I asked for that schedule is, by the time we get into this March 2018 period, how do we start to assess what the possible package is, which means us, as the Chair said, working with the pollsters that we’ve used to sort of assess what the possibilities for those things are. And then that being said, I just would say, if there is any ballot measure item that the Council ends up recommending, they really need to do that by the end of June, when you go on recess, because pretty much the first week in August we would have to have everything ready for the election cycle to be able to meet the 2018 ballot. So, I do think in the next two months, clearly you need to at least say, here’s the universe of projects that we think are worthwhile and viable. Here’s the approximate scope of the costs. And then look at how we would test how to fund some things. I do think that there is, we should still expect that we should be focusing on value engineering these projects still as much FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 44 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 as we can, without undermining them. And, being open to considering to deferring some projects and just saying maybe it’s not the time to do those. I mean, I made the point repeatedly that I think Fire Station 4 could be deferred, and we certainly have a lot of challenges right now with Charleston/Arastradero, even where the funding is. You know, those may be other things that you want to be thinking about too. We did run, we did get some data from the, during the Rail Committee process on a range of different yields on different revenue sources that we could also provide the Committee, but I would say in a general sense, just even seeing what you saw with TOT and that sort of thing, and what these numbers are, if you leave things like Cubberley and the Parks Master Plan, or something which could be really, I mean, depending upon the scale, could be really big expenditures. I mean, I’m just making it up. They could each be over $50 million. I mean, depending upon the scale of them over time. But if you don’t, and we’re not really ready to deal with Cubberley, if you look at most of the rest of these things and the gap that you have in the main Infrastructure Plan, to me those seem achievable by different combinations of revenues, to be able to maintain our course on that. We’ll have to see ultimately where the community would be. My thoughts. Chair Scharff: I agree with all of those thoughts. Comments, questions? Vice Mayor Filseth: I was going to ask about the Charleston/Arastradero Plan, but I think you touched on it. Chair Scharff: Alright. Comments, questions? Council Member Tanaka: So, one question I have is, from like the long-range forecast, aren’t you already including in the Marriott numbers as future revenue, to make sure that we are able to balance our budgets in those future years? Ms. Nose: We have not included these two hotels specifically. Council Member Tanaka: So, on the long-range financial forecast, there is no money at all? Ms. Nose: Not associated with these two new. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 45 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Council Member Tanaka: Okay. Because I’m just trying to make sure that we’re not double counting. Ms. Nose: You and me both, thank you. Chair Scharff: That’s a great question. Council Member Tanaka: Okay. And then, what about the grade separations? Like funding that? Chair Scharff: So, I’ll answer that since I’m on the Rail Committee. Well, you were on the Rail Committee. You can answer it too. (crosstalk) So, where we are on grade separations is, we’re talking about ballot measures for this year. I do not believe that they were even close to coming up with a ballot measure for grade separations. We’re going to have to choose a preferred alternative. We’re not going to do that before, until at least the end of the year, and I think that’s aggressive. If we can choose a preferred alternative on Rail by the end of the year, I think we’d have done a great job this year and be good. And once we have the preferred alternative, then you move into the phase of how we fund it, because then you could start to figure out how much money are we talking about. And right now, the different alternatives range from let’s say over a billion dollars for what I call the mini-trench down in Charleston and Meadow to, you know, $4 billion if you did a full tunnel. So, something along those ranges. So, the point is that I don’t believe that in this Committee or now is really the time to worry about how to spend that. That’s probably a different election cycle, once we know what we want to do. Mr. Keene: I can just say one thing from many, many years of experience in going to the ballot, and I’m sure that any of the consultants, if we bring FM3, who is sort of our go-to firm, would tell you that it’s generally really hard to get a successful vote if you don’t have a clearly identified project and purpose and be able to really explain how it’s going to be used and what the benefits are. So, we really have got to work through the winnowing down process in the Rail Committee on the grade separation issue. And even though there are huge demands for meeting a construction schedule in the 2020 decade, I think that when we discuss this with the Rail Committee, it will be pretty clear that there’s not an urgency for us to have revenues available before 2020 anyway. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 46 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Chair Scharff: You know, and I think we should address Cubberley upfront too. I also don’t believe we should talk about Cubberley in terms of this. I think Cubberley we have the same issue. We do not yet have a plan with the school district or how we want to spend the money, and so, I think that’s beyond the scope of this. Mr. Perez: Just to remind you, the lease is up in 2020, so we still need to negotiate even that piece before we get to the Master Plan. Chair Scharff: Now in the Parks and Rec Master Plan, I actually think there are elements of the Park Master Plan that we should possibly think about funding. I mean, we have the ten acres, frankly, you know. Every time we delay on that, a generation of children are not getting to use that ten acres. So, I mean, I do think that we should think about some of those things. I’m not sure, I would actually like to see Rob and it’s what, Kristen, working with the Parks and Rec Committee, starting to put together a list of projects that they believe are well defined, clearly articulated, you know, that we could think about funding. Mr. Keene: I’m sure they would enjoy that. Council Member Kou: So, the $56 million, it takes into account all the grants that is mentioned here for each of the projects? Ms. Nose: That’s correct. Chair Scharff: So, the other thing we might want to do, and I got this from Council Member Filseth, or Vice Mayor Filseth, was, there is certain opportunities to buy park land, and we don’t have enough park land, right? There was that seven acres or? Vice Mayor Filseth: There’s the one acre AT&T. Chair Scharff: Right, the one acre AT&T Park I was thinking of, and it might be nice if we had a fund where we had money to buy that. Because I know a lot of people want to buy that site. So, I don’t know where we are as a City in thinking about the ability to buy that. But it’s something like those kinds of things, we should, when Staff puts together a list of projects, we should think about the things that people have really talked about that they want. And I know that AT&T site has come up many times. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 47 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Perez: We’re monitoring that situation. They have put forward their realignment of the lot, and it’s going through that process. It’s not final. Just to remind you what they told us is that they expect a competitive process. What we asked is that since we’re are a public agency, that they try to give us some heads up so we can react accordingly. Chair Scharff: We also have the power of Eminent Domaine, and I think the power of Eminent Domaine for parks and something like that, is absolutely something we should consider. Mr. Perez: In terms of funding, not to get too specific with this one, but some of the things that I think Staff would recommend to you is to look at some of your stranded assets. You have a couple of lots in Middle Field that are not being utilized. They are in a residential area, that you could consider selling to purchase park land, so, for example. Chair Scharff: That might be smart. Council Member Kou: So, I remember Santa Clara’s Supervisor (not understood). They had a fund for Magical Bridge, if you were going to do a park like Magical Bridge. Would that be something that we might, I mean, is there funds still available? Would we be able to use that and get a grant for that parcel that you were mentioning? Mr. Perez: Let us follow up. I did read that there was an appropriation specifically set up, but I don’t know what the criteria is for those particular uses, but it’s related to the concept of the Magical Bridge. So, let us look into it and see what that criteria are and see if we would be able to participate in that process. Council Member Kou: That would be super. Chair Scharff: So, I think in terms of next steps, Staff, for March, when you come back in March, are you coming back with a polling firm or is that too early to do that? To start to explain what they want to do? Mr. Keene: I think we could do that. I mean, it’s for your direction. I can tell you that we don’t need Council authorization to engage with a polling firm. I mean, the cost of that is within the authority of the City Manager’s contracting authority, and that’s typically the way we’ve done it in the past. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 48 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 So, we would be good to get your, even your direction that you’re interested in us doing that for sure, and we could be ready to have them come back and talk to you about the process. I mean, some of you are familiar with working with these firms. Some of you will be new, but I think it will be interesting and educational, and they will be able to give you a lot of perspective, not only on what it takes for things to be successful, but what’s the general mood of the electorate, how do things work in a general election that’s a non-presidential election. To what extent do you have to be concerned about ballot fatigue or whatever and all of those kinds of things. Vice Mayor Filseth: I would be comfortable giving Staff a nod on that one now. Chair Scharff: I would too. So, let’s talk about it overall and see if we can come to an agreement on what we should do. Staff should come back with a polling firm. You’ve got the direction on that if we’re all in agreement. I don’t know, are we all in agreement? Council Member Tanaka: I have some comments. Are we doing questions or comments? Chair Scharff: You can do either. Go ahead. Council Member Tanaka: I thought about what the City Manager said in terms of the need to value engineer and prioritize, and I think before we go out and ask our citizens for more taxes, I think we owe it to ourselves to really make sure that we have really thought hard about these projects and prioritize them, that we value engineer the heck out of them, before we ask people to open up their pocketbooks, because the feeling I have is that a lot of people already feel like they pay a lot of taxes, right? If you look at the property tax bill, their like, wow, this is a lot of money. And, you know, I feel also that I’m not necessarily sure that the City is as optimal as it could be in terms of getting bids and getting contracts, so I think we need to get a better handle on that before I would be in favor of increasing our taxes. Oh, one other question I just thought of, which is, so where was the Marriott money allocated to before? Where did you put it? Ms. Nose: For the new hotels? Council Member Tanaka: Yeah. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 49 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Ms. Nose: We didn’t include it. Council Member Tanaka: Anywhere. Ms. Nose: No. Mr. Keene: It doesn’t exist yet. Ms. Nose: It’s not alive yet. Chair Scharff: Okay. I agree with Council Member Tanaka in that we need to really look hard at value engineering, look hard at making sure that we are doing the best we can on that kind of stuff. I think we all would probably believe that. Council Member Kou. Council Member Kou: Just another thing. You know, on Table 3, I believe, I was wondering if there was any way to add another column in there to show what the grants are, so that we know how much actually, you know, updated conceptual over here for the Public Safety, but, well, that one is not a good one because it doesn’t have grants. Charleston/Arastradero, for example. I understand 4 million is what we have to come up with, or is that the gap? Mr. Eggleston: I don’t believe that Table 3 is not trying to show what the current gap is. Unless I’ve got the tables mixed up. (crosstalk) I think that would be Table 5. Council Member Kou: Okay. I’m not specifically talking about the gap, but more, just basically more columns to show, okay, if the whole cost is 10 million, then what is our portion and what is the grant portion? Mr. Eggleston: I understand. Vice Mayor Filseth: Can I try to rephrase this to explain it? Because I think it’s a really good question, which is, you know, we’re looking at these and we’re going to say, Gee, if we push this one out a few years we would save this much money. But I think what Council Member Kou is asking is, is that really true, because some of these things may have money earmarked for them that’s not fungible to other things. