Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-22 City Council Agenda Packet1 City Council Special Meeting Monday, August 22, 2022 5:00 PM Council Chamber & Virtual AMENDED AGENDA Amended agenda items appear in red below Pursuant to AB 361 Palo Alto City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. HOW TO PARTICIPATE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/362027238) Meeting ID: 362 027 238 Phone:1(669)900-6833 The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center at https://midpenmedia.org. 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. REVISED PUBLIC COMMENTS Public Comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Council and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your email subject line. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to b e presented during public comment are accepted only by email to city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the City Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold st rong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. 2 Special Meeting August 22, 2022 Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. CALL TO ORDER SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY 1.Interviews for the Human Relations Commission AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS PUBLIC COMMENT 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. CONSENT CALENDAR Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 2.Review and Approve the Williamson Act Contract Renewals Within Palo Alto City Limits (2022) 3.2515 El Camino Real: Ratify a BMR Regulatory Agreement Permitting Rental of Two Units at Below Market Rates and Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute and Record Amendment No. 1 to the Regulatory Agreement. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to Guidelines Section 15601(b)(3). 4.1985 Louis Road (First Congregational Church of Palo Alto) [22PLN- 00159]: Appeal of a Director’s Decision Approving a Safe Parking Program Permit to Allow Overnight Parking of up to Four (4) Vehicles at the Subject Property. Environmental Assessment: Exempt. Zoning District: R-1 (Single-Family Residential). AA1. Repeal of a Resolution Adopted on August 8, 2022 and Adoption of a Revised Resolution Establishing Advisory Spending Guidelines for Business Tax Proceeds AA2. Approval of the City Position for the 2022 Cal Cities Annual Conference Resolution CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ACTION ITEMS Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. Public Letters 3 Special Meeting August 22, 2022 Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. 5.Consider a Recommendation to Review and Endorse the 202 3-31 Draft Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs and Updated Sites Suitability Inventory and Analysis; Provide Direction on Possible Land Use Policy Changes to Promote Housing in Certain General Manufacturing (GM) and Research, Office and Limited Ma nufacturing (ROLM) Districts; and, Receive an Update on the Housing Element Project Schedule. AA3. City Auditor Vacancy: Council Direction on Next Steps COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION REPORTS Information reports are provided for informational purposes only to the Council and the public but are not listed for action during this meeting’s agenda. 6.Contracts Awarded by the City Manager and Chief Procurement Officer OTHER INFORMATION Standing Committee Meetings - None Public Comment Letters Schedule of Meetings AMENDED AGENDA ITEMS Items that have been added/modified fro m the original publication of the agenda are listed below. Any corresponding materials are appended to the end of the initial packet. If full items have been added to the Agenda, they will be denoted with a number staring with AA, meaning Amended Agenda it em. AA1. Repeal of a Resolution Adopted on August 8, 2022 and Adoption of a Revised Resolution Establishing Advisory Spending Guidelines for Business Tax Proceeds AA2. Approval of the City Position for the 2022 Cal Cities Annual Conference Resolution AA3. City Auditor Vacancy: Council Direction on Next Steps Public Letters Presentation 4 Special Meeting August 22, 2022 Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.CityofPaloAlto.org. PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. A. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. B. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. C. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. D. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. E. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions B-E above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Council. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 362 027 238 Phone:1(669)900-6833 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14580) Office of the City Clerk City Council CAO Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Title: Interviews for the Human Relations Commission From: Lesley Milton, City Clerk Recommendation Conduct interviews with all applicants for the Human Relations Commission. Discussion Boards and Commissions are established as advisory bodies to th e City Council, made up of community volunteers that provide essential feedback on matters of importance to the community. The City Clerk’s office advertises and recruits for vacancies, the Council considers the applications, interviews desired candidates, and makes recommendations for appointment for the open positions. Commissioner Patti Regehr resigned from the Human Relations Commission on May 31, 2022. As such, the current vacancy staff is requesting to be filled is: • One (1) position on the Human Relations Commission, with term expiring March 31, 2023 A total of 6 applications have been submitted during the recruitment period. On Monday August 8, 2022 the City Council directed that all applicants be scheduled for interview and consideration. The interview schedule will be as follows: Schedule of Interviews for August 22, 2022 Human Relations Commission 5:00 PM Donald Barr In-person 5:10 PM Katie Causey Virtual 5:20 PM Chitra Sharma In-person 5:30 PM Tracy Navichoque In-person 1 Packet Pg. 5 Page 2 5:40 PM Sunita De Tourreil Virtual 5:50 PM Kat Synder In-person Membership Requirements Per PAMC 2.22.010, The Human Relations Commission requires each member of the commission to have Palo Alto residency. Human Relations Commission: One position Term ending March 31, 2023 • Palo Alto Residency Public Outreach Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.16.060 requires public notification regarding vacancies of the Commissions as follows, “The City Clerk shall exercise their discretion in choosing the method of advertisement that will most effectively reach potential candidates.” Based on the September 14, 2021 Policy & Services Committee meeting report (available here) regarding Board and Commission Member demographics and community representation the City Clerk’s office expanded recruitment efforts through additional means to “most effectively reach potential candidates”. The Human Relations Commission special recruitment invited applications from June 10, 2022 through July 27, 2022 through the new online application process. The vacancy was advertised through various methods in partnership with the Communications team. This included paid and digital print advertisements in the Daily Post and Palo Alto Weekly; via the City’s website and social media channels; in physical locations of the Palo Alto Libraries and Community Centers; and distributed by e-mail and through the City subscription-based notification lists. ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment1.a: HRC - All Applications_Redacted (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 6 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:15 July 2022, 1:40PM Receipt number:8 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name Donald Barr Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 7 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? City Website Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website 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. Alternate Contact Information - Address Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number Alternate Contact Information - Email 2 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 8 Personal and Job Experience Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) MD - University of California, San Francisco 1973 PhD - Sociology, Stanford University 1993 Licensed physician in California, 1974 - present Faculty, Stanford University, 1993 - present, teaching courses on U.S. Health Care Policy and on Racial and Social Inequality in Health. Employment Information Company/Employer Name Stanford University Occupation Professor of Pediatrics, and of Education (by courtesy) Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) For more than 2 decades I have been involved in developing affordable housing in Palo Alto and in providing services to the homeless. I founded the Community Working Group and led the non-profit organization in the development of the Opportunity Center in Palo Alto, which provides housing, social services, and medical care to the homeless. I also led the organization's effort in developing the affordable housing facility at 801 Alma in Palo Alto. I served on the Board of the organization for more than 10 years. I founded the nonprofit organization that is now the Peninsula Healthcare Connection (PHC), and currently serve as Board Secretary. PHC is a federally certified (lookalike) health clinic that provides medical services and social services support to the currently homeless and to the formerly homeless who have been placed in housing. For the past year I have also served on the Board of Directors of Avenidas, the senior services agency in Palo Alto. I have also worked for more than two decades at Stanford to reduce racial inequalities in access to medical school. With my support, a substantial number of former Stanford students from under-represented racial minorities have become successful health care professionals. 