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 50 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Eggleston: So, like a great example would be the Highway 101 bike/pedestrian bridge, where we’re saying it’s a $16.3 million project, but we have $8.35 million in grants and a $1 million currently from Google supporting that. Vice Mayor Filseth: So, you couldn’t just free up $16 million by saying, you know, we’re going to do that in 2023. Council Member Kou: It kind of will help, you know, when we’re looking through this, so we know exactly the funds that we have to show (crosstalk) if we could have that. And then also, another thing I was looking at, on the Packet Page 62. I mean, it’s great that you have all the design steps. So, is there any way that you would be able to kind of provide an average from conceptual design to actually awarding the contract? What is the average delta that you see at these projects, and if you might be able to also add it in so we can kind of factor it in when we’re reading all of this in the table. I don’t know if that’s too much. I mean, you know, an average, because obviously we see that from when in 2012 you guys decided, when we decided on the project a lot has changed in the pricing. As a matter of fact, as I was looking at the infrastructure costs, it was like a lot of them were half more than it was back then. Mr. Eggleston: That’s right. And so, is what you’re looking for where we get from conceptual at the beginning, like all the way to the end, where we have that? Council Member Kou: To when we award the contract to whichever contractor we’re going to be using. Is that possible to get that? Mr. Eggleston: We can do that. Are you thinking just for these projects? Because we can do that. The issue right now is that only one of them is so far at the point where we think we have the final costs. The Fire Station 3 Project that I was mentioning. Council Member Kou: The reason I asked for that, even the ones that haven’t, you know, does not have the actual costs, if you could include that number in there, then we can see far down the line what it increases to. Does that make sense? FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 51 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Ms. Nose: I think I understand what you’re saying. What I think you’re actually seeing is also just an evolution of Staff’s ability to forecast these costs. Council Member Kou: And the rising costs. Ms. Nose: Right. And they have become, to Brad and his team’s credit, have become more sophisticated in projecting these costs and not, you know, he’s able to give us those estimates of, these are the costs for every month that’s going to compound if it delays. And so, I guess, what I’m trying to say is, naturally you shouldn’t see that significant of a change across this process to the extent your scope stays the same, and you built in the right contingencies from the get go. And I think as a whole and the timing, right? So, the inflation costs. As a whole the PW Team is working on has done a really good job of revising how they do this. So, these new costs are looking at not only just current-day estimates, but when it’s going to happen, the rise in inflation costs between now and when the project is going to happen. Council Member Kou: So, it’s already been looked at, it’s factored in? Ms. Nose: We’re actively looking at it I would say. I don’t want to say that it’s perfect, because when this chart gets completed on every one of these projects, and the costs continue to escalate from today all the way through, I want to be on record saying that they won’t. But I do think that the PW Team as a whole is becoming much more sophisticated as they’re working their way through these projects, so that Council has a much better idea of the estimated costs of them across the forecasted period. Council Member Kou: Thank you. Council Member Tanaka: So, I was just looking at slide 4 again, and Council Member Kou kind of made me think about this. So, we have Staff salary and benefits at $6.5 million, correct? Ms. Nose: Correct. Council Member Tanaka: Is that allocated across all the projects above there, or is there a Staff salary and benefits in some of these other numbers? FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 52 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Ms. Nose: I’ll look for it. Mr. Eggleston: It’s allocated throughout all the projects. Council Member Tanaka: But we have this additional $6.5 here as well? Mr. Eggleston: No, the $6.5 is, essentially, if you were to go to the Budget Document, you would see numbers that are different than what we show you and currently budgeted because they would include the Staff salaries and benefits. But to make it easier to actually compare these figures to the original Infrastructure Plan figures from 2014, which did not include Staff salaries and benefits, we’ve shown it this way. So, you’re able to compare the current estimate to the original estimate, but still see on the bottom line what the total Staff salaries and benefits figure is. Council Member Tanaka: I see. Do you know what is the percentage of the Staff salaries and benefits is for each project? Because I wonder like for projects like the 101 bike bridge, which has been going on for a long time, that might have like a very significant chunk of Staff costs, versus some other ones might be very little. Mr. Eggleston: We could show that, and I agree with you, it does vary widely. So, for instance, on a project like Fire Station 3, we add funding, we went through the design process, and here we are, it’s under construction. I don’t think we’ve spent that much on salaries and benefits. On the Bike Bridge Project it’s had starts and stops and a lot of time invested in the design competition, and it has a much higher salaries and benefits figure. Mr. Keene: Just so we’re clear, this is, these are budget plans for the projects, which include projected costs for the project, for the remainder of the project and it would also include costs that have already been paid to a project to the extent you have had Staff already working on it. So, it is designed to be the total cost of the Staff time allocated to this set of projects essentially from beginning to completion. Chair Scharff: So, do you want to follow up on that? You look like you do. Vice Mayor Filseth: I do, but I’m waiting to see… FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 53 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Council Member Tanaka: So, just to be clear, (crosstalk). So, just to be clear, the $6.5 is all the Staff cost that has ever been incurred, and ever will be incurred for these projects? Is that the way to think about that? Mr. Perez: But it wouldn’t be an obsolete number because it could change. I think (crosstalk) Right. You know, if for example you ask us to redesign something, then we would have to add additional. Council Member Tanaka: I understand that. I mean for at least the foreseeable future it’s $6.5. That’s been all the costs so far and all the costs it would be in the future, assuming nothing else changes. Mr. Keene: That’s correct. Council Member Tanaka: But what’s missing here is that we don’t know that maybe some projects like the bridge might be, like a huge percentage, and some other ones like the fire station, might be a small percentage, right? Ms. Nose: Correct. Council Member Tanaka: When could you guys provide the percentages? Chair Scharff: Yeah, I’d like to see that too. Also, I’m really curious on some of this, on the Staff costs. So, let’s say the Charleston/Arastradero Project has been around, I think, since I was born. So, there must be a ton of Staff time that’s gone into that back and forth. If we decide not to do that, what happens to those Staff costs? Mr. Eggleston: Those would become a sunk cost. Mr. Keene: We would be booking those costs against those projects when we close them out. Chair Scharff: But, how does that work? Because there’s no money then. So, we say we’re saving, so we say you have $3 million, I’m making it up obviously, in Charleston/Arastradero and we decide not to do it. And then we say, okay, we’ve now saved $15 million off our Infrastructure Plan, but you’ve already spent that. You’ve paid those salaries. You’ve done all of that, so what happens to the $6.5 million? I’ve always thought this was on a FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 54 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 going-forward basis of Staff costs, not a looking back, because who do we pay back? The General Fund suddenly gets the money back? Mr. Eggleston: It’s not just the salaries and benefits. These figures are not just looking forward. They include all of the soft costs like design services, that have already been incurred on the projects. Chair Scharff: So, if we’ve incurred money on the projects, I mean, I guess I’d like to look and see what we still need to incur. Because that’s what we have to raise. If we’ve spent the money, we spent the money. And I don’t understand who we pay back by putting it in here? I guess that’s what I’m trying to understand. Mr. Keene: So, one of the things is the budgeted versus current estimates is just the Budget Plan and estimates. It’s not an accounting for what we’ve spent. We don’t have a column in here that would say, Expenses To Date, in each one of these projects, which we also do have. The fact is, I mean, we do not account to the quarter of an hour of Staff time on every project. We basically use a general kind of cost allocation model. (crosstalk) Well, and that degree of extra accounting has its own cost to it that compounds all of the pricing. Chair Scharff: Ask Terence. I bet he’s older than he looks. Mr. Eggleston: Can I make one more point on the salaries and benefits issue is just that what the question about salaries and benefits in each project, if you look at Attachment C to the Staff Report, we’ve actually provided a table that does show that project by project. Chair Scharff: That’s C, right? Mr. Eggleston: I think it’s the very last page of the report. Chair Scharff: Why does yours look more useful? Mine is small. Mr. Eggleston: I am looking at the printout of the report from January 22, so maybe there was a mistake in the printing. Chair Scharff: The reason I was going there was all I wanted to know was, how much more money do we need? FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 55 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Eggleston: Are you asking, Chair, specifically about that project right now, or just when we come back you would like to have that? Chair Scharff: I’d like to know how much money we need. Mr. Eggleston: Another way of saying that would be, how much do we save if we removed a project or deferred it? Mr. Perez: Just a little background. We used to have all the salary and benefits charged to one Capital Project and not allocated to projects, but maybe six years ago, Finance Committee said, no, we’d like to see the allocation at least for the current projects, so that’s how this originated. Mr. Keene: Just so we’re clear, these are the direct costs for the projects. We don’t do allocated overhead charges. So, for example, the fact that we’re all in here sitting with you guys, talking about this right now, we’re not billing our time to the project. It’s not part of it. Chair Scharff: Alright, any questions? Mr. Keene: We keep a running tally of our allocated charges, but we don’t actually book. Chair Scharff: So, I think the other thing I think we just wanted to briefly, I wanted to briefly talk about is, you have a list of different ballot measure options here. I’m not sure this is the meeting where we bring that down, but I think, for instance, for the Infrastructure Plan and for the other, and for what I would call the Community Projects, the Business License Tax is probably not the right one. We’ve been talking about using a Business License Tax to fund transportation at some point, and so I’m not sure that’s the right one, but, we can obviously talk about it. I’m not sure the Sales Tax increase is the right one either for those two things. And the reason I say that is that the sooner we narrow down these, the easier it is to have the polling, to have all of that. So, I don’t think we should have Staff spend a lot of time on ones that the Committee, the four of us, are not interested in, looking at, for those two measures. Not to say that we wouldn’t use these for other things, but that’s – I mean for parks and for a lot of the community stuff, Property Tax may make sense. Parcel Tax may make sense. I don’t know. I do think our Documentary Transfer Tax is low compared to other cities. I know I’ve seen stuff like that. I’m not necessarily advocating for that either, but I mean, I think Staff should come back, look at these and make FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 56 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 some suggestions when they come back to us in March about that, and we as a Committee could think about what we want to do. But I don’t think we want to go through every single possible tax and have Staff spend the time and effort to do that, if we’re not going to do that. Utility Users’ Tax, for instance, we just went to the voters on that. I don’t know, it seems a reach to ask the voters again now to raise that, but I could be wrong. This is sort of a gut sense, but I do think we need to think about that and make that decision fairly quickly. Vice Mayor Filseth: Well, the fundamental issue behind the $50, $60, $70 million gap, construction costs are going up in the Bay Area. I mean, it’s getting more and more expensive to live here, as the area generates more wealth and more people come here, but the amount of land remains the same. So, in my mind, we’re all as a community just going to have to accept it’s going to cost us more to get these kinds of things. So, whether it’s, I mean, I think you raise an interesting point for thought as to which kinds of revenue and so forth. But, at some level we have to have the expectation that if we want these kinds of things, then we’re going to have to pay more for them because of the dynamics and the boom in the Silicon Valley, and so at some level that’s going to affect whether it’s a business tax or a sales tax or a parcel tax or, you know, a hotel tax or whatever. A Utility Users’ Tax, even though we went out to them last year for a Utility Users’ Tax, that’s the way it is, right? Chair Scharff: Right. My point was more that I think we should take the time when we leave here, I wanted to focus people that these are the different taxes. We should come to a discussion, I don’t think we should make a decision tonight, obviously. I’m saying we should think about it. I wanted to focus everyone that these were what Staff was thinking of in different taxes, and we should have that discussion. Vice Mayor Filseth: You’ve asked a question that I’m going to go think about, which is, we’re used to thinking about this as, okay, well, how would we fund this and so forth. Well, the other end of that is, well, this kind of lever and that kind of lever, what’s the appropriate uses for those kinds of levers? I haven’t thought about that, and I’m going to go think about that. Chair Scharff: And it’s also, there’s a practical aspect to it of different taxes are received differently by the voters, and at the end of the day, we have to get 51 percent for some taxes and two-thirds for other taxes, you know, and FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 57 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 that plays a big role in it, because you’ve got to win. Otherwise, you get nothing. Council Member Kou: So, which ones are the 51 and which ones are the two-thirds? Mr. Perez: As long as they’re general. Chair Scharff: I believe as long as they’re general, right? Mr. Perez: You get a simple majority. Chair Scharff: But not on a bond. You can’t do a simple majority bond, can you? I though bonds were always two-thirds. Mr. Perez: GO’s two-thirds. Mr. Keene: So, they are two-thirds on the bonds, Property Tax typically, or the Parcel Tax. Chair Scharff: So, Parcel Tax and Property Tax are typically two-thirds, right? Mr. Keene: Yeah. Chair Scharff: That’s what I thought. Mr. Keene: All the others for the most part are, if we use it for general purpose as opposed to a specific purpose, it’s 50 percent. However, if we were to just, for example say, we wanted to go out for a tax to fund the Public Safety Building just in and of itself, that would be for a special purpose. That would need a two-thirds. Chair Scharff: But we would never do that. What we would say is, here’s the advisory measure. This is what we’re going to spend it on. That’s what we’ve always done. And I don’t think, I would say I don’t want to spend any time on this Committee saying that we should go out for a two-thirds tax when we can put in a 50 percent tax by simply having an advisory measure. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 58 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Keene: And those are things, when we bring in our consultants who can kind of give you a lot of texture and details on how all of these things work and what the pros and cons of them are and if you want a particular way, what’s the best way to structure it to be effective. Chair Scharff: Do you guys feel like you have enough direction from us, or do you need more direction? Mr. Keene: I would say one thing. I do agree with Council Member Tanaka’s comments that it’s important that we kind of pursue all options. I would also say, though, that we can’t do this in an entirely linear process. We have to do some parallel work, and then it doesn’t mean you make a decision by us doing this work. We’re going to get at some point down the road, and then you will maybe have enough convergence between value engineering, potential realignment of priorities and what the revenue streams are to be able to make that decision. But, we would need to pursue gathering data on sort of what the public response would be to projects and all of those things in polling concurrent with, as we’re working on value engineering, some of t hose other things. Because some of the projects just aren’t far enough along for us to maximize what we would do in value engineering for example. Mr. Perez: I think the only clarity that might help us is on the ballot measure option, if there’s an item there that you definitely don’t want us to pursue, it would save us time. Because we’re trying to work on the budget as well, at the same time. Chair Scharff: Correct, and I think we can make that decision in March. I didn’t want to force people to try to make that decision tonight. Mr. Perez: Fair enough. Chair Scharff: I do think you need to come back to us a little bit, with a little bit of information. I’m not sure if everyone has information. Like I’d like to know where we are compared to other cities, and are other cities going out on Documentary Transfer Taxes recently? I want Staff to think a little bit about this. I mean, Utility Users’ Tax, is this a good time to go out for that? And maybe it’s just a polling question. What are we likely to win on? What are we likely to get to get this stuff passed on? Mr. Perez: We can provide you that. We’ve done some preliminary research, for example, on the TOT increase, and we’re on the high end. Now, there’s FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 59 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 an asterisk on that because there’s other add-on taxes, a Tourism Tax, for example, on hotels. So, there’s other components of how others have done it, but we can do that and we can give you a comparison on Documentary Transfer Tax. Some cities in the County, for example, don’t have it, others do and what do they have and how do we compare to others in the peninsula. Chair Scharff: Give us some cities that have recently started going out to raise their Documentary Transfer Tax. Mr. Perez: Yes, and right now, just to remind you, it’s $3.30 per thousand. That’s what it is. Vice Mayor Filseth: That’s probably a useful exercise, don’t you think. That’s probably the one that sort of strikes most of us as sort of maybe one of the most likely. Chair Scharff: To me, the TOT, the Documentary Transfer Tax, possibly a Utility Users’ Tax, are interesting, and for funding parks and that kind of stuff, maybe some sort of Parcel Tax or Property Tax, but I’m concerned that it’s two-thirds, and I think that’s a really high bar. Mr. Perez: It’s a simple majority if you keep it general. Chair Scharff: Okay, so we can keep it general and still do a Property Tax increase? Mr. Perez: It’s when you do a special tax then it becomes a super majority. Chair Scharff: So, those are the ones that interest me, the Property Tax, the Parcel Tax, TOT, Documentary Transfer Tax, Utility Users’ Tax for those items, and I think if we were doing transportation, and a Sales Tax increase is an interesting one, but I think we should save that for something else. I’m not sure what, but I don’t know why I think that. We’ve had discussions about it. On the other hand… Vice Mayor Filseth: A lot of Sales Tax is paid by residents. Chair Scharff: It is. No, I’m fine with Sales Tax, so we should consider that. I mean, the other advantage to the Sales Tax is that we’re only allowed to go FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 60 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 to 10 whatever it is. There’s a quarter left, and other people could grab it if we don’t. (crosstalk) That’s what I mean. So, we might want to grab that and grab it now, and fund stuff. So, I’m good with that too. Ms. Nose: Just for context on the Sales Tax, two other jurisdictions in our County have individual Sales Tax of a quarter percent. So, for example, San Jose just passed their Sales Tax increase specific to their district. Chair Scharff: Oh, they just did? Ms. Nose: A few years ago. Vice Mayor Filseth: Are they at the cap? Ms. Nose: Yes. Chair Scharff: So, we should probably seriously consider a Sales Tax increase. Ms. Nose: I’m not sure the year they went, but it’s been in the last three years maybe. Council Member Kou: Do you guys also know, I know that Mountain View had looked at increasing their revenues and doing something. Have you looked at what they were doing? Mr. Perez: I think they’re just beginning the discussions, but we will look at it and bring you that. Ms. Nose: I’m sorry. Say that again. Vice Mayor Filseth: San Jose probably was not at the limit before Measure B. Ms. Nose: That’s correct. Mr. Keene: I was trying to remember what the Documentary Transfer Tax rate was in Berkley. I remember it was high. (crosstalk) So, ours is $3.30 and Berkley is at $15. And actually, a lot of the Alameda County cities are $12 and $13. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 61 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Council Member Kou: I think we also have to remember their prices are a lot more less than what we have over here. I mean, their real estate prices, right? Mr. Keene: They’re not at the level we’re at. Council Member Kou: Right. So, when you do $3.30 per thousand. Michelle Flaherty, Assistant City Manager: Well, and as we look at Sales Tax, of course, that is leveling off anyway, so the calculations on estimates of what that’s going to raise over time is not what it would have been 5 or 10 years ago. Chair Scharff: That’s true. It’s leveling off, whereas those Documentary Transfer Taxes are rising. Council Member Kou: So, on the additional capital funding needs, you know, the ones on page 8, will you be adding it to the, to your tables so that we look at them, or is this a separate set? Mr. Perez: I think what we heard, at least from the Chair, and this will be good feedback for us, the suggestion was to have two buckets, one for the Infrastructure Plan I call it, and the other for these types of projects, if that’s the direction the Committee wants to give us, that’s how we’ll allocate them. Mr. Keene: And with a specific exemption on Cubberley out of that mix, right? Chair Scharff: (Unintelligible) no Cubberley. Ms. Flaherty: Did that include the operating as well, from the preceding slide? Ms. Nose: So, I think she’s wondering when we are trying to bucket, what our outstanding obligations are, or that are coming up, rather. Do we want to include all of the outstanding operating costs as we’re looking at this, or do you want us to just keep those to the side? Chair Scharff: Maybe that’s a third bucket, operating costs? I’m unclear what you mean by operating costs. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 62 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Ms. Nose: So, operating costs, pension, right, if we want to start adding addition contributions to our pension costs to pay down UAL. Chair Scharff: I think that’s a third bucket, I really do. Ms. Flaherty: Just confirming it’s not included? Mr. Keene: Right, yeah. I think definitely it’s not. I mean, just to be clear, the direction that the Committee is giving us is not to turn to the General Fund as it is now and find additional money, which would be putting us in the competition with operating costs. This is to see how do we get the costs down on the projects on the demand side, and then what’s a new supply of revenue that we could find for this purpose, and the Vice Mayor’s point exactly. We’re not talking about pension obligation bonds or anything like that. Council Member Tanaka: I had one other question. I just got this Packet Page, so I’m just looking at it now. For some reason I’m the only one that did not get it. So, I’m looking at this and I’m looking at Page 4 of our slide. I don’t know if you guys can – you guys will have to look at it manually, so, I’m just trying to match these up. The numbers are a little bit different, but that’s okay. The thing that I’m just puzzling over is, when you go from $180 million to $235 million, the Staff salaries and benefits are the same, but, because I’m looking at the salary and benefits, the second to last column on Packet Page 75, and I guess I’m just trying to understand. So, is there really no increase at all? Like, when you go from $180 to $235 or $236 million, right. So, the $6.5 is everything, even… Mr. Keene: If we were adding new projects, that could be a driver that would change, but keeping the projects the same, they just have escalating costs associated with the projects themselves. Mr. Perez: If there are project delays then there are salary increases and, therefore, benefit increases, the costs could drive up too. Council Member Tanaka: Okay, so where it says Budgeted Plus Actual, what does that mean? Ms. Nose: To your earlier question of, does the $6.5 include money that we’ve spent on salaries, this charge is telling us that, yes, it does. And just a FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 63 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 quick note, the reason why this total project funding looks different than the slide that you’re looking at, I don’t remember what slide number that is. Council Member Tanaka: Four. Ms. Nose: Four, thank you. We’re looking on Slide 4, the projected costs for these projects, whereas, this matrix that we’re looking at for the 180 million was what’s currently budgeted for those projects. So, actually, if you look at the initial column on Slide 4, the $179.8 is the same as the $179.8 on what we’re looking at right now, the allocations. And so, ultimately, now the project costs have risen from a construction standpoint and we’re kind of making some forecasts as to where we think the project costs will be. And also, just a quick note for Council Member Kou, it also talks about the grants. Council Member Kou: This is exactly what I was thinking. Thank you. Chair Scharff: Anything else. Anything else from Committee Members? Council Member Tanaka: Actually, a last question. So, when are we going to prioritize? Chair Scharff: I think at the next meeting. Council Member Tanaka: At the next meeting, okay. Ms. Nose: I’m sorry, could you repeat that? Chair Scharff: When are we going to prioritize stuff? Mr. Keene: So, to the extent that you’re going to say, are there some projects that would be deferred or something like that? Mr. Perez: I think at the next meeting you could definitely do that with the Infrastructure Plan first bucket. The second bucket, there’s going to be some… Chair Scharff: The second bucket we’re not ready yet. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 64 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Mr. Perez: Right, because we’re going to try to do the first cut, and then you’re going to see our recommendations, and then you’re going to make those calls in the budget hearings. And then there are some that are going to be obvious to you that are not in there that (interrupted). Chair Scharff: So, in the second bucket, I don’t think so in the budget here. The second bucket is questioning do we want to go to a ballot measure for the second bucket. Mr. Perez: There are some that, yes. And so… Chair Scharff: There’s really a third bucket of stuff that goes in the budget hearing. Mr. Perez: Sure, we can split it up that way. (crosstalk) It makes it cleaner. Chair Scharff: In my view, Finance has the Infrastructure Plan, what I call the second bucket items, Animal Shelter, community investment. Why don’t we just call it community investment. I like that. So, community investment is the second bucket. Then we add in a third bucket, we have pensions and that kind of stuff we talked about. And then we have “the budget” that we do every year. And then, obviously, we have all of the Utility stuff that comes to us. Neilson Buchanan: Just a point of order, do the people in the community have a chance to talk? Chair Scharff: Sure. Would you like to speak? We never called for oral communications. Mr. Buchanan: I appreciate the opportunity to attend these meetings, because it’s fulfilling a need that I have as to better understand why the Council acts the way it does. So, as said before, I really decided I wanted to follow the money. So, this is my 20th hour or something like that, sitting through the build out of the budget. I’ve heard all the departments coming in and I continue to feel it’s a very good process. I am reluctant to even comment very much, because I don’t think I have enough grasp of what you’re doing, other than I’ve got a fair amount of confidence about it. Jim, you said something very quietly in the beginning of a Council meeting not too long ago, and it really caught my eye, because it triggered what I don’t FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 65 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 understand. In a previous meeting you’ve commented on how are we going to communicate this to the public. You really hit me between the eyes, because you talked about the average assessment of a home is 600,000. Well, that’s me and you’re getting about $600, you the City, is getting about $600 of that. Mr. Keene: In the Property Tax. Mr. Buchanan: Property Tax side. Well, here’s some hints. In my little 8-unit condominium I pay $1,000 a year for mediocre management. I pay more than that for my cell phone. So, I don’t know how to turn that into something individuals can understand, but it’s a piece of the communications that I don’t hear discussed here. That’s all I was going to say tonight, but, the comment about the sliver of Sales Tax that’s left for grabs, I didn’t quite hear the pucker factor. If I were you guys, I would be really worried about other people grabbing that first, if it’s possible. I don’t know the mechanics, but I just heard that discussion. I read a lot of newspapers. I read every frigging newspaper every day up and down the peninsula. If there are newsletter, then you could get a digest of that. But, there are more people planning to go to the public pocket. Los Altos, Mountain View schools are over a quarter billion, and I’m beginning to try to add all that up, and many of them are very needy and deserving. No question about it. If anybody could do that barn raising, this region should. From where I grew up in Mississippi, there’s no barn building potential. It’s just simply sliding to hell and back. So, I just think you need to be really careful about figuring out what the public is going to tolerate, because the thing that we don’t know, and the pollsters apparently don’t know at all, but the Federal SALT, State And Local Tax thing, really is going to complicate people’s propensity to pony up money, because the perception is, I can’t write it off. While my overall tax rate may be better, but I can’t write it off. And I don’t think anybody has dealt with the high-income states and what’s going to be happening. The governors are all in a twit, as you know. But, I’m just, I would put that down into your great uncertainties. Because I don’t think a pollster can tell you how the individual taxpayers are thinking, because none of us have thought through our Federal taxes. And some people, it’s a major hit. For me it’s not. In fact, I’m willing to give $100,000 for a good rail car fix, because I’ve figured out, hey my property would be worth a lot more, it’s a direct benefit for me, because I’m in a unique situation because I’m not paying any taxes to speak of. And I’ve got free cash. I could do that. It would be like Bell’s Book Store. She just prepaid the Parking Assessment District. So, I don’t think I’m typical at all, but I think the uncertainty is typical. And I think I went way over my time. Thank you. FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 66 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Chair Scharff: Kath Durham. Kathy Durham: I will try to be very brief. I actually was intending to speak about next steps regarding project priorities, which apparently you’re not doing tonight. But I’ll throw