3 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 9 Application Questions 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) The Palo Alto community is facing a number of challenges, some as a result of the pandemic and some unrelated to the pandemic. Seniors – those age 65 or older – are one of the groups most affected by these challenges. As a member of the Board of Directors of Avenidas, I have committed to addressing the personal and social needs of seniors in Palo Alto. Issues such as social isolation as a result of the pandemic and rising costs of housing have impacted the lives of a number of senior residents of Palo Alto. As a member of the HRC I would work both to learn about and to address these issues. As I have also been working for many years to support the homeless population in our community, I would also address the needs of this population as a Commissioner. As a member of the HRC I would build on my experience addressing the needs of seniors and of the homeless to work to understand and to support the needs of all members of our community, with a focus on the needs of socially and economically disadvantaged populations. 4 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 10 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. As part of the May 24 meeting, the HRC established a series of “ad hoc sub-committees” to address issues that are part of the 2022-23 HRC Work Plan. I note that the membership of the sub-committee on “Housing/Homelessness – Advocacy” was “TBD”, which I take to mean to be determined. As a Commissioner, I would hope to play a role in this important public health issue. Through my work in support of the homeless, I am aware that there are a number of groups in the population we consider homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. These include the recently housed, the unhoused who come to the Opportunity Center for services, and the unhoused who remain isolated and do not seek services. It is important to learn more about these populations through collaboration with both County agencies and community organizations that focus on the needs of these populations. I also note that, in identifying the issues to be addressed by the HRC ad-hoc committees, the social and economic needs of the population of seniors in our community were not included. I would advocate to establish an ad-hoc committee to assess and address the needs of seniors. In this role I would work to collaborate with Avenidas in addressing this issue. 5 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 11 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) As I have indicated in my response to the earlier questions, I would like the HRC to focus on understanding and supporting the needs of seniors and of the homeless. A key step in this process would be to gather data from other governmental agencies and from community groups on the social, economic, and health care needs of these groups. The Commission can then suggest to the City Council and the City government steps that might be taken to address these needs. As an additional goal, I would encourage the HRC to address the needs of another group in our community: workers in the retail and service sectors of our community. It would be important to learn about the typical wages and income of these workers, and where their income places these workers on the spectrum of housing affordability (e.g., moderate-income, low-income, very-low-income). As the City Council continues to consider options for expanding housing in our community, including the housing needs of workers will be essential. The HRC could play a central role in this process. 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) I have no personal experience with any of these documents. As a member of HRC, I would read each of these documents to learn about the issues they address. If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. Tall Tree-2006.pdf 6 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 12 Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes Signature Name of signatory: Donald A Barr Link to signature Date Completed 07/15/2022 7 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 13 Select FILE --> PRINT to print this story. News - Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Education, housing activists win 'Tall Tree' awards Honors planned for Barbara Spreng, Donald Barr, Children's Health Council, Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center by Jay Thorwaldson School-leadership activist Barbara Spreng and advocate for the homeless Donald Barr, M.D., have been named 2006 recipients of the Tall Tree Award by the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce. The Children's Health Council has been cited as outstanding non -profit organization and the Palo Alto-based Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center as outstanding business, due to its support for community programs. The awards will be presented Wednesday, April 5, at the 26 th annual Tall Tree Awards dinner, this year at the Crowne Plaza Cabana hotel in Palo Alto. Spreng will receive the award for "outstanding volunteer" for her years of work on behalf of Palo Alto schools, including key roles in raising funds, and for her community and education work generally. The array of organizations for which she has worked include the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (PTAC), Palo Alto Foundation for Education, Adolescent Counseling Service - she served terms as board president of all three organizations. She also has been active with Palo Altans for Government Effectiveness, Leadership Midpeninsula, the Foundation for a College Education and others. "Barbara personifies the meaning of 'outstanding volunteer,'" Mayor Judy Kleinberg said in a nomination letter. "She has unselfishly, and with little recognition, devoted her talents and time to a broad cross-section of organizations committed to improving the quality of life for children and families in Palo Alto." Spreng also has worked as a child advocate for Kids in Common, a Silicon Valley children's advocacy organization, where she helped create an immunization program for underprivileged children in the region. Nancy Shepherd, another former PTAC president, noted that "Few presidents have ever served during a parcel-tax campaign, let alone two in one year! Her service leadership style contributed directly (to) the development and final success of these campaigns." Dr. Barr, named "outstanding professional," was founding president of the Community Working Group on Homeless Services beginning in 1998 after a flood shut down a small drop -in center. He spearheaded the creation of the Opportunity Center, now under construction on Encina Avenue between the Palo Alto Medical Foundation and Town & Country Village Shopping Center. "Don's devotion to responding creatively, in this very tangible way, to the problem of homelessness in our community is unprecedented," the Rev. Jeffrey Vamos of the Community Working Group board - which nominated Dr. Barr - said of his leadership. "Don has been the key factor in the creation of this $24 million facility," which will be "a lasting legacy to our whole community," the Rev. Vamos said. He noted that Dr. Barr has performed without pay the duties of a CEO in the complex, often challenging development of the center. "He has performed this service in addition to his duties as a professor of sociology at Stanford - where he has also received the Dinkelspiel Award for his outstanding work - and his work as a practicing physician at the Palo Alto Medical Foundation," he said. The Children's Health Council, for just over a half century, has provided diagnostic, treatment and counseling services for children and families facing the challenges of learning disabilities and emotional and speech problems, ranging from autism to dyslexia, depression to hyperactivity disorders. It also operates the Esther B. Clark School for young persons aged 7 to 17 who are unable to function in public or private school systems, typically transitioning them back into regular schools within a year or two. The school is named for the late Esther Clark, one of the first women pediatricians on the Peninsula and an early partner with the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. The CHC was initially founded to address needs of children stricken with polio, but evolved to include a range of complex medical problems and their side effects. 