this comment out for you to reflect on for whenever it is that you do do this. When you’re considering these Infrastructure Projects what I am struck by is how they are not framed or presented with reference to our City’s sustainability goals. And I’ve been involved since 1998. There have been plans, priorities, goals, number one items, etc., the importance of shifting the mix of mobility choices. And we really haven’t done a very good job about doing that at the City level. We have now fairly aggressive targets in reducing green house gases. Okay, 40 percent of those gases are generated by transportation. The largest chunk of that is single occupancy motor vehicles, but when we’re looking at these budgeted costs and shortfalls, where is that in any consideration of prioritizing? I don’t see that here. That doesn’t mean there hasn’t been energy doing that. But, I liked what Council Member Scharff said about already, what’s already been spent, sunk into a project that you’re not going to get back, versus what is the incremental, the cost to get to finishing it, to complete it? Because if you look at these, there’s the shortfall, and then, some of them are projects that now have tens of millions over. Some of them will only take a small amount to get there. When you’re making those decisions, look at reducing congestion versus managing congestion. Subsidizing daytime housing for cars versus other things you could be doing with that money. And it’s not an either/or, but you have to have the big picture of, and not always sacrifice for the immediate urgent need of housing for cars to shifting the priorities in our local trips and the big-picture items like rail, shifting priorities for our long-distance trips. Please consider climate change, the future for our children. All of that wonderful stuff, and not just these little columns you’ve got there today. How you put that into a number? It would be good to communicate that. It would really be helpful in terms of prioritizing I think. Thank you. Chair Scharff: Alright. Are we ready to adjourn? Does anyone else have any? Vice Mayor Filseth: Future meetings and agendas? NO ACTION TAKEN FINAL TRANSCRIPT MINUTES Page 67 of 67 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Transcript Minutes: 02/06/2018 Future Meetings and Agendas Chair Scharff: Oh, yeah. Lalo Perez, Chief Financial Officer: Our next meeting is the 20th of this month. We’ll bring you three items. Two related to Utility, hydroelectric, water adjustment policy and then the review of the Downtown Parking Management Study. Chair Scharff: You’re bringing this issue back to us? Mr. Perez: This one comes back on, Kiely, March 20th, right? Coming back with this issue? Ms. Nose: We will do our best. Chair Scharff: And the next one is March 6th, is that right? Mr. Perez: Yes, and at this point there are no agenda items on March 6th. But, we need some time to do the homework. Chair Scharff: So, right now we have February 20? Mr. Perez: February 20th. Chair Scharff: And we have nothing on March 6th right now? Mr. Perez: At this point, and then March 20th is the continuation of this and we put slash pension, in case you wanted to talk about some high-level policies that we could propose. Chair Scharff: Okay, sounds good. Mr. Perez: Thank you. Chair Scharff: Alright. Meeting adjourned. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 8:44 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 9107) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/17/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Review of Initial Public Opinion Survey for Infrastructure Funding Needs Title: Review of Initial Public Opinion Survey Results Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Address the Funding Gap for the 2014 Infrastructure Plan, Discussion of Next Steps for Addressing the Funding Gap, and Potential Recommendation to Council Regarding Refinement of Survey Elements and Objectives for Follow-Up Survey From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Finance Committee review the results of the initial public opinion survey and provide direction on next steps in addressing the funding gap for the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects, including discussion of priorities with respect to competing future capital investments and a potential refinement of survey elements and objectives for a follow- up survey. Background On March 20, 2018, the Finance Committee approved direction to Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3 Research) to conduct an initial public opinion survey, from March 23 to April 2, 2018, to assess public support for a potential November 2018 ballot revenue measure to help address the funding gap for the 2014 Infrastructure Plan projects, currently estimated at $76 million including a $20 million contingency placeholder. The survey also gathered information regarding the level of public support for funding other “community asset” projects, such as the second phase of the new Junior Museum and Zoo, a New Animal Shelter, and implementation of elements of the Parks Master Plan which were estimated to cost $55 -65 million. In addition, the staff report provided discussion and tables outlining the current cost estimates for both the Infrastructure Plan projects and other community asset projects as well as potential funding options for these projects. (CMR #9039 Initial Public Opinion Survey for Infrastructure Funding Needs) City of Palo Alto Page 2 On February 6, 2018, the Finance Committee discussed the next steps for addressing the existing funding gap1 for the Council Infrastructure Plan projects. The Council Infrastructure Plan includes the following nine projects:  Public Safety Building  Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge  Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation  Charleston/Arastradero Corridor  Byxbee Park  California Avenue Parking Garage  Downtown Parking Garage  Fire Station 3 Replacement  Fire Station 4 Replacement Discussion Survey Results FM3 Research conducted a survey from March 23 to April 2, 2018 by phone and through email and received approximately 1,200 responses from likely November 2018 voters. (For more information, a summary of survey results from FM3 Research is provided in Attachment A.) These survey results were juxtaposed to recent similar survey results completed in 2013 and 2016. Overall the survey results indicated that the City’s current direction is not as highly supported as it was in a similar survey in 2016. In addition, the confide nce in the City’s management of infrastructure and finances has declined since 2016; however, it is important to note that this trend is not unique to Palo Alto. These sentiments have been expressed in recent polls done for other surrounding communities and jurisdictions in the Bay Area. Even though confidence has declined overall, the City’s maintenance of its infrastructure still has approval from two-thirds of the survey sample. Additional funding to support infrastructure polled with a little less than 50% support, which is similar to results from a poll question posed in 2013 asking about the need for additional funding to maintain and improve infrastructure. When asked about specific infrastructure projects that have been identified as upcoming needs , projects that pertained to public safety, streets maintenance, and bike/pedestrian safety all rated over 60% in terms of importance. A majority of the projects that fall into the community asset project category previously discussed by the Committee rated less than 40% in terms of importance. Specific types of funding mechanisms were evaluated that could potentially be used to fund the City’s infrastructure repairs and improvements. The four funding options polled were increases to the transient occupancy tax (TOT), documentary transfer tax, and sales tax, or establishing a 1 Information on the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan funding gap is provided in the February 6, 2018 Finance Committee report (CMR #8927) at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63293 City of Palo Alto Page 3 parcel tax. Increases to both the TOT and the documentary transfer tax polled with over 50% support, while increases to sales tax or establishing a parcel tax both polled with under 4 0% support. The survey also assessed how much in additional taxes households would be willing to pay annually to support infrastructure needs. A $100 increase per year was the upper limit that still received a majority of positive support. Updated Potential Funding Options Staff continues to work to identify multiple types of funding sources, ranging from current ly available funding, anticipated new funding, and funding from potential revenue generating ballot measures. Below is an updated version of a table previously presented addressing available and anticipated funding, and a new table estimating potential revenues generated by ballot measure initiatives. Table 1: Project Funding Options Additional Parking In-Lieu Funds (Downtown Garage) $2.8 million FY 2019 estimated SB1 funding (Charleston/Arastradero Project) $1.2 million Other Sources (Charleston/Arastradero Project) $1.7 million Infrastructure Reserve (currently “scheduled annual” General Fund transfer for CIP investment between FY 2019 – FY 2023 $25- $30 million Available Funding Sources (w/o ballot measure) $31- $36 million New Estimated Transient Occupancy Tax estimated debt issuance (anticipated opening FY 2020, Marriott hotels)* $35 million Additional hotel development Transient Occupancy Tax receipts (in entitlement process)* $10- $12 million Transportation Tax measures (SB1, Measure B, through FY 2023) $12 million Sale of City of Palo Alto real estate assets (Middlefield lots) $4 - $5 million Anticipated Funding Sources (with less certainty) $61- $64 million The table below articulates both the potential annual revenue generated as well as potential debt issuance that can be leveraged against the four tax increases that were polled in the initial survey. Except for a parcel tax, which requires 2/3 voter approval, each of these measures could be structured as a general tax measure requiring a simple majority for approval. Should a “special tax” measure be pursued, dedicating these funds to certain purposes, this would require a 2/3 voter approval. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Table 2: Potential Ballot Measure Initiatives Tax Measure Annual Revenue Total Debt Leverage 1% Increase in TOT (from 14% currently, to 15%)* $1.7 million $16.7 million $1.10 per $1,000 increase in Documentary Transfer Tax (from $3.30 per $1,000 currently, to $4.40 per $1,000)* $2 million $19.6 million 1/4 cent increase in Sales Tax (additional 0.25% to rate of 9.25%)* $5-$6 million $49-$59 million Parcel Tax ($100/parcel) $2.1 million $29.4 million * All economically sensitive revenues are modeled at 70% of estimated receipts leveraged for debt service. As mentioned above, increases to the TOT and Documentary Transfer Tax polled favorably; however, an increase to the sales tax or establishing a parcel tax both polled below 50 % approval. Below is additional background information for TOT and Documentary Transfer Tax rates compared to other cities. In addition, Attachment B has a full list of these comparables. Transient Occupancy Tax Palo Alto has a TOT (hotel tax) rate of 14 percent of the room rate. This rate increased from 12 percent to 14 percent in 2014 as approved by the voters and is consistent with other destination cities such as San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Monica and Beverly Hills. The highest rate in the state is currently 15 percent in Anaheim and the median rate in the state is 10 percent, according to Californiacityfinance.com. Some cities have other taxes included in addition to the hotel tax, such as tourism tax and/or convention center tax. For every 1 percent increase in the tax rate, we estimate collecting $1.7 million in additional revenues annually. Documentary Transfer Tax California’s Documentary Transfer Tax Act allows counties and cities to collect tax on transactions that transfer real estate. In addition to the county rate, cities may impose additional documentary transfer taxes. The amount that the city may impose depends on whether the city is a charter city or a general law city (Palo Alto is a charter city). In Palo Alto, property owners pay a total of $4.40 ($1.10 county rate plus $3.30 city rate) on each $1,000 of property value transferred. In comparison to other Santa Clara County cities, Palo Alto’s rate is consistent with San Jose and Mountain View, but higher than Sunnyvale and Santa Clara which are at $0.55 per $1,000 even though they are charter cities. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Projected Uncertainties and Risk As discussed at the Finance Committee meeting on March 20 and in the associated staff report (CMR 9039), it may be possible that sufficient funding sources will be available over the Proposed 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to address the Council Infrastructure Plan funding gap and $20 million contingency. However, there are risks and uncertainties associated with this strategy:  Currently Measure B and SB1 are both facing challenges through litigation and a referendum. The outcome of these proceedings remains uncertain.  Additional TOT revenues are contingent on the development and construction of new hotels and timely opening of permitted facilities.  The funding model assumes continued economic growth through the projected five - year period; no recession or contraction in the economy is presumed or modeled.  The model would exhaust all funding options and delay the City’s ability to invest in any projects outside of the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects , including the community asset projects previously identified.  Many of the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects remain in the design phase. Project cost estimates are still in flux, and there is a potential that a $20 million contingency will be insufficient to address further increases. As a result, this approach could reduce the flexibility of the City t o respond to unforeseen, urgent capital needs over the next five years. In addition, execution of the five-year CIP assumes current projects remain within budgeted levels and that there are no new capital requests beyond those projects. Looking forward, the City is facing numerous pressures. These include the 2014 Council approved Infrastructure Plan, FY 2019 General Fund operating budget forecasted gap of $2.6 million, growing obligations to fund employee pension benefits, current labor negotiations for some of the City’s largest employee units, and needed additional capital investment such as rail/grade separation. Palo Alto serves a diverse community with a broad range of unique services adding to the complexity of managing resources and expectations in both the near and longer term. A containment strategy is necessary to maintain a manageable financial position and to address these future financial challenges as well as any unforeseen changes such as program needs or the inevitable economic downturn. The City is faced with prioritizing the growing needs of the City with the long-term stability of these needs. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Ballot Measure – Timeline Should the Committee provide direction to conduct a refined survey and potentially pursue a November 2018 ballot measure, Table 3 outlines the schedule necessary to accomplish that. The schedule allows for Finance Committee to bring a potential recommendation for a November 2018 ballot measure to Council before the Council summer break, so that the remaining steps can occur in time to meet the relevant election deadlines. This is a very constrained schedule that will require late packet reports and assumes that decisions needed from Finance Committee and Council will be made at the indicated meetings. Table 3: Estimated schedule for consideration and preparation of ballot measure Activity Estimated Schedule Finance Committee approval of initial survey objectives - COMPLETE March 20 FM3 conducts initial survey and compiles results - COMPLETE March 23 – April 2 Finance Committee review of survey results and recommendation on refinement survey objectives (late packet distribution) April 17 Council approval of refinement survey objectives (late packet distribution) April 30 FM3 conducts refinement survey and compiles results May 7 – May 14 Finance Committee review of survey results and recommendation on placing measure on ballot (late packet distribution) May 30 Council takes policy action to place measure on the ballot (late packet distribution) June 11 Council adopts resolution of necessity June 11 Council adopts resolution calling election June 11 Deadline to submit election measure to County August 10 Election Day November 6 Timeline Following completion of the refinement of the initial public opinion survey, staff would to Council to review the survey results on April 30. Resource Impact The recommended actions in this report do not have a resource impact as costs associated with polling will be funded from FY 2018 budgets. However, the result of this process will assist in informing the both the FY 2019 budget development and proposed funding for various infrastructure investments. Attachments:  Attachment A: Initial Survey Results  Attachment B: Tax Rate Comparisons 220-5016 Key Findings of a Survey of Palo Alto Voters Conducted March 23-April 2, 2018 Palo Alto Voter Views on Infrastructure Funding Attachment A 1 Methodology •1,191 interviews with likely November 2018 voters in Palo Alto •Conducted March 23 to April 2, 2018, online and via landline and cell phones •Margin of sampling error of ±4.0% at the 95% confidence interval •Due to rounding, some percentages do not add up to 100% •Selected comparisons to 2016, 2014, 2013 and 2008 surveys 2 Key Findings •Voters are now divided on the City’s direction compared with 2016 – a trend common in recent months for Bay Area cities facing increasing challenges like housing costs and traffic congestion. •Majorities approve of the City’s management of infrastructure, and more approve than disapprove of its handling of budget and tax dollars. •In principle, voters support a measure to fund improvements to City infrastructure – and a solid majority is willing to pay up to $100 per household per year for such projects. •Ensuring a modern emergency response system, and repairing streets and roads, are the highest-priority projects. •Among mechanisms tested in concept, a TOT or real estate transfer tax have the most initial appeal. •Note that this poll was not designed to gauge the ultimate feasibility of a fully- developed ballot measure concept; should the City choose to move forward, future research will need to test draft ballot language and pro and con arguments. 3 Issue Context 4 Q1. Right Direction 61% Wrong Track 25% DK/NA 14% Right Direction 43% Wrong Track 37% DK/NA 20% 2018 2016 Would you say that things in the Palo Alto are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that things are pretty seriously off on the wrong track? Voters are now split on the city’s direction, reflecting a regional trend. 5 10% 18% 15% 16% 50% 56% 53% 56% 27% 19% 23% 22% 10% 5% 6% 2018 2016 2013 2008 Excellent Good Only Fair Exc./ Good Fair/ Poor 60% 37% 74% 24% 68% 29% 72% 26% Three in five say the City does an “excellent” or “good” job providing services. Q2. How would you rate the overall job being done by Palo Alto city government in providing services to the City’s residents? Would you say the City is doing an …? 6 21% 10% 9% 43% 37% 38% 5% 23% 16% 17% 16% 21% 13% 14% 16% Maintaining the City's infrastructure Managing the City's budget and finances Efficiently utilizing local tax dollars Strng. App.Smwt. App.DK/NA Smwt. Disapp.Strng. Disapp. Q3. Total Approve Total Disapprove 64% 31% 47% 30% 47% 36% Nearly two-thirds approve of maintenance of City infrastructure; they are more divided on budget and tax management. I am going to read you a list of specific aspects of the City of Palo Alto’s work in managing city government. Please tell me whether you generally approve or disapprove of the job the City is doing in that area. 7 Q3. I am going to read you a list of specific aspects of the City of Palo Alto’s work in managing city government. Please tell me whether you generally approve or disapprove of the job the City is doing in that area. Appraisals of the City’s work managing infrastructure and its budget have declined – as they have in many cities - but remain net positive. City Palo Alto City Government 2013 2016 2018 Maintaining the City's infrastructure 75% 75% 64% Managing the City's budget and finances 62% 64% 47% Efficiently utilizing local tax dollars 63% 67% 47% (Total Approve) 8 11% 35% 19% 25% 11% Q5. Split Sample 10% 36% 22% 23% 9% Great/ Some Need 46% Little/No Real Need 45% Great need Some need Little need No real need Don’t know Great/ Some Need 45% Little/No Real Need 43% Just under half see at least “some need” for funding for infrastructure. More specifically, how would you rate the City of Palo Alto’s need for additional funding to maintain and improve infrastructure: is there a great need for additional funding, some need, a little need or no real need for additional funding? 2018 2013 9 10% 31% 25% 25% 8% Q6. Split Sample 11% 43% 19% 22% 5% Great/ Some Need 54% Little/No Real Need 41% Great need Some need Little need No real need Don’t know Great/ Some Need 42% Little/No Real Need 50% About two in five see at least “some need” for more specific infrastructure improvements. More specifically, how would you rate the City of Palo Alto’s need for additional funding to maintain and improve public parks, streets, sidewalks and vital facilities like police and fire stations: is there a great need for additional funding, some need, a little need or no real need for additional funding? 2018 2013 10 Voter Priorities for Infrastructure Funding 11 “Now I would like to ask you a few questions about potential local funding measures. The City has identified between $75 million and $150 million in needed improvements to City’s streets, sidewalks, parks, public facilities and other basic infrastructure.” 11 Q7. 12 35% 22% 24% 26% 25% 15% 23% 22% 16% 40% 44% 39% 35% 36% 43% 31% 31% 35% 18% 29% 30% 27% 29% 37% 27% 32% 33% 6% 5% 7% 12% 10% 5% 19% 14% 16% ^Ensuring a modern and stable 911 emergency communications network Maintaining City streets and roads Fixing potholes and paving city streets ^Providing safe routes for bicyclists and pedestrians Maintaining City parks and recreation facilities ^Improving safety at Caltrain crossings ^Improving city streets to make busy intersections safer Providing adequate parking Ext. Impt.Very Impt.Smwt. Impt.Not Too Impt./DK/NA Q7. I’m going to read you some of the objectives of the infrastructure projects identified through this process. Please tell me how important each objective is to you as a resident of Palo Alto: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample Ext./Very Impt. 75% 66% 63% 61% 61% 58% 54% 53% 51% Ensuring a modern emergency communications network is important to three-quarters. ^Ensuring vital City facilities like police stations and the emergency command center are earthquake safe 13 17% 20% 14% 15% 10% 9% 32% 25% 29% 29% 29% 21% 14% 8% 8% 35% 31% 34% 32% 41% 38% 46% 32% 29% 16% 24% 22% 24% 21% 32% 37% 59% 61% ^Making sidewalks, City buildings and parks accessible for people with disabilities Funding transportation incentives that improve traffic by reducing solo driver trips Providing downtown parking ^Providing a safe crossing over Highway 101 for pedestrians and cyclists Improving parks, playgrounds and playfields for youth and adult recreation ^Providing a modern animal shelter ^Upgrading the Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo ^Upgrading Byxbee Park Restoring the historic Roth building Ext. Impt.Very Impt.Smwt. Impt.Not Too Impt./DK/NA Q7. I’m going to read you some of the objectives of the infrastructure projects identified through this process. Please tell me how important each objective is to you as a resident of Palo Alto: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample Ext./Very Impt. 49% 44% 44% 43% 39% 30% 17% 10% 10% Fewer are concerned with upgrading the museum, zoo, Byxbee Park, or Roth building. 14 Support for an Infrastructure Funding Measure 15 19% 39% 17% 18% 6% Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Don't know Many of these projects and improvements are beyond the scope of the City’s existing budget and may require additional funding through a local voter- approved bond or tax measure. Based on what you’ve heard, do you think you would support or oppose a bond or tax measure to fund some group of these projects to maintain and improve Palo Alto’s infrastructure? Total Support 59% Total Oppose 35% Q8. In principle, nearly three in five support a bond or tax measure for infrastructure upgrades. 16 Younger voters are slightly more supportive than those over age 50. Q8. Many of these projects and improvements are beyond the scope of the City’s existing budget and may require additional fun ding through a local voter-approved bond or tax measure. Based on what you’ve heard, do you think you would support or oppose a bond or tax measure to fund some group of th ese projects to maintain and improve Palo Alto’s infrastructure? 64% 56% 62% 59% 30% 39% 33% 33% Men Ages 18-49 Men Ages 50+ Women Ages 18-49 Women Ages 50+ Total Support Total Oppose % of Sample 15% 33% 15% 36% By Gender by Age 17 While nearly seven in ten Democrats support the idea, independents are split. Q8. Many of these projects and improvements are beyond the scope of the City’s existing budget and may require additional fun ding through a local voter-approved bond or tax measure. Based on what you’ve heard, do you think you would support or oppose a bond or tax measure to fund some group of th ese projects to maintain and improve Palo Alto’s infrastructure? 68% 49% 38% 61% 64% 51% 25% 43% 57% 35% 29% 44% Democrats Independents Republicans Asians/Pacific Islanders White Voters Voters of Color Total Support Total Oppose % of Sample 58% 27% 15% 14% 62% 30% By Party & Ethnicity 18 Renters are stronger backers than owners, though majorities of both support it. Q8. Many of these projects and improvements are beyond the scope of the City’s existing budget and may require additional fun ding through a local voter-approved bond or tax measure. Based on what you’ve heard, do you think you would support or oppose a bond or tax measure to fund some group of th ese projects to maintain and improve Palo Alto’s infrastructure? 63% 64% 56% 64% 56% 66% 29% 32% 38% 30% 38% 28% <$100,000 $100,000-$150,000 $150,000-$250,000 $250,000+ Homeowners Renters Total Support Total Oppose % of Sample 18% 12% 19% 28% 72% 23% By Income & Residence 19 51% 36% 23% 19% 20% 24% 18% 18% 5% 5% 5% 8% 11% 16% 14% 16% 24% 37% 43% $50 per year $100 per year $200 per year $250 per year Very Will.Smwt. Will.DK/NA Smwt. Unwill.Very Unwill. Q9. Total Willing Total Unwilling 71% 25% 61% 35% 41% 53% 38% 57% Three in five voters are willing to pay up to $100 annually for these improvements. Regardless of how the measure was structured, would your household be willing to pay ______ in additional taxes if it were dedicated to the types of Palo Alto infrastructure repairs and improvements we have been discussing? 20 Examining Potential Funding Mechanisms 21 27% 25% 13% 8% 34% 27% 27% 20% 5% 7% 5% 17% 16% 17% 23% 17% 25% 38% 47% Increasing the transient occupancy tax, charged to hotel and motel guests Increasing the real estate transfer tax rate, paid when a property is bought or sold Establishing a flat tax on every parcel of property in Palo Alto Increasing the sales tax Strng. Supp.Smwt. Supp.DK/NA Smwt. Opp.Strng. Opp. Q10. I am going to read you a list of several methods that might be used to raise money to fund the types of infrastructure r epairs and improvements we have been discussing. Please tell me if you would support or oppose that particular way of raising new revenue for these purposes. Would you suppo rt or oppose_____? Total Supp. Total Opp. 61% 34% 53% 40% 40% 55% 27% 70% Three in five back a higher TOT, and a majority favors an RETT. 22 Q11. Voters then heard a pro/con exchange on a potential sales tax increase in isolation. Let me ask you about the idea of increasing the sales tax. Supporters say increasing the sales tax ensures that people who make purchases in the city, including visitors, pay a small share of the cost of maintaining city infrastructure without raising taxes on homeowners once again. Opponents say sales taxes increase the price of nearly everything we buy, which hurts the poor more than it does the rich. Our sales tax rates is already 9 percent. Having heard this, would you support or oppose increasing the sales tax as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 23 9% 17% 21% 51% 2% Q10a. I am going to read you a list of several methods that might be used to raise money to fund the types of infrastructure repairs and improvements we have been discussing. Please tell me if you would support or oppose that particular way of raising new revenue for these purposes. Would you suppo rt or oppose increasing the sales tax? Q11. Having heard this, would you support or oppose increasing the sales tax as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 8% 20% 23% 47% 2% Total Support 27% Total Oppose 70% Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Don’t know/NA Total Support 26% Total Oppose 72% This did not shift opinions – more than seven in ten still oppose a sales tax increase. After Pro/Con Initial Opinion 24 Q12. They also heard an exchange of messaging on a transient occupancy tax increase. Let me ask you about the idea of increasing the transient occupancy tax, charged to hotel and motel guests. Supporters say increasing the transient occupancy tax ensures that visitors to our city pay their fair share for our infrastructure while keeping costs lower for residents. Opponents say higher transient occupancy taxes will cause tourists to stay in cities outside Palo Alto, driving business out of the City, and especially hurt parents and students who visit campus. Having heard this, would you support or oppose increasing the transient occupancy tax charged to hotel and motel guests as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 25 25% 33% 19% 19% 4% Q10b. I am going to read you a list of several methods that might be used to raise money to fund the types of infrastructure repairs and improvements we have been discussing. Please tell me if you would support or oppose that particular way of raising new revenue for these purposes. Would you suppo rt or oppose Increasing the transient occupancy tax, charged to hotel and motel guests? Q12. Having heard this, would you support or oppose increasing the transient occupancy tax charged to hotel and motel guests as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 27% 34% 17% 17% 5% Total Support 61% Total Oppose 34% Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Don’t know/NA Total Support 58% Total Oppose 38% A solid majority continued to support a TOT increase after messaging. After Pro/Con Initial Opinion 26 Q13. Supporter and opponent rationales for a real estate transfer tax were also read. Let me ask you about the idea of raising the real estate transfer tax rate, paid when a property is bought or sold. Supporters say the it makes sense for people who buy a home in Palo Alto to contribute to the City’s infrastructure with a one-time investment when they buy the house. Opponents say the cost of housing is already outrageous, and we shouldn’t make it even more costly to buy a home in our community. Having heard this, would you support or oppose raising the real estate transfer tax rate as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 27 21% 26% 17% 32% 4% Q10c. I am going to read you a list of several methods that might be used to raise money to fund the types of infrastructure repairs and improvements we have been discussing. Please tell me if you would support or oppose that particular way of raising new revenue for these purposes. Would you suppo rt or oppose increasing the real estate transfer tax rate, paid when a property is bought or sold? Q13. Having heard this, would you support or oppose raising the real estate transfer tax rate as a way of raising money to re pair and upgrade City infrastructure? 