1.a Packet Pg. 14 The Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center (ATC), in the Stanford Research Park, is comprised of more than 700 persons engaged for the past half century in research and development for Lockheed Martin Space Systems. The ATC community activities have included being a founding community leader in "Palo Alto Green," the city-wide effort to create a more sustainable environment through use of renewable energy. The company executed the first renewable power purchase nationally by a leading defense and aerospace contractor. The firm has donated to scores of local and regional organizations, directly and through an employee -giving program. In the past year, it has contributed to Habitat for Humanity, Committee for Green Foothills, Community School for Music and Arts, Resource Area for Teachers, the Marine Science Center, Camp Anytown, Junior Achievement, Teach for America, the Arts Council of Silicon Valley and the California League of Conservation Voters - in addition to other programs. Editor Jay Thorwaldson can be reached at jthorwaldson@paweekly.com. Find this article at: http://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekly/story.php ?story_id=132 1.a Packet Pg. 15 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:14 June 2022, 10:54PM Receipt number:4 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name Katie Causey Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 16 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Email from the City Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website Read the code, and check only ONE option below: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 the following contact information below: Alternate Contact Information - Address Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number Alternate Contact Information - Email Personal and Job Experience 2 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 17 Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) I was born and raised in Palo Alto where I have lived my entire life I attended PAUSD for my entire K-12 education I graduated from the George Washington University in 2017 with a Bachelor’s in Women’s Studies where my program primarily focused on looking at community issues and different approaches to resolve them (for example: addressing discrimination, harrassment, intersectional approaches resolving conflict between communites with complex history between eachother, etc.). Employment Information Company/Employer Name Palo Alto Forward Occupation Community Engagement Manager Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer 3 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 18 Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) I’ve been a member of the American Association of University Women since 2017 and have been hired as community advocate for them to speak on issues such as addressing sexual harassment in schools. In 2019 I assisted the Palo Alto Recreation Foundation with their fundraising and community outreach. Since I was a teenager I have actively volunteered in Palo Alto and the Bay Area. Between 2019 - 2020 I served on the Fund Development Council for the Junior League of San Francisco which supports a variety of programs in the Bay Area including those used in Palo Alto. I was also awarded by them for my volunteer work in the community and my leadership. I’ve worked on a variety of local campaigns and in 2020 ran for PAUSD Board of Education. From the end of 2021 until last month I worked as an Organizer for the Palo Alto Renters’ Association primarily helping tenants in Palo Alto facing eviction during the pandemic. I am currently a student completing the necessary coursework to become eligible for a Master’s in Bioengineering. Between 2018 - 2020 I served as Chair for the League of Women Voters Palo Alto Committee to End Gun Violence, I also supported their Climate Change Committee. Application Questions 4 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 19 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) I've been interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission the last several years, as I stated before my undergraduate degree was in Women's Studies and how my program worked was we would look at the history of different communities and identities, and each week we would get an example based on a real case of an issue in a community (mediating a conflict, discrimination, harassment, etc.) and we would discuss the different interest groups and perspectives involved, and how to solve the issue from both a lens of community action and also policy change. I've brought that perspective to a work with a variety of nonprofits in the area and I've heavily volunteered in the community since I was a teenager. The Human Relations Commission covers a very broad range of subjects I'm highly interested in. I also can say from running for office I know how to be open and seek feedback from a wide range of community members in Palo Alto. I'm also a young LGBT+ women someone who grew up in this community and I currently balance multiple jobs and being a student, a huge reason I haven't applied to this commission sooner is a 4 year unpaid position is a big commitment, but this was the perfect timing of I know I can commit to the next 9 months. 5 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 20 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. As an Organizer at the Palo Alto Renters' Association I met with members of the Human Relations Commission to give feedback on the impact of renters protections in Palo Alto based on my last 6 months of working with tenants. While there's a very wide range of subjects the Human Relations Commission covers that I am interested in, housing is such a critical issue and evictions are happening now. As someone who grew up here working as an organizer, the impact of evictions are horrific they rip our community apart I've seen first hand what happens in Palo Alto when someone faces eviction whether their a single parent just trying to keep their kid in the local schools or they're elderly on social security and have lived in this community for decades. 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) While this appointment is only for 8-9 months I would love to help the Human Relations Commission in any manner possible in furthering their work to support independent investigation of the hate crimes that have occurred the last several years, as their occurrence has been deeply unsettling. If this was 9 months where we had an unlimited amount of time and resources I would love to work to further support our LGBT+ youth in Palo Alto whether through a pride celebration or youth community resources. 6 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 21 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) NA If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes Signature Name of signatory: Katie Causey Link to signature Date Completed 06/14/2022 7 of 7 1.a Packet Pg. 22 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:13 June 2022, 8:57PM Receipt number:3 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name Sunita de Tourreil Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 23 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Email from the City Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website Read the code, and check only ONE option below: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 the following contact information below: Alternate Contact Information - Address City Hall HRC contact address (my home address should not be listed) Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number 650-796-5287 Alternate Contact Information - Email sunita@chocolatedividends.org 2 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 24 Personal and Job Experience Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) I have a graduate degree in Science, worked in medical research for many years, became an entrepreneur and have my own business for nearly 20 years. I served on the HRC for a partial term, like the one I am applying for, I trained to be a Court Appointed Special Advocate in the early 2000s, for children in the foster system. Employment Information Company/Employer Name Happy Chocolate Experiences, LLC Occupation entrepreneur Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) HRC Fall 2020-Spring 2021 Palo Alto Girls Softball Assistant and Head Coach Application Questions 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) I served a partial term in 2020-2021, and I learned a lot about how the organization works, the kind of grant work we do, and how we can make sure all voices are heard. I am interested in serving again, because it is my main way to engage and do my civic duty, as I am not a citizen of this country (by choice) and yet I feel I owe my community my engagement, and it deserves alternate points of view that come from being raised in another country, with parents who were nationals of yet two other countries. 3 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 25 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. I remain interested in all issues relating to bringing compassion and kindness to all of our neighbors. An ongoing issue that remains on my radar, is to do with the unhoused, the cost of housing and ensuring that post-Covid we are able to enable folks who are struggling to be able to have the support needed to be able to keep finding more opportunity, not less. 