25% 27% 16% 25% 7% Total Support 53% Total Oppose 40% Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Don’t know/NA Total Support 47% Total Oppose 49% After messaging on the RETT as a funding mechanism, voters were evenly divided. After Pro/Con Initial Opinion 28 Q14. Voters heard reasons to vote “yes” and “no” on a flat parcel tax. Let me ask you about the idea of establishing a flat parcel tax on each piece of property. Supporters say that it is the simplest way to ensure that property owners all pay a fair share in improving the City’s infrastructure. Opponents say that this method is unfair because owners of smaller homes will be forced to pay the exact same price as owners of larger and more valuable properties. Having heard this, would you support or oppose establishing a flat parcel tax as a way of raising money to repair and upgrade City infrastructure? 29 12% 22% 22% 41% 4% Q10d. I am going to read you a list of several methods that might be used to raise money to fund the types of infrastructure repairs and improvements we have been discussing. Please tell me if you would support or oppose that particular way of raising new revenue for these purposes. Would you suppo rt or oppose Establishing a flat tax on every parcel of property in Palo Alto? Q14. Having heard this, would you support or oppose establishing a flat parcel tax as a way of raising money to repair and up grade City infrastructure? 13% 27% 17% 38% 5% Total Support 40% Total Oppose 55% Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Don’t know/NA Total Support 34% Total Oppose 62% This increased opposition to more than three in five. After Pro/Con Initial Opinion 30 Conclusions 31 Conclusions •This limited test of mechanisms alone indicates that a transient occupancy tax or real-estate transfer tax present potential avenues for voter-approved revenue. –Both a TOT and RETT (without the rate of increase) begin with majority support, and retain it after a very brief exchange of messaging. –Voters in general support up to $100 per year in new taxes for infrastructure improvements and repairs. •Maintaining the emergency communications network, repairing streets and roads, and pedestrian and cyclist safety are top priorities. •Voters are increasingly pessimistic about the direction of the City, and offer middling approval ratings on the City’s work managing tax revenues and the budget. •At the same time, fewer than a majority see a need for new funding for the City generally or for infrastructure specifically. •Further research should test a 75-word ballot label, which includes the rate of increase and projects funded, as well as a fuller suite of messaging, to determine viability in a November election. For more information, contact: 1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone (510) 451-9521 Fax (510) 451-0384 Dave@FM3research.com Miranda@FM3research.com Revised Apil 15, 2017 Count 483 Mean 9.80% Standard Deviation 1.85% Median 10.00% Minimum 3.50% Maximum 15.00% City County Rate Anaheim Orange 15.0% Garden Grove Orange 14.5% Beverly Hills Los Angeles 14.0% Culver City Los Angeles 14.0% Healdsburg Sonoma 14.0% Inglewood Los Angeles 14.0% Los Angeles Los Angeles 14.0% Oakland Alameda 14.0% Palo Alto Santa Clara 14.0% San Francisco San Francisco 14.0% San Leandro Alameda 14.0% Santa Monica Los Angeles 14.0% Palm Springs Riverside 13.5% Blythe Riverside 13.0% Del Mar San Diego 13.0% Indio Riverside 13.0% Mammoth Lakes Mono 13.0% Burlingame San Mateo 12.0% Campbell Santa Clara 12.0% Cupertino Santa Clara 12.0% East Palo Alto San Mateo 12.0% Los Gatos Santa Clara 12.0% Menlo Park San Mateo 12.0% Pacifica San Mateo 12.0% Redwood City San Mateo 12.0% San Bruno San Mateo 12.0% San Mateo San Mateo 12.0% Sunnyvale Santa Clara 10.5% Mountain View Santa Clara 10.0% Transient Occupancy Tax Rates California Cities and Counties SOURCE: CaliforniaCityFinance.com SOURCE: CaliforniaCityFinance.com California City Documentary and Property Transfer Tax Rates CONTRA COSTA COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 RICHMOND Chartered $ 7.00 $ 1.10 $ 8.10 SAN MATEO COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 SAN MATEO Chartered 0.5% of value $ 1.10 $ 6.10 SANTA CLARA COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 CUPERTINO General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 GILROY Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 LOS ALTOS General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 LOS ALTOS HILLS General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 MOUNTAIN VIEW Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 PALO ALTO Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 SAN JOSE Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 SANTA CLARA Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 SUNNYVALE Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 Governance General Law or Chartered Per $1000 Property Value City Rate Per $1000 Property County Rate Per $1000 Property Value Total ALAMEDA COUNTY ALAMEDA $ 1.10 $ 1.10OUNTY ALAMEDA Chartered $ 12.00 $ 1.10 $ 13.10 ALBANY Chartered $ 11.50 $ 1.10 $ 12.60 BERKELEY Chartered $ 15.00 $ 1.10 $ 16.10 EMERYVILLE Chartered $ 12.00 $ 1.10 $ 13.10 HAYWARD Chartered $ 4.50 $ 1.10 $ 5.60 OAKLAND Chartered $ 15.00 $ 1.10 $ 16.10 PIEDMONT Chartered $ 13.00 $ 1.10 $ 14.10 SAN LEANDRO Chartered $ 6.00 $ 1.10 $ 7.10 FINANCE COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 3 Special Meeting April 17, 2018 Vice Mayor Filseth called the meeting to order at 6:06 P.M. in the Community Meeting Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Filseth, Kou, Scharff (arrived at 6:09 P.M.)(Chair), Tanaka Absent: Agenda Items 3. Review of Initial Public Opinion Survey Results Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Address the Funding Gap for the 2014 Infrastructure Plan, Discussion of Next Steps for Addressing the Funding Gap, and Potential Recommendation to Council Regarding Refinement of Survey Elements and Objectives for a Follow-up Survey. MOTION: Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member xx to recommend to the City Council to raise the Transient Occupancy Tax by two percent, to move forward with the next round of polling, craft a ballot measure, test it and to recommend to the City Council to discuss whether or not to move forward with a measure that would fund more park land. MOTION RESTATED: Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to recommend to the Council to: 1. Move forward with a two percent Transient Occupancy Tax increase, including moving forward with the necessary creation of a ballot statement, polling, testing, and authorizing FM3 to perform associated tasks; 2. To discontinue consideration of a Sales Tax or a Parcel Tax; and 3. To continue to consider and explore a Real Estate Transfer Tax, including the possibly of polling. ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 3 Special Finance Committee Meeting Action Minutes: 4/17/18 AMENDMENT:Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member xx to have Staff reach out to all the hotels and realtors in the City of Palo Alto to inform them of the possibility of a tax and to hear their input. AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Community outreach before the measure goes on the ballot.” MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to recommend to the Council to: 1. Move forward with a two percent Transient Occupancy Tax increase, including moving forward with the necessary creation of a ballot statement, polling, testing, and having FM3 to perform associated tasks; 2. To discontinue consideration of a Sales Tax or a Parcel Tax; 3. To continue to consider and explore a Real Estate Transfer Tax, including the possibly of polling; and 4. To do community outreach before the ballot measure goes on the ballot. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 3-1, Tanaka no The Committee took a break from 7:50 P.M. to 7:55 P.M. 1. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Utility Rate Schedule D-1 (Storm and Surface Water Drainage) Increasing the Storm Water Management Fee by 2.9 Percent to $14.05 Per Month Per Equivalent Residential Unit for Fiscal Year 2019. MOTION:Vice Mayor Filseth moved, seconded by Chair Scharff to recommend to the City Council to adopt a resolution amending Utility Rate Schedule D-1 (Storm and Surface Water Drainage), to Implement a 2.9% rate increase consistent with the applicable Consumer Price Index, ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 3 Special Finance Committee Meeting Action Minutes: 4/17/18 increasing the monthly charge per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) by $0.40, from $13.65 to $14.05 for Fiscal Year 2019. MOTION PASSED:4-0 2. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt: (1) a Resolution Approving the Fiscal Year 2019 Water Utility Financial Plan; and (2) a Resolution Increasing Water Rates by 4 Percent by Amending Rate Schedules W-1 (General Residential Water Service), W-2 (Water Service from Fire Hydrants), W-3 (Fire Service Connections),W-4 (Residential Master-Metered and General Non- Residential Water Service), and W-7 (Non-Residential Irrigation Water Service (Continued From April 3, 2018). MOTION: Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member xx to move forward with Alternative 2, reducing reserves. MOTION RESTATED: Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Filseth to recommend to the City Council to move forward with Alternative 2, reducing reserves. MOTION PASSED: 3-1, Tanaka no ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 9:17 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 9039) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/20/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Initial Public Opinion Survey for Infrastructure Funding Needs Title: Review of Options to Address Funding Gap for Infrastructure Plan Projects, and Approval of Objectives and Elements of Initial Public Opinion Survey Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Raise Revenue From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Finance Committee review options for addressing the funding gap for the Infrastructure Plan projects, and approve the objectives and elements of an initial public opinion survey regarding a potential ballot measure to raise revenue, as provided in Attachment A. Background On February 6, 2018, Finance Committee discussed the next steps for addressing the existing funding gap1 for the Council Infrastructure Plan projects. The Council Infrastructure Plan includes the following nine projects: x Public Safety Building x Highway 101 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge x Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Implementation x Charleston/Arastradero Corridor x Byxbee Park x California Avenue Parking Garage x Downtown Parking Garage x Fire Station 3 Replacement x Fire Station 4 Replacement Committee members described the need to obtain public opinion research information on the public’s support for a potential November 2018 ballot revenue measure to help address the 1 Information on the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan funding gap is provided in the February 6, 2018 Finance Committee report at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63293 City of Palo Alto Page 2 funding gap. There was also an interest in determining the level of public support for funding other “community asset” projects, such as the second phase of the new Junior Museum and Zoo and implementation of elements of the Parks Master Plan. These projects are not currently included in the Council Infrastructure Plan. Committee members also requested a comparison of Palo Alto’s tax rates compared to those of neighboring jurisdictions, and information on how removing or deferring individual projects on the Council Infrastructure Plan would impact the funding gap for the plan. Discussion Following the February 6, 2018 Finance Committee meeting, staff has continued to assess available and expected new revenue sources to address the funding gap for the Council Infrastructure Plan, and to develop approximate costs for implementing community asset projects that are not currently part of the Infrastructure Plan. Project Costs The funding gap for the Council Infrastructure Plan, using current project cost estimates and including a placeholder contingency of $20 million to ensure funding for any unanticipated escalation in cost, is $76 million. Staff has included the following unbudgeted projects as potential community asset projects: • New Junior Museum and Zoo - Phase II • New Animal Shelter • Construction of priority projects in the Parks Master Plan The estimated cost of these projects is $55-65 million. Table 1 summarizes these figures. TABLE 1: Estimated Project Costs Infrastructure Plan Gap (current estimates) $56 million Contingency Funding for unanticipated future cost escalation $20 million Infrastructure Plan Total $76 million Junior Museum and Zoo Construction Phase II $5 million New Animal Shelter (tentative estimate) $10-15 million Parks Master Plan (priority projects, tentative estimate) $40-45 million Community Assets Total $55-65 million City of Palo Alto Page 3 Projected Project Funding Options Staff have worked to identify multiple types of funding sources, ranging from current funding, anticipated new funding, and potential revenue generating ballot measures. Below is a summary of possible funding options. In addition to these funding options, Attachment B outlines the estimated total project cost of each of the nine Council Infrastructure Plan projects and estimates the savings that could be realized for each project if the project was eliminated from the plan or deferred beyond the five-year CIP. TABLE 2: Project Available or Anticipated Funding Additional Parking In-Lieu Funds (Downtown Garage) $2.8 million FY 2019 estimated SB1 funding (Charleston/Arastradero Project) $1.2 million Other sources (Charleston/Arastradero Project) $1.7 million Infrastructure Reserve (currently “scheduled annual” General Fund transfer for CIP investment between FY 2019 – FY 2023) $25-30 million Available Funding Sources (w/o ballot measure) $31-36 million New estimated Transient Occupancy Tax receipts/estimated debt issuance (anticipated opening FY 2020, Marriott hotels) $35 million Additional hotel development Transient Occupancy Tax receipts/estimated debt issuance (in entitlement process) $10 - $12 million Transportation Tax measures (SB1, Measure B, through FY 2023) $12 million Sale of City of Palo Alto real estate assets (Middlefield lots) TBD Anticipated Funding Sources (with less certainty) $57-59 million As demonstrated in Table 2, it may be possible that sufficient funding sources may be available over the current planned five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to address the Council Infrastructure Plan funding gap and $20 million contingency. However, there are risks and uncertainties associated with the funds identified above, including: x Currently Measure B and SB1 are both facing challenges through litigation and a referendum. The outcome of these proceedings is uncertain. x Additional TOT revenues are contingent on the development and construction of new hotels and on timely opening of permitted facilities x The funding model assumes continued economic growth through the projected five- year period (present through FY 2023); no recessionary or contraction in the economy is presumed or modeled. x Identified funding above would exhaust all funding options and delay the City’s ability to invest in any projects outside of the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan projects. As a result, this approach could reduce the flexibility of the City to respond to unforeseen, urgent capital needs and limit the ability to begin work on the additional community asset investment projects identified in this report over the next five years. In addition, execution of the five-year CIP assumes current projects remain within budgeted levels and that there are no new capital requests to those projects. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Potential Revenue Generating Ballot Measure In order to allow for more flexibility in the five-year CIP and beyond, a ballot measure could be used to generate additional revenues. As discussed at the February 6, 2018 Finance Committee, there are a number of types of revenue generating measures that could be explored, including but not limited to a parcel tax, increased rates for the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) or Documentary Transfer Tax, and an increase to the sales tax. The latest information available for some of the key tax rates in California and a short summary for each potential type of tax that could generate additional revenues is below. Attachment C provides more specific rate details for the various cities surrounding Palo Alto and other parts of the state. Transient Occupancy Tax (each 1-percent estimated $1.7 million annually) Palo Alto has a TOT (hotel tax) rate of 14 percent of the room rate. This rate increased from 12 percent to 14 percent in 2014 as approved by the voters and is consistent with other destination cities such as San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Monica and Beverly Hills. The highest rate in the state is currently 15 percent in Anaheim and the median rate in the state is 10 percent per Californiacityfinance.com. Some cities have other taxes included in addition to the hotel tax, such as tourism tax and/or convention center tax. For every 1 percent increase in the tax rate, additional revenues of $1.7 million are estimated to be collected. Documentary Transfer Tax (estimated $1.0 million to $3.8 million annually) California’s Documentary Transfer Tax Act allows counties and cities to collect tax on transactions that transfer real estate. In addition to the county rate, cities may impose additional documentary transfer taxes. The amount that the city may impose depends on whether the city is a charter city or a general law city. A charter city is a city in which the governing system is defined by the city’s own charter instead of by California law. In general, charter cities have authority over their municipal affairs and have greater ability to impose taxes (subject to voter approval). We are a Charter City. Only about 20 percent of California cities are charter cities. Many of California’s 121 charter cities have enacted their own documentary transfer tax rates which are typically articulated as a percentage or rate per $1,000 of property value. In Berkeley, for example, the city documentary transfer tax rate is $15.00 for each $1,000 of property value, significantly higher than Palo Alto’s equivalent of $3.30 for each $1,000, and Santa Clara County’s rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value. Typically, when a charter city imposes its own tax rate in excess of the county’s tax rate, the county does not provide a credit for the city tax. This means that the county and city property taxes in charter cities are cumulative. In Palo Alto, property owners pay a total of $4.10 ($1.10 county rate plus $3.30 city rate) on each $1,000 of property value transferred. In comparison to other Santa Clara County cities, Palo Alto’s rate is consistent with San Jose, and Mountain View, but higher than Sunnyvale and Santa Clara which are at $0.55 per $1,000 even though they are charter cities. The City of San Mateo is at 0.5% of the property value which translates to $5 per $1,000. The County of Alameda has an average rate of $11.00 per $1,000 for their cities. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Cities that are not charter cities are known as general law cities. General law cities may impose a transfer tax equal to one-half of the rate imposed by the county. When the general law city imposes a tax, the county transfer tax is reduced by the amount of the city’s transfer tax so that the amount that the taxpayer pays remains at 55 cents per $500 of property value or consideration. Depending on the amount of any increase in the tax rate, current collections are estimated to generate an additional $1.0 million to $3.8 million. These estimates assume a rate of $3.80 per $1,000 to $5.00 per $1,000 or a marginal increase between $0.50 and $1.70 per $1,000. Utility Users Tax (estimated $1.4 million to $2.9 million annually) This tax generally applies to utility services and the tax rate can vary depending on the utility or commodity. To simplify comparisons to other jurisdictions, these various rates have been grouped into “utilities” and “telecommunications.” In Palo Alto the utilities tax is 5.0 percent and 4.75 percent for telecommunications. For cities in Santa Clara County that have a Utility Users Tax (UUT) it ranges from 2 percent in Sunnyvale to 5 percent in Palo Alto and San Jose. The highest in the region is Santa Cruz at 8.5 percent and the highest in California is Los Angeles at 10 percent. Depending on the amount of any increase in the tax rate, current collections are estimated to generate an additional $1.4 million to $2.9 million). Sales and Use Tax Rates (estimated $5 million to $6.0 million annually) The sales and use tax rate in Palo Alto is at 9 percent of which the City receives one percent directly and is in line with most other cities in the County. (The State and County receive the rest.) The Santa Clara and San Mateo county cities range from 8.75 percent to 9.25 percent with the highest tax rate being in San Jose and Campbell. Assuming a 0.25 percent increase to 9.25 percent, current sales tax activity is estimated to generate an additional $5 million to $6 million annually. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Potential Ballot Measure – Timeline The City has contracted with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) to conduct public opinion research on a potential ballot measure. Given Finance Committee’s interest in a potential November 2018 ballot revenue measure, staff recommends that FM3 conduct an initial survey, with an additional refinement survey if Finance Committee and Council wish to follow up on the results of the initial survey. Table 1 outlines a schedule that provides for an initial survey and a refinement survey, with a Council review of Finance Committee’s recommendations for the refinement survey objectives and elements. (This schedule does not anticipate City Council review of the initial survey objectives.) The schedule allows for Finance Committee to bring a potential recommendation for a November 2018 ballot measure to Council before the Council summer break, so that the remaining steps can occur in time to meet the relevant election deadlines. This is a very constrained schedule that will require late packet reports and assumes that decisions needed from Finance Committee and Council will be made at the indicated meetings. Table 3: Estimated schedule for consideration and preparation of ballot measure Activity Estimated Schedule Finance Committee approval of initial survey objectives March 20 FM3 conducts initial survey and compiles results March 26 – April 6 Finance Committee review of survey results and recommendation on refinement survey objectives (late packet distribution) April 17 Council approval of refinement survey objectives (late packet distribution) April 30 FM3 conducts refinement survey and compiles results May 7 – May 14 Finance Committee review of survey results and recommendation on placing measure on ballot (late packet distribution) May 30 Council takes policy action to place measure on the ballot (late packet distribution) June 11 Council adopts resolution of necessity June 11 Council adopts resolution calling election June 11 Deadline to submit election measure to County August 10 Election Day November 6 Timeline Following completion of the public opinion survey, staff anticipates returning to Finance Committee to review the survey results on April 17. Resource Impact The recommended actions in this report do not have a resource impact as costs associated with polling are anticipated to be funded from FY 2018 budgets. However, the result of this process will assist in informing the both the FY 2019 budget development and proposed funding for various infrastructure investments. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Additional Resources Attachment A provides a high level overview of the objectives of an initial survey. The proposed survey will focus primarily on potential revenue measures to help address the estimated $76 million funding gap in the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan, and on support for the community asset projects described above. The survey will also assess a range of potential levels of funding support for grade separation work. Attachment B compares the estimated total project cost of each of the nine Council Infrastructure Plan projects with the actual incurred costs to date, and estimates the savings that could be realized for each project if the project was eliminated from the plan or deferred beyond the five-year CIP. Attachment C provides a summary of estimated revenue increases resulting from potential tax measures, and a comparison of Palo Alto’s tax rates with those of neighboring communities. Attachments: x Attachment A: Initial Survey Objectives x Attachment B: Project Costs and Potential Savings x Attachment C: Tax Rate Comparisons 12100WilshireBoulevard,Suite350|LosAngeles,CA90025 Phone:(310)828Ͳ1183|Fax:(310)453Ͳ6562 1999HarrisonSt.,Suite2020|Oakland,CA94612 Phone:(510)451Ͳ9521|Fax:(510)451Ͳ0384 TOBradEgglestonandClaudiaKeith CityofPaloAlto FROMDaveMetzandMirandaEveritt FM3Research RE:SummaryofObjectivesforPublicOpinionResearch DATEMarch6,2018 ThismemooutlinesobjectivesforourupcomingpublicopinionresearchamongPaloAltovoters.Thesurveywill aimtodetermine: x GeneralattitudesaboutconditionsintheCity,includingtheperformanceofCitygovernment x PerceivedneedforfundingforCityinfrastructureprojectsgenerally x Whichfinancemechanisms,ifany,areacceptabletovotersaswaysoffundingneededinfrastructure improvements x Impactofproandconargumentsonsupportforthosemechanisms x Willingnesstopayfortheseimprovementsbasedoncostimpactsatthehouseholdlevel x Rankingoftherelativeimportanceofspecificinfrastructureprojects x SupportforamajorgradeͲseparationproject,overallandwithawarenessofcostimpacts Wherepossible,wewilltrackquestionsfrompriorsurveystoassesschangesinopinionovertime.Usingvoter filedataanddemographicquestions,wewillalsodeterminedifferencesinopinionbymajordemographicand geographicsubgroupswithintheCity. Ifyouhaveanyquestionsorifthereisanyfurtherinformationwecanprovide,pleasedonothesitatetocontact us.YoumayreachusinourOaklandofficeasfollows: DaveMetz Fairbank,Maslin,Maullin,Metz&Associates(FM3) 1999HarrisonStreet,Suite2020 Oakland,CA94612 (510)451Ͳ9521(Office) dave@fm3research.com Attachment A Sa l a r i e s a n d Be n e f i t s De s i g n a n d Co n s t r u c t i o n Pr o j e c t To t a l Sa l a r i e s a n d Be n e f i t s Ex p e n d e d t o Da t e De s i g n a n d Co n s t r u c t i o n Ex p e n d e d t o Da t e Gr a n t s an d Ou t s i d e Fu n d i n g Im p a c t an d I n - Lie u f e e s Es t i m a t e d Sa v i n g s i f Pr o j e c t De f e r r e d Pu b l i c S a f e t y B u i l d i n g $1 . 2 $ 9 1 . 0 $ 9 2 . 2 $ 0 . 4 $ 1 . 9 $ 8 9 . 9 Ca l i f o r n i a A v e n u e G a r a g e $0 . 9 $ 4 0 . 4 $ 4 1 . 3 $ 0 . 1 $ 0 . 6 $ 4 0 . 5 Fir e S t a t i o n N o . 3 $1 . 3 $ 8 . 6 $ 9 . 9 $ 0 . 6 $ 1 . 0 $ 8 . 4 Do w n t o w n G a r a g e $1 . 0 $ 2 8 . 1 $ 2 9 . 1 $ 0 . 2 $ 0 . 4 $ 4 . 0 $ 2 4 . 4 Fir e S t a t i o n N o . 4 $0 . 7 $ 7 . 5 $ 8 . 2 $ 8 . 2 Hi g h w a y 1 0 1 B i k e B r i d g e $2 . 2 $ 1 6 . 3 $ 1 8 . 5 $ 1 . 5 $ 2 . 0 $ 9 . 4 $ 5 . 7 Ch a r l e s t o n / A r a s t r a d e r o C o r r i d o r $1 . 3 $ 1 4 . 6 $ 1 5 . 9 $ 0 . 6 $1 . 7 $ 1 . 5 $ 0 . 8 $ 1 1 . 4 Bi k e / P e d e s t r i a n P l a n $0 . 8 $ 2 0 . 0 $ 2 0 . 8 $ 4 . 0 $ 0 . 2 $ 1 6 . 5 By x b e e P a r k $0 . 8 $ 2 . 8 $ 3 . 6 $ 0 . 1 $ 2 . 8 $ 0 . 6 * v a l u e s s t a t e d i n $ m i l l i o n s At t a c h m e n t : E s t i m a t e d S a v i n g s F r o m D e f e r r i n g / E l i m i n a t i n g P r o j e c t s Revised Apil15,2017 Count 483 Mean 9.80% StandardDeviation 1.85% Median 10.00% Minimum 3.50% Maximum 15.00% City County Rate Anaheim Orange 15.0% Garden Grove Orange 14.5% Beverly Hills Los Angeles 14.0% Culver City Los Angeles 14.0% Healdsburg Sonoma 14.0% Inglewood Los Angeles 14.0% Los Angeles Los Angeles 14.0% Oakland Alameda 14.0% Palo Alto Santa Clara 14.0% San Francisco San Francisco 14.0% San Leandro Alameda 14.0% Santa Monica Los Angeles 14.0% Palm Springs Riverside 13.5% Blythe Riverside 13.0% Del Mar San Diego 13.0% Indio Riverside 13.0% Mammoth Lakes Mono 13.0% Burlingame San Mateo 12.0% Campbell Santa Clara 12.0% Cupertino Santa Clara 12.0% East Palo Alto San Mateo 12.0% Los Gatos Santa Clara 12.0% Menlo Park San Mateo 12.0% Pacifica San Mateo 12.0% Redwood City San Mateo 12.0% San Bruno San Mateo 12.0% San Mateo San Mateo 12.0% Sunnyvale Santa Clara 10.5% Mountain View Santa Clara 10.0% TransientOccupancyTaxRates CaliforniaCitiesandCounties SOURCE: CaliforniaCityFinance.com Attachment C SOURCE:CaliforniaCityFinance.com California City Documentary and Property Transfer Tax Rates CONTRA COSTA COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 RICHMOND Chartered $ 7.00 $ 1.10 $ 8.10 SAN MATEO COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 SAN MATEO Chartered 0.5% of value $ 1.10 $ 6.10 SANTA CLARA COUNTY $ 1.10 $ 1.10 CUPERTINO General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 GILROY Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 LOS ALTOS General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 LOS ALTOS HILLS General Law $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $1.10 MOUNTAIN VIEW Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 PALO ALTO Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 SAN JOSE Chartered $ 3.30 $ 1.10 $ 4.40 SANTA CLARA Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 SUNNYVALE Chartered $ 0.55 $ 0.55 $ 1.10 Governance General Law or Chartered Per $1000 Property Value City Rate Per $1000 Property County Rate Per $1000 Property Value Total ALAMEDA COUNTY ALAMEDA $ 1.10 $ 1.10OUNTY ALAMEDA Chartered $ 12.00 $ 1.10 $ 13.10 ALBANY Chartered $ 11.50 $ 1.10 $ 12.60 BERKELEY Chartered $ 15.00 $ 1.10 $ 16.10 EMERYVILLE Chartered $ 12.00 $ 1.10 $ 13.10 HAYWARD Chartered $ 4.50 $ 1.10 $ 5.60 OAKLAND Chartered $ 15.00 $ 1.10 $ 16.10 PIEDMONT Chartered $ 13.00 $ 1.10 $ 14.10 SAN LEANDRO Chartered $ 6.00 $ 1.10 $ 7.10 County City TelecommunicationsUtilities Alameda Berkeley 7.5% 7.5% Alameda Emeryville 5.5% 5.5% Alameda Hayward 5.5% 5.5% ContraCosta ElCerrito 8.0% 8.0% ContraCosta Hercules 8.0% 8.0% ContraCosta Richmond 9.5% 10.0% LosAngeles HuntingtonPark 9.25% 9.5% LosAngeles Inglewood 8.0% 8.0% LosAngeles Irwindale 7.5% 7.5% LosAngeles LosAngeles 9.0% 10.0% Sacramento Sacramento 7.0% 7.0% SanMateo DalyCity 5.0% 5.0% SanMateo EastPaloAlto 5.0% 5.0% SanMateo MenloPark 2.5% 3.5% SanMateo RedwoodCity 4.0% 5.0% SantaClara Cupertino 2.4% 2.4% SantaClara LosAltos 3.2% 3.2% SantaClara MountainView 3.0% 3.0% SantaClara PaloAlto 4.75% 5.0% SantaClara