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) I believe that a national reckoning is necessary and underway, to rectify inequities and economic and racial injustices, and Palo Alto needs to do its part. It's leaders and our community have a responsibility to see where we have historically fallen short, and continue to fall short, and take an honest and humble look at how our systems (housing, policing, parks and recreation) are not serving all. We must be the innovative leader, showing how we take Silicon Valley principles and apply them to community problems. We are leaders at thinking outside of the box, and daring greatly. We can do this with more than tech, we can also lead the way in fostering a more inclusive and welcoming community that is a tight knit group of folks who are stronger together. We can show that inclusion leads to so much more than the sum of its parts. None of this needs to be a pure sacrifice, we can all grow and be better by being better together. 4 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 26 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) I believe I worked with the Human Services Needs Assessment and some other guidelines used for doing the CBDG grants and helping with the granting of emergency funds. If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes Signature Name of signatory: Sunita de Tourreil Link to signature Date Completed 06/13/2022 5 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 27 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:26 July 2022, 3:46PM Receipt number:12 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name Tracy Alejandra Navichoque Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 28 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? City Website Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website Read the code, and check only ONE option below: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 the following contact information below: Alternate Contact Information - Address Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number Alternate Contact Information - Email Personal and Job Experience 2 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 29 Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) Bachelors Degree in History from Northwestern University Master's Degree in Public Diplomacy from USC Employment Information Company/Employer Name Stanford University Occupation Program Manager Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) Volunteer at the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula Application Questions 3 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 30 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) Although I have only lived in Palo Alto since January of 2020, I am keen to serve and contribute to my community. As a first generation American who first learned to speak Spanish, I have constantly seeking ways to make equity a priority for all, especially when it comes to language and translation. My current work revolves around human rights and ensuring that our right to privacy and free expression are protected in digital spaces. I would like to contribute my fresh perspective and dedication equality. Most of my work in this space has been through volunteer positions but I would like to complement that work with discussions about policy. I am currently a program manager at Stanford and can bring organizational, management, and analyst skills to the commission. I have also lived and worked abroad (Turkey, Uruguay, and Guatemala) so I am willing seeking to integrate worldly perspectives. In the past, I served as an education manager for the Los Angeles World Affairs Council and also as an arts educators for several art museums, where I was tasked with focusing on integration and equity for all demographics and learning abilities. 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. I would like to work and learn about all topics but am keen on contributing to the reduction of hate speech in our communities. I am particularly interested in this topic because my employment explicitly deals with the nuances of freedom of speech and considers the negative impacts of hateful discriminatory speech and its adverse effects on communities. This topic was explicitly debated during the March 10, 2022 meeting. I would also like to work on human rights specific projects. 4 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 31 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) My goal is to ensure that all persons can participate equally. Moreover, I would like to contribute to the promotion of community awareness and understanding. The pandemic has isolates us greatly. As a relatively new community member, I would like to sponsor more neighbor initiatives so that we can interact with one another. My goal is to oil the wheels of conversation. When we speak to one another, we can put in place a better practice of listening! When we listen, we can better understand one another. I would also like to use the robust park system in Palo Alto as a medium through which we can apply some of the commission's laudable goals. Secondly, I live next to two elderly neighbors. While I help day to day with groceries and some digital literacy, I would like to consider policies that could assist our aging neighbors at a city wide level. 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) None at the moment but willing and able to learn and engage. If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes 5 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 32 Signature Name of signatory: Tracy Navichoque Link to signature Date Completed 07/26/2022 6 of 6 1.a Packet Pg. 33 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:17 June 2022, 5:43AM Receipt number:6 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name chitra sharma Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 34 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? City Website Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website 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. Alternate Contact Information - Address Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number Alternate Contact Information - Email 2 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 35 Personal and Job Experience Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) MS Pharmaceutical Sciences - worked in the Biotech industry for over 25 years and have a mindset to work towards better governance and compliance in public health for communities. Have been part of the PTA at Duveneck and Palo Alto High School, and volunteered heavily in the school district for the last 11 years. Am the block disaster coordinator and also helped neighbors widely during Covid, esp those with preexisting conditions and vulnerabilities. Am actively engaged as a parent leader in the BSA Troop 57 Boy Scout troop in Palo Alto. My life goal is to volunteer and give back to my neighbors and community. Employment Information Company/Employer Name gCompliance, Inc. Occupation Scientist Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) 1989-1992 Built a audio book library with recorded books for the visually handicapped in Bombay, India 1992-1994 Raised funds for natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes in the world for the school of Internally affairs, UConn , CT 1995-1999 Served a non-profit to assist poor children gain scholarships. 2000-2004 Worked to raise money to serve Breast cancer 2013 Raised money and walked 39.2 miles for Breast cancer awareness. 2006-2017 Active volunteer in PAUSD schools, Duveneck PTA and PALY PTA-2022 Parent leader in BSA Boy Scouts of America Troop 57 3 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 36 Application Questions 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) I want to work on actionable items on the city’s community planning and help my community 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. Castelija school building issue 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) I would like to streamline homelessness and see how best to svt 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) I do not have any experience but would love to learn more. If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. 4 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 37 Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes Signature Name of signatory: Chitra Sharma Link to signature Date Completed 06/17/2022 5 of 5 1.a Packet Pg. 38 Human Relations Commission Application Submission date:26 July 2022, 3:45PM Receipt number:13 Related form version:3 Personal Information Name Kat Snyder Address City Postal Code Cell Phone Number Home Phone Number Email Address Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes 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? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes 1 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 39 Fair Political Practices California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700). Do you/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 this Board or Commission? No Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Other: watching HRC and City Council meetings Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website Read the code, and check only ONE option below: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 the following contact information below: Alternate Contact Information - Address Alternate Contact Information - Phone Number Alternate Contact Information - Email katsnyderux@gmail.com Personal and Job Experience 2 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 40 Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, and professional registration. (621 characters max) User Experience Researcher/Designer, Catalina Labs, Palo Alto, CA, 2016-2017 User Experience Researcher, Go Live Labs, Sunnyvale, CA, 2016 M.A. Psychology, Cognition and Perception UT Austin, 2014 (PhD Coursework) B.S. Symbolic Systems, Stanford University, 2006 Educated in PAUSD 1990-2002 Peace Ambassador Training (one evening, July 2020) via San Jose Peace and Justice Center. Learned de- escalation tactics useful for march and rally organizers. Poll Monitor Training (one evening, before each volunteer day) via Asian Law Caucus - Northern California chapter Employment Information Company/Employer Name Ashworth College, HVAC certification program Occupation student Is your Company/Employer your current one or last?Current Employer 3 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 41 Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held. (1242 characters max) - 350 Palo Alto Steering Committee Member, March 2022-present. Helped organize the 2022 Earth Day event co-sponsored by the City of Palo Alto. Organized an upcoming demo of an induction cooktop powered by an electric vehicle at the Sept 25th Midtown Ice Cream Social. - Palo Alto Against ICE, head of Ordinance Committee, 2019-2020. The primary goal was to research whether to and how to pass a city ordinance that prohibits the city from contracting with any companies that pass information to ICE. We also ran actions such as public comment campaigns against allowing Palantir to co-sponsor any city cultural events, and a protest rally in front of Palantir that got covered in Business Insider. - Volunteer Poll Monitor - Asian Law Caucus - Northern California chapter. November 2020 general election, monitored 4 precincts in San Francisco. June 2022 primary election, monitored 4 precincts in Stanislaus County. - Co-op Director, Laurel Housing Co-op, Austin, TX, 2008-2009 Ran a 60 person housing co-op as well as managing a team of house officers. Ran house elections and weekly house meetings. - Board Member (and Finance Subcommittee Member), College Houses Board of Directors, Austin, TX, 2008-2009 Application Questions 4 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 42 1. W hy are you interested in serving on the Human Relations Commission and what experience would you bring to the position? (1518 characters max) This particular slot only runs through March and it leaves the Climate Emergency workplan item without any commissioners. I’ve attended the HRC meetings for the past 3 years, I’ve watched every S/CAP meeting, and I’m a steering committee member of 350 Palo Alto. I believe I’m well positioned to start work on the HRC and also to help head the Climate Emergency item. Participating in city government meetings has taught me the scope of different committees/commissions and of the standard deliverables from one body to another. Getting from ideas to action involves understanding the city process and how different suggestions create different administrative burdens. I also learn some of the latest city work on electrification through my weekly 350 Palo Alto meetings, which gives me more context for the city's plans around the climate emergency and can help me make recommendations that are better scoped for the city. My graduate psychology background helps me digest and summarize the latest research about racial trauma and effective healing interventions. We need to use every tool in our toolbox to help provide healing and create community resiliency as hate crimes only continue to increase. My work in cognitive psychology, and user experience research and design, is especially pertinent when designing for communities with disabilities or other marginalized communities. I would also be well- equipped to read through that research and bring that knowledge to the table when designing new policies. 5 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 43 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. (1449 characters max) Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center. I have followed the national conversation around policing, racism, and criminal justice reform since Trayvon Martin was killed in 2012, but that was mostly educating myself on the latest academic research around the subject. After the death of George Floyd, I made a promise to myself to get actively involved in these issues at a city level because I can best make a difference at the local level. I followed the 8 Can't Wait conversations through the HRC, City Council and various other city forums at the time. I gave comment where I thought appropriate - around changes in police policy, around the first amendment right to protest, and around the press' role in police oversight. I even read through academic papers around police policy reform and pulled out an actionable suggestion, which the HRC's then Vice Chair Valerie Stinger forwarded to City Council. Over time and with experience, I'm learning to hone my recommendations to better interface with city government and I have also gradually gotten a wider sense of the number of departments and bodies that could and should be considered stakeholders in these issues. I am committed to strengthening the city's process around improving police policy as informed by a wide variety of community, academic research, and criminal justice perspectives. 3. If you are appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and how would you help in the process? (1656 characters max) Note: Because of the short timeframe, I would first ask the HRC to help me scope and prioritize the following ideas Climate Change: develop a disability-inclusive plan for public safety power shutoffs, wildfires, and floods. - Collect and summarize background research on what people across the spectrum of disability need from emergency services. - Interview a range of disability activists, disability organizations, people with disabilities, and caregivers 6 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 44 (when applicable) on their emergency services needs and the barriers to meeting them. - Seek out partnerships with governmental and non- governmental organizations that help provide emergency services to people with disabilities. Include any relevant stakeholders around our city's emergency services in this conversation. - Start a conversation around whether any of the organizations from the previous bullet point should be invited to apply for HSRAP grants, including the Emerging Needs fund. Hate Crimes: - Flesh out trauma-informed interventions for victims of Hate Crimes - Partner with a community group that holds bystander intervention trainings and create an advertising campaign to urge Palo Alto residents to complete the training Police Reform: - The HRC's review of 8 Can't Wait (as directed by City Council) was triggered by a national tragedy. Going forward, it makes sense to create objective criteria for triggering a review of police policy by the City Council - and/or by the HRC, when applicable. I would recommend that the HRC, in co-operation with relevant stakeholders, draft a set of criteria for City Council to review. 7 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 45 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. (690 characters max) Human Services Needs Assessment (2020) Muni Code 9.72 – Mandatory Response Program Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2017) I am familiar with the Human Services Needs Assessment document as that shows up during HRC meetings. I am not familiar with the other two, but feel confident I could use them to fulfill my duties. If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload below. Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions Handbook. View the Boards and Commissions Handbook. Yes Signature Name of signatory: Katherine "Kat" Snyder Link to signature Date Completed 07/26/2022 8 of 8 1.a Packet Pg. 46 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14413) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Williamson Act Contract Renewal (2022) Title: Review and Approve the Williamson Act Contract Renewals Within Palo Alto City Limits (2022) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Find that the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15317; and 2. Approve the renewal of Williamson Act contracts listed in Attachment A. Executive Summary: The City of Palo Alto currently has 23 properties (350.05 acres of land) in contract under the Williamson Act. The proposed Council action would extend these 23 existing Williamson Act contracts between the City and landowners for another ten-year term starting January 1, 2023. The City did not receive any request for nonrenewal during this reporting cycle. Following Council action, the City will submit its annual report to the California Department of Conservation by October 31, 2022. Background: The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly known as the Williamson Act, is a State program. The program discourages agricultural lands from being converted to urban uses, preserves open space, and promotes efficient urban growth patterns. Under the Williamson Act, private landowners can voluntarily restrict their land to agricultural and compatible open - space land uses under a minimum ten-year rolling term contract. These contracts are administered by the respective jurisdictions. In return, the State assesses the restricted parcels for property taxes at a rate consistent with their actual use or generated income, rather than 2 Packet Pg. 47 City of Palo Alto Page 2 potential market value. The program provides property tax relief to owners of agricultural land who agree to limit the use of their property to agricultural or other approved compatible uses. On July 24, 1974, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2663 to institute rules for both establishing and administering Williamson Act contracts for Palo Alto pr operties. The rules regarding the administration of established contracts limit the allowable uses of the property to what is described in the contract. The regulations also provide that the contract must remain in place when a property is sold, ensuring that the new owners are subject to the same use restrictions. The contracts are for a rolling ten-year term with a renewal date of January 1 each year, at which time one year is added to the contract term. The term would remain a total of ten years unless the City or property owner provides notice of non-renewal. The California Department of Conservation’s Williamson Act Program requires participating cities and counties to complete and submit applications for an Open Space Subvention Act1 payment per Government Code section 16144. The code states: "On or before October 31 each year, the governing body of each county, city, or city and county shall report to the Secretary of the Resources Agency the number of acres of land under its regulatory jurisdiction which qualifies for state payments pursuant to the various categories enumerated in Section 16142, together with supporting documentation as the secretary by regulation may require.” While the State no longer provides meaningful subvention payments2 to local agencies, this reporting requirement remains in the law. Every year, at least 80 days prior to the January 1 renewal date, the City Council reviews the contracts. Also, at that time, Council may initiate a notice of non-renewal for any contract or approve a notice of non-renewal submitted by a landowner. If the Council takes such action, then that contract does not renew on January 1 and terminates ten years later. Under certain conditions, the Council may also approve a landowner’s request to cancel a contract. Should Council not approve a notice of non-renewal or cancellation, the contract automatically renews for the ten-year term each January 1. 1 Working in conjunction with the Williamson Act, the Open -Space Subvention Act provides for the partial reimbursement of property tax revenue lost as a result of participation in the program to local governments. Cities and counties are eligible to receive $5 per acre of prime agricultural land enrolled in the program and $1 per acre of non-prime land. 2 A subvention payment is paid to the local governments to offset loss of property tax revenue due to lower assessments for Williamson Act parcels. The amount of the state subvention to localities is based on the amount and type of land under contract. The Legislature suspended subvention payments in FY 2010 -11 and has not reinstated them. 2 Packet Pg. 48 City of Palo Alto Page 3 Discussion: The Williamson Act Property Report for the calendar year 2022 (Attachment A) includes information on the 23 existing parcels in Palo Alto currently under contract, as well as parcels undergoing the process of non-renewal. Attachment A lists 2022 assessed land values, acreages, and the land class (prime and non-prime land) for these parcels. Attachment B is a map showing the locations of these individual parcels. Properties Under Contract Renewal The owners of all 23 properties are renewing their contracts with the City for another ten-year term, starting from January 1, 2023. Of the 23 contracts, the privately-operated Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club is not eligible for tax benefits. Although this golf course is a permitted use, only golf courses that are open to the public and charge minimal green fees are eligible for tax benefits. A total of 350 acres of land are under Williamson Act contracts in the City. Approximately 42 % of this land (147 acres) is defined as prime land with a Class I or Class II natural resource conservation service rating. Class I or II lands are considered to have the features to sustain long-term agricultural production. Private individuals own about 70% of the land under contract. Stanford University Board of Trustees owns another 27%, while the City of Palo Alto owns the remaining three percent. The Williamson Act Status Report 2020-213, published by the California Department of Conservation in May 2022, provides a detailed report of all lands enrolled in the program throughout the state of California from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Properties Under Contract Non-Renewal There were no applications for Williamson Act contract non-renewal filed with the City between November 1, 2021, through August 1, 2022. At present, there are two parcels, previously approved for non-renewal by the Council (in 2014 and 2016), that are undergoing the ten-year non-renewal process for termination. The two parcels will reach the end of their remaining terms on December 31, 2024, and 2026 respectively (see Attachment A for parcel details). Policy Implications: 3 https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/wa/Documents/stats_reports/2018%20WA%20Status%20Report.pdf 2 Packet Pg. 49 City of Palo Alto Page 4 The recommended action implements Ordinance No. 2663 regarding the administration of the Williamson Act for Palo Alto properties. The Williamson Act program complies with the goals of the Natural Environment Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan 2030. The Natural Environment Element encourages the protection and conservation of Palo Alto’s open space, natural resources, and ecosystems. Program N1.3.1 of Goal N-1 specifically supports the preservation of Palo Alto’s Williamson Act agricultural preserves. Resource Impacts: The City does not receive any property tax revenue for those parcels enrolled in the Williamson Act program. The State of California bases property tax assessment for Williamson Act parcels on a rate consistent with the actual land use or generated income, rather than its potential market value. Because of this method of assessment, the City does not receive market value tax revenue for these properties. Based on data collected from the County Assessor’s Office, the City would have received approximately $16,216 in tax revenue if the parcels were not under Williamson Act contracts. Historically, the City received approximately $1,000 a year in subvention payments from the State to partially offset the foregone revenue. However, the State suspended funding for these payments in 2011. The Assembly Bill 1265 allowed participating cities and counties to recapture ten percent (10%) of the benefits; however, the implementation of this provision is generally only cost-effective for cities and counties that have significant acreage under contract. Timeline: This is an annual report due to the California Department of Conservation by October 31 of each year. Stakeholder Engagement: This is a required annual reporting to the Department of Conservation. The City does not typically perform public outreach or contact affected property owners unless changes are initiated by the property owners. This type of reporting does not require any additional public engagement. Environmental Review: The proposed project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15317 (Open Space Contracts or Easements) of the CEQA Guidelines. Attachments: 2 Packet Pg. 50 City of Palo Alto Page 5 Attachment2.a: Attachment A: List of Williamson Act Properties, 2022 (PDF) Attachment2.b: Attachment B: Williamson Act Parcels Map, 2022 (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 51 Number APN Street Name Full Address Owner Name Williamson Act Land Ownership Zoning Acreage after Deducting Homesite Exclusion Homesite Exclusion Land Class Contract Start Date Contract Status Assessed Land Value 20211 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2021) Assessed Land Value 20221 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2022) 1 120-31-0012 El Camino Real 103 El Camino Real Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land PF 0.72 No acreage deducted Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $12,988 $12,988 2 120-31-0092 El Camino Real 103 El Camino Real Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land PF 10.00 No acreage deducted Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $180,705 $180,705 3 142-16-052 Coyote Hill Road No Street Number Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land AC (D)36.02 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $17,421 $17,421 4 142-16-057 Coyote Hill Road No Street Number Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land AC( D)15.33 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $9,605 $9,605 5 142-16-064 Deer Creek Road No Street Number Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land AC( D)4.04 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $2,964 $2,964 6 142-16-065 Deer Creek Road No Street