SanJose 4.5% 5.0% SantaClara Sunnyvale 2.0% 2.0% SantaCruz SantaCruz 8.5% 8.5% UtilityUserTaxRatesͲCalifCitiesͲupdatedJanuary2017 SOURCE: CaliforniaCityFinance.com AlmadenValley 9.00% SantaClara Alviso(SanJose) 9.25% SantaClara BlossomHill 9.00% SantaClara BlossomValley 9.00% SantaClara CambrianPark 9.00% SantaClara Campbell 9.25% SantaClara Coyote 9.00% SantaClara Cupertino 9.00% SantaClara Gilroy 9.00% SantaClara HolyCity 9.00% SantaClara LorreEstates 9.00% SantaClara LosAltosHills 9.00% SantaClara LosAltos 9.00% SantaClara LosGatos 9.00% SantaClara Milpitas 9.00% SantaClara MoffettField 9.00% SantaClara MontaVista 9.00% SantaClara MonteSereno 9.00% SantaClara MorganHill 9.00% SantaClara MountHamilton 9.00% SantaClara MountainView 9.00% SantaClara NewAlmaden 9.00% SantaClara PaloAlto 9.00% SantaClara Permanente 9.00% SantaClara RedwoodEstates 9.00% SantaClara SanJose 9.25% SantaClara SanMartin 9.00% SantaClara SanTomas 9.00% SantaClara SantaClara 9.00% SantaClara Saratoga 9.00% SantaClara Stanford 9.00% SantaClara Sunnyvale 9.00% SantaClara ValleyFair 9.00% SantaClara Atherton 8.75% SanMateo Belmont 9.25% SanMateo Brisbane 8.75% SanMateo Burlingame 8.75% SanMateo Colma 8.75% SanMateo SanMateoCounty SantaClaraCounty CaliforniaCity&CountySales&UseTaxRates(effectiveOctober1,2017) SOURCE:CaliforniaCityFinance.com DalyCity 8.75% SanMateo EastPaloAlto 9.25% SanMateo ElGranada 8.75% SanMateo EmeraldHills(RedwoodCity) 8.75% SanMateo FosterCity 8.75% SanMateo HalfMoonBay 8.75% SanMateo Hillsborough 8.75% SanMateo Hillsdale(SanMateo) 9.00% SanMateo LaHonda 8.75% SanMateo Ladera 8.75% SanMateo LomaMar 8.75% SanMateo MarshManor 8.75% SanMateo MenloPark 8.75% SanMateo Millbrae 8.75% SanMateo Montara 8.75% SanMateo MossBeach 8.75% SanMateo Pacifica 8.75% SanMateo Pescadero 8.75% SanMateo PortolaValley 8.75% SanMateo RedwoodCity 8.75% SanMateo SanBruno 8.75% SanMateo SanCarlos 8.75% SanMateo SanGregorio 8.75% SanMateo SanMateo 9.00% SanMateo SouthSanFrancisco 9.25% SanMateo Woodside 8.75% SanMateo SOURCE:CaliforniaCityFinance.com FINANCE COMMITTEE FINAL MINUTES Page 1 of 7 Special Meeting March 20, 2018 Chairperson Scharff called the meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. in the Community Meeting Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Filseth, Kniss, Scharff (Chair) Absent: Kou, Tanaka Oral Communications Andrew Boone wanted to bring attention to several streets that could use improvement for walking and bicycling. These are a section of El Camino Real and East Bayshore Road. Agenda Items 1. Review of Options to Address Funding Gap for Infrastructure Plan Projects, and Approval of Objectives and Elements of Initial Public Opinion Survey Regarding Potential 2018 Ballot Measure to Raise Revenue. Chair Scharff stated there is a short Staff presentation. James Keene, City Manager noted they brought a report on the status of various infrastructure initiatives that the City has, and Dave Metz with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) was asked to discuss some next steps that could be taken as part of a survey that could play a role in how the Council ultimately decides about funding. Following an initial survey Staff wanted to come back to the Finance Committee (Committee) for a Refinement Survey on April 17, 2018 and would be looking for a recommendation from the Committee to ultimately go to Council to approve the objective of that Refinement Survey which will be done in May. Dave Metz and FM3 has done polling work for the City and he will talk about what the City will be attempting to achieve at this stage as part of discussions FINAL MINUTES Page 2 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 about how the Committee will ensure they are able to make progress on the infrastructure needs that have been identified. Dave Metz, Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates discussed their proposed research approach which mirrors a series of surveys they did previously when the City was contemplating ways to increase funding for infrastructure. They started with a survey that allows them to test building blocks that might go into a ballot measure that would be placed before voters. There were three sections: 1) The relative importance that voters assign to a variety of specific projects and infrastructure improvements that might be funded; 2) The viability of a range of funding mechanisms that might be used to generate dollars to fund those projects; and 3) The durability of support for those mechanisms in the face of pro and con arguments specific to those mechanisms that might be put forward. With that data, they planned on coming back to the Committee with some recommendations about how combinations of projects and finance mechanisms might be put together to form a measure that voters in the City would likely support. After that, the refinement survey was to be used to make sure the package met the standards needed to have a high likelihood of passage. They wanted to propose asking some questions in the survey that were asked in surveys done for the City going back a decade - tracking people’s perceptions of the quality of life, the performance of City Government and the condition of the City’s infrastructure overall, to determine if those perceptions are remaining static or have changed. If changed, what the implications of those shifting opinions might be for voters’ willingness to support additional infrastructure funding. One modification to their research approach relative to what was done in the past is, they recommend conducting the survey through three different modes of outreach to voters; 1) Calls on land-line phones; 2) Calls on wireless phones; and 3) Reaching out to voters on line via e-mail. People were severing their land-line connections and are more comfortable with on-line communications, so using all these modes to reach out to voters, enables FM3 to get a broad and representative sample and to obtain it more cost effectively. The underlying sampling methodology was still the same. They draw a random sample of voters who were likely to vote in November’s election from the voter. E-mail was simply added as a way of reaching out to those voters in addition to phone calls. In a lot of other communities, most recently in Mountain View, this was found to be a very effective way of broadening the sample and gathering more public feedback without significant additional expense. This was built into the proposed approach put before you. FINAL MINUTES Page 3 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 Chair Scharff put this to the public. Ann Pianetta, Board Member for the Friends of the Palo Alto Animal Shelter stated they have been trying for five years to upgrade and eventually replace the existing animal shelter. Pets-In-Need has offered to manage the facility but has been waiting for three years for a final decision by City Council. They asked that Pets-In-Need be the authorized organization to run the shelter. Also, as the animal shelter falls under auspices of the Police Department, they asked that the shelter expenses be included with the new Public Safety Building infrastructure plan. David Coale with Carbon-Free Palo Alto asked to add a few numbers to their report and analysis at the Staff Report. For each California Avenue Garage new parking space, it was $124,000 and for the Downtown Garage it’s $112,000. He put forth some solutions, including Transportation Demand Management (TDM). When polling people about potential funding measures, he encouraged including both Business Tax and a Special Assessment Tax. James Pflasterer wished to address the Arastadero Corridor Project. He encouraged completion of this project and prioritizing this higher than other projects. Libby Lundgren, Parent Teacher Association (PTA), Safe Rides to School, wished to express support for the bike and pedestrian plans in the Budget Plan. She wanted Council to consider the projects that will affect the most people in the most cost-effective way. Penny Ellson asked for support of funding for the three Bike/Pedestrian Transportation Plan projects in the Infrastructure Budget. She noticed that in the list of potential revenue sources in the Staff Report there is no Business License Tax or Business Tax of any kind and no plan to price automobile parking for users. She felt businesses should think about helping fund projects that serve them. Paul Goldstein urged the Council to continue making progress on the bicycle and pedestrian projects in the Infrastructure Plan. He suggested that, as the parking deficit appears mainly around the noon hour, implementing variable time-of-day pricing strategies might be an appropriate source of revenue for some garages. FINAL MINUTES Page 4 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 Sophie Alexis stated she is a sophomore at Gunn High School and was hit by a car when she was biking through the El Camino/Arastadero intersection. She encouraged the Committee to address the safety issues at that intersection. Michael Maurier reiterated his support for the Charleston/Arastadero Plan and asked the Committee to prioritize the expenditures required to complete the plan. Nina Bell voiced her encouragement to finish the Charleston/Arastadero project. Melanie Liu with Divest Palo Alto and Alliance and Solidarity with Standing Rock wished to remind the Committee that they are still actively looking for divestment from fossil fuels from Palo Alto. She provided some information from Los Angeles on their move to divest. Evan Lurie expressed his disappointment with Palo Alto regarding losing sight of what our core values used to be. He encouraged developing a mechanism for prioritizing projects on the table and support for the Charleston/Arastadero Corridor. He encouraged regulating future growth and felt those benefiting from the improvements must be asked to defray the costs. Chair Scharff indicated that tonight the primary thing on the Agenda was to give direction to Dave Metz and FM3. He briefly outlined this and thought all of the projects on the list could be done. A Colleague’s Memo in 2010 from the Committee to Council listed infrastructure needs to be done and the Committee came up with a list of projects. Those projects are in the Staff Report. He agreed the Charleston-Arastadero Project needed to be finished. Also discussed at that time was a Public Safety Building, a parking garage downtown and a parking garage on California Avenue, two Fire Stations, a bike bridge and some money for Bixby Park. It was decided the best way to fund it was a Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), which is primarily a tax on business. The TOT since 2010 has been funding the Infrastructure Plan. That’s been the Council direction and the Council policy. The question to the public was, what should the TOT be. On a 5-4 vote it was decided the TOT should be 2 percent. He reiterated the City needs to complete this Infrastructure Plan. He believed the City should poll the voters and move forward with a TOT to fund all the items on the Infrastructure Plan. One of the things the Staff Report pointed out about the downtown parking garage FINAL MINUTES Page 5 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 was that there will likely be an additional $2.8 million in Parking In-Lieu Funds that were paid to the downtown. With that extra $2.8 million, there was expected to be about $10 million in that fund and he stated that if the Downton parking garage is not built, that $10 million would have to be given back to the developers. The reason there was $10 million in that fund is that the City has allowed people to pay into the In-Lieu Fund rather than building a parking space; so, the $10 million represents parking spaces that have already been promised that were not built. He felt the City needed to complete that promise to build a Downtown parking garage. The City also needed to fund the Parks Master Plan Fund and buy more park land. The issue with the Animal Shelter needed to be solved. The second phase of the Junior Museum and Zoo needed to be funded, as well as other things related to parks and recreation. He suggested a $0.25 Sales Tax and stated that if Palo Alto doesn’t take it first, another government entity could get that. The grade separation issue also needed to be solved. A preferred alternative for what grade separations looked like in Palo Alto is needed, then projects can be made ready and a decision made on how best to fund that. He felt the best way to fund that would be a Business Tax in 2020 or 2022. Vice Mayor Filseth questioned how many responses were expected from the survey. Mr. Metz stated they are shooting for 600.. Vice Mayor Filseth asked if that would be at random across the City. Mr. Metz answered yes, a random sample of likely voters. Mayor Kniss recalled over the last couple of years several polls have been done and she presumed that included in this poll would be general questions. She asked that a sample be given to the City. Mr. Metz replied that surveys were designed to provide a specific information need, but there were also a range of questions asked which were helpful as general management tools for the City. These included how people feel about the quality of life in the community, what they see as the major issues facing it and their overall evaluation of the performance of City Government. Mayor Kniss asked Mr. Metz how many polls his firm has done for Palo Alto. FINAL MINUTES Page 6 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 Mr. Metz believed going back to the bond measures tested in 2007, probably six or seven polls. Mayor Kniss remarked that in today’s world, people felt that polls don’t count anymore. She felt polls were important regarding support for budgetary needs and what is happening in the community. Chair Scharff asked Mr. Metz if his firm is planning on polling on the individual projects listed in the Staff Report or not. Mr. Metz replied some questions will ask people to rate the importance of general categories of spending and also some specific projects. Chair Scharff thought other areas where the Council may want to spend money would be a dedicated funding source out of the TOT to expand the Transportation Management Association (TMA) and, the Roth Building renovation. Mayor Kniss believed Chair Scharff did a good job of summing up everything that happened while he was on the Council. MOTION:Chair Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Kniss to recommend to the City Council to approve the objectives and elements of an initial public opinion survey regarding a potential ballot measure to raise revenue, and direct Staff to return with more information on the Parks Master Plan Projects. Chair Scharff added into the Motion that Staff return with more information on the Parks Master Plan Projects. Mr. Keene restated that this would be an initial poll. FM3 was to come back to the Committee with the findings and the Committee could then weigh in more specifically on strategic angles to pursue. He reiterated that to have something on the November 18 ballot, the Council needs to make the ballot question decisions before the end of June. Vice Mayor Filseth hoped everyone was aware of the need to move expeditiously. He thought Council and Staff needed to develop a plan and the poll was needed to shed light on the way to pursue this. FINAL MINUTES Page 7 of 7 Special Finance Committee Meeting Final Minutes 3/20/18 MOTION PASSED:3-0 Kou, Tanaka absent Mr. Keene believed the Staff Report presented the challenges and the Committee spoke to measures to resolve these. Staff targets April 17, 2018 to return with the results from this poll and will be looking for the Committee’s discussion and action on the next step. Chair Scharff thanked the public for coming out and speaking. Mr. Keene thanked Mayor Kniss for sitting in for Council Member Kou. Future Meetings and Agendas ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 6:46 P.M.