Number Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land AC( D)16.70 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $10,411 $10,411 7 142-16-069 Coyote Hill Road No Street Number Leland Stanford Jr., Univ. Board of Trustees Stanford University Land AC( D)12.48 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $7,929 $7,929 8 182-33-0143 Arastrader o Rd 1525 Arastradero Rd City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto Land PF 11.42 No acreage deducted Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $0 $0 9 182-35-008 Alexis Dr Alexis Dr Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club, Inc. Private Ownership OS 5.52 No acreage deducted Prime 5/1/1973 Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $56,600 $57,732 10 182-35-035 Alexis Dr 3000 Alexis Dr Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club, Inc. Private Ownership OS 119.92 No acreage deducted Prime 5/1/1973 Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $1,559,988 $1,591,187 11 351-05-024 Page Mill Rd 3845 Page Mill Rd Judith A. Block Trustee Private Ownership OS 7.72 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime 2/16/1976 Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $57,145 $58,277 12 351-05-042 Page Mill Rd 3837 Page Mill Rd David P. and Cynthia Lautzenheiser Trustee Private Ownership OS 9.00 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $434,050 $442,718 List of Parcels under Williamson Act Contract to Renew on January 1, 2023 Page 1 of 3 2.a Packet Pg. 52 Number APN Street Name Full Address Owner Name Williamson Act Land Ownership Zoning Acreage after Deducting Homesite Exclusion Homesite Exclusion Land Class Contract Start Date Contract Status Assessed Land Value 20211 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2021) Assessed Land Value 20221 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2022) 13 351-05-043 Page Mill Rd No Street Number Richard D. Guhse Trustee Private Ownership OS 19.01 No acreage deducted Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $1,411 $1,411 14 351-05-044 Page Mill Rd 3905 Page Mill Rd Michael R. Lowry Private Ownership OS 5.43 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $198,854 $202,831 15 351-05-045 Page Mill Rd 3895 Page Mill Rd Marc and Lesley Wilkinson Private Ownership OS 9.00 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $1,137,647 $1,160,399 16 351-05-046 Page Mill Rd 3885 Page Mill Rd William W. and Sharon T. Luciw Trustee Private Ownership OS 7.45 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $1,136,471 $1,159,190 17 351-05-047 Page Mill Rd 3875 Page Mill Rd Richard D. Kniss Trustee & Et Al Private Ownership OS 10.00 No acreage deducted Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $705 $705 18 351-05-048 Page Mill Rd 3865 Page Mill Rd Grace Carland Trustee Private Ownership OS 9.00 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $39,306 $40,079 19 351-05-049 Page Mill Rd 3855 Page Mill Rd Patrick K. Suppes Private Ownership OS 10.00 No acreage deducted Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $566,399 $577,726 20 351-12-062 Skyline Blvd 5061 Skyline Blvd Rogers Noah Private Ownership OS 10.39 No acerage deducted Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $223,058 $227,503 21 351-12-063 Skyline Blvd 5065 Skyline Blvd Robert Schulte Trustee Et al Private Ownership OS 11.35 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $523,314 $533,780 22 351-12-066 Skyline Blvd 2287 Skyline Blvd Robert Schulte Trustee Et al Private Ownership OS -0.76 No acreage deducted Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $30 $30 23 351-25-015 Page Mill Rd 4201 Page Mill Rd Bruce A Leak Private Ownership OS 10.31 One acre deducted for homesite Non Prime Unknown Unchanged; contract will continue for at least another 10 years. $1,740,820 $1,775,580 24 351-12-006 Skyline Blvd 1405 Skyline Blvd Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District OS 138.59 Non Prime 2/26/1973 Contract Terminates 12/31/24 $0 $0 List of Parcels undergoing Non-Renewal Process Page 2 of 3 2.a Packet Pg. 53 Number APN Street Name Full Address Owner Name Williamson Act Land Ownership Zoning Acreage after Deducting Homesite Exclusion Homesite Exclusion Land Class Contract Start Date Contract Status Assessed Land Value 20211 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2021) Assessed Land Value 20221 (Assessed Information as of 6/30/2022) 25 351-05-050 Page Mill Rd 3849 Page Mill Rd Jeffrey A. and Mary L. Thomas Private Ownership OS 10 Non Prime 2/7/1977 Contract Terminates 12/31/26 $1,608,303 $1,606,500 Source: City of Palo Alto, Williamson Act Parcel Database 2022. Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Santa Clara County Assessors Office, Website:https://www.sccassessor.org/online-services/property-search/real-property The City of Palo Alto leases this land for public use; however, it is privately owned. Value not assessed because land is owned by public agency. Page 3 of 3 2.a Packet Pg. 54 Arastradero Lake Felt Lake Boronda Lake 351-12-006 351-05-050 HeritagePark Foothills Park Los Trancos Open Space Preserve Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Upper Stevens Creek Canyon County Park Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Long Ridge Open SP Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Palo Alto Baylands Nature Preserve Foothill Open Space Preserve Arastradero Preserve Cameron Park Weisshaar Park Mayflield Park Peers Park El Palo Alto Park Lytton Plaza Cogswell Plaza Scott Park Kellogg Park Bol Park Rinconada Park Bowden Park Johnson Park Eleanor Pardee Park Boulware Park Terman Park Robles Park Monroe Park Mitchell Park D Jesus Ramos Park Hoover Park Greer Park Baylands Atheletic Byxbee Park Bowling Green Henry Seale Park Sarah Wallis Park Werry Park Juana Briones Park Esther Clark Park WilliamsPark Stanford/Palo Alto Community Playing Fields San Antonio Rd 280 B o u l e v a r d A la meda de las P ulg a s S a nd H i l l R o a d 2 8 0 Jun ip e r o S e rr a Boulev a r d P a ge M i l l Road A r a s t ra d e r o R o a d E l C a m i n o R e a l San Antoni o Av e n u e C h a r l e s t o n R o a d G 5 M o n t e B e l l o R o a d Moody Road A l t a m o n t R o a d O r e g o n E x p r e s s w a y M i d d le fi e l d R o a d Univers 1 0 1 A l m a S t r e e t l A l p i n e R o a d F oo thil l Expr e s s w a y H i g h w a y 2 8 0 Lo s Tr ancos Road H i l l v i e w E a st B a y s h o re W e st B a y s h ore Fabian E l M o nt e R oa d S a n d H ill R o a d R o a d MillPage Skyline E m b a r c a d e r o R o a d StanfordUniversity Park Mountain View Los AltosLos Altos Hills Santa Clara County San Mateo County Portola Valley El Camino Park This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Williamson Act Parcels Under Contract for 2022 Parcels with Non Renewal Notices Approved 0'7000' Williamson Act Parcels 2022 CITY O F PALO A L T O I N C O R P O R A T E D C ALIFO R N 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 2.b Packet Pg. 55 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14663) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Consent Calendar City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: 2515 El Camino Real: Ratify a BMR Regulatory Agreement Permitting Rental of Two Units at Below Market Rates and Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute and Record Amendment No. 1 to the Regulatory Agreement. Environmental Assessment: Exem pt from CEQA Pursuant to Guidelines Section 15601(b)(3). From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Ratify a Below Market Rate (BMR) Regulatory Agreement (Attachment A) executed in 2019, which permits the property owner to rent, rather than sell, two units at affordable rates, so long as all units on the property are offered for rent. 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute and record Amendment No. 1 (Attachment B) to the BMR Regulatory Agreement, which would align rental rates with City policy. Background On May 23, 2016, the City Council approved1 an application to redevelop the former Olive Garden site at 2515-2585 El Camino Real. On June 25, 2018, the City Council approved2 a vesting tentative map for condominium purposes for the site, allowing up to 13 residential and 13 commercial retail condominiums. At the time, the property owner explained to staff that they did not have any present intention to file a condominium plan with the state and sell the units separately. Although a subdivision map provides an option to do so in the future, the property owner’s intention was to maintain sole ownership of the property and offer the units for rent. Because the units could be offered for sale, the property was subject to the City’s 15% inclusionary housing ordinance and was required to provide 1.95 (13 x .15) units on-site at below market rates (BMR). Although the City’s ordinance allows a property owner to pro vide 1 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas -minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/00-archive/2016/05-23-16-approved-action-minutes.pdf 2 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas -minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/00-archive/2018/06-25-18-action-minutes.pdf 3 Packet Pg. 56 City of Palo Alto Page 2 just one unit in such circumstances (with in-lieu fees paid for the 0.95 fractional unit), the property owner in this case agreed to provide 2 units on site. Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.65 allows the provision of affordable rental units as an alternative means of compliance to offering affordable units for sale. In addition, Ordinance No. 54093 set forth City policy regarding the number units and level of affordability required for a rental alternative. Under the code, a rental alternative must be approved by the City Council and requires a showing that it would be infeasible to provide the units for sale. Given the property owner’s stated intention to offer the units for rent, staff prepared a BMR Regulatory Agreement that required that the two BMR units be offered at affordable rents. In addition, consistent with City policy, the Regulatory Agreement requires if any unit on the property was ever sold, the two BMR units would need to be offered for sale as well, also at affordable sales prices. The BMR Regulatory Agreement was executed in 2019 and recorded with the County as document no. 24092602. The project has been constructed and is now ready to be offered for rent. As staff was preparing to coordinate the addition of the rental units at be low market rates, staff discovered that the rental alternative was never presented to the City Council for approval. In addition, staff found that the rental rates were not clearly specified. Discussion Given the history of this property and the fact that the property owner constructed the project with the understanding that it could be operated as a rental property, staff recommends that the City Council ratify the 2019 BMR Regulatory Agreement authorizing the rental alternative to for-sale BMR units. Also, understanding that it would be a rental property, the property owner has represented that they have not prepared the necessary documents to file a condominium plan with the state and create a homeowner’s association, which would be necessary to offer any of the units for sale. And that process would reportedly take about a year to complete. In these circumstances, staff believe it would create substantial hardship to require sale of the BMR units, without generating significant benefit for the City. Staff also recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute and record Amendment No. 1 to the Regulatory Agreement, which clarifies the BMR rental rates and creates a right of first refusal for existing tenants in the event t he BMR units are offered for sale. As noted above, in the event the property owner does create condominium units and offer a unit for sale, they must also offer the BMR units for sale at an affordable price. Pursuant to the City’s inclusionary ordinance, this means sales prices affordable to households earning 100% and 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). By contrast, while the units are offered for rent, Amendment No. 1 clarifies that they must be priced at a rate affordable to households earning 3 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/city-clerk/ordinances/ord-5409.pdf 3 Packet Pg. 57 City of Palo Alto Page 3 70% of the AMI. In other words, in exchange for the ability to offer BMR units for rent rather than for sale, the property owner must provide a deeper level of affordability. Policy Implications Staff believe this recommendation is consistent with existing City policy, as expressed in PAMC Chapter 16.65 and Ordinance No. 5409. In addition, the right of first refusal provided through Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the City’s anti-displacement goals. Resource Impact None. Environmental Assessment The staff recommendation is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed activity will have a significant impact on the environment. Attachments: • Attachment3.a: Attachment A - County Copy Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants regarding BMR Units 2515-2585 El Camino Real • Attachment3.b: Attachment B - Amendment No. 1 to Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants regarding BMR Units 2515-2585 El Camino Real 3 Packet Pg. 58 3.a Packet Pg. 59 3.a Packet Pg. 60 3.a Packet Pg. 61 3.a Packet Pg. 62 3.a Packet Pg. 63 3.a Packet Pg. 64 3.a Packet Pg. 65 3.a Packet Pg. 66 3.a Packet Pg. 67 3.a Packet Pg. 68 3.a Packet Pg. 69 3.a Packet Pg. 70 3.a Packet Pg. 71 3.a Packet Pg. 72 3.a Packet Pg. 73 3.a Packet Pg. 74 3.a Packet Pg. 75 3.a Packet Pg. 76 3.a Packet Pg. 77 3.a Packet Pg. 78 3.a Packet Pg. 79 3.a Packet Pg. 80 3.a Packet Pg. 81 3.a Packet Pg. 82 3.a Packet Pg. 83 3.a Packet Pg. 84 3.a Packet Pg. 85 3.a Packet Pg. 86 3.a Packet Pg. 87 3.a Packet Pg. 88 3.a Packet Pg. 89 3.a Packet Pg. 90 3.a Packet Pg. 91 3.a Packet Pg. 92 3.a Packet Pg. 93 3.a Packet Pg. 94 3.a Packet Pg. 95 3.a Packet Pg. 96 3.a Packet Pg. 97 3.a Packet Pg. 98 3.a Packet Pg. 99 3.a Packet Pg. 100 3.a Packet Pg. 101 3.a Packet Pg. 102 3.a Packet Pg. 103 3.a Packet Pg. 104 3.a Packet Pg. 105 3.a Packet Pg. 106 3.a Packet Pg. 107 3.a Packet Pg. 108 3.a Packet Pg. 109 3.a Packet Pg. 110 3.a Packet Pg. 111 3.a Packet Pg. 112 3.a Packet Pg. 113 3.a Packet Pg. 114 3.a Packet Pg. 115 3.a Packet Pg. 116 3.a Packet Pg. 117 3.a Packet Pg. 118 3.a Packet Pg. 119 3.a Packet Pg. 120 3.a Packet Pg. 121 3.a Packet Pg. 122 3.a Packet Pg. 123 3.a Packet Pg. 124 3.a Packet Pg. 125 3.a Packet Pg. 126 3.a Packet Pg. 127 3.a Packet Pg. 128 3.a Packet Pg. 129 1 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO REGULATORY AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS REGARDING BELOW-MARKET-RATE UNITS AT 2515-2585 EL CAMINO REAL A.P.N. Nos. 124-33-066 and 124-33-067 This Amendment No. 1 (“Amendment”) to the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants Regarding Below-Market-Rate Units at 2515-2585 El Camino Real, recorded on January 1, 2019 as Instrument No. 24092606 in the Official Records of Santa Clara County, California (“Agreement”) is entered into this ____ day of ______, 2022 by and between the City of Palo Alto, a California chartered municipal corporation (“City”), and Palo Alto Properties Investment LLC, a California limited liability corporation, (“Developer”) (collectively, “Parties”). WHEREAS, Section 16.65.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) requires that residential ownership projects containing three or more units shall provide at least fifteen percent of the dwelling units in the project shall be made available at affordable sales price to very low, low, and moderate income households. WHEREAS, Section 16.65.080 of the PAMC allows the City Council to authorize, as an alternative means of compliance when provision of affordable ownership units is infeasible, the provision of affordable rental units in a residential ownership project. WHEREAS, Section 16.65.080, subdivision (c) of the PAMC further provides that the City Council may by ordinance or resolution specify the percentage and affordability level of rental affordable units that are equivalent to provision of on-site for-sale affordable units. WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto adopted Ordinance No. 5409, specifying that a rental alternative for residential ownership projects shall provide at least fifteen percent of the dwelling units in the project at rates affordable to low income households. WHEREAS, the Parties entered into the Agreement to govern the below-market-rate units for a residential ownership project at 2515-2585 El Camino Real (“Project”). WHEREAS, the Agreement includes provisions for a rental alternative to for-sale affordable units, but this alternative was neither approved by the City Council in accordance with PAMC Section 16.65.080, nor did it specify the level of affordability required by Ordinance No. 5409. WHEREAS, the Agreement indicated that exemplary affordable rents would be provided in Exhibit C, yet no such Exhibit was attached. WHEREAS, the City has asserted that the rental alternative provisions of the Agreement are invalid as a non-legislative act in conflict with the City’s zoning laws. 3.b Packet Pg. 130 2 WHEREAS, Developer has fully constructed the Project in reliance upon the rental alternative provisions of the Agreement. WHEREAS, the Parties wish to amend the Agreement to bring it into compliance with the PAMC and effectuate their earlier intent to the greatest extent possible. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: 1. The definition of “Affordable Rent” provided in Section 1.1 (a) of the Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: “(a) ‘Affordable Rent’ is the maximum allowable Rent for a BMR Unit that is leased by Developer prior to its sale. Affordable Rent shall be calculated at a level affordable to Low Income Households, as follows: one twelfth (1/12th) of thirty percent (30%) of seventy percent (70%) of Area Median Income for Santa Clara County, adjusted to assumed household size of one person in a studio BMR Unit, two persons in a one-bedroom BMR Unit, Three persons in a two-bedroom BMR Unit, and one additional person for every additional bedroom thereafter. An example of this calculation for the calendar year 2022 is provided in Exhibit C.” 2. Exhibit C to this Amendment No. 1 shall replace Exhibit C to the Agreement. 3. Section 4.1 of the Agreement, “Rental of BMR Units Prior to Sale,” is amended to read as follows: “4.1 Rental of BMR Units Prior to Sale. If the Developer elects not to sell any of the units at initial project occupancy and instead offer them for rent, the Developer shall lease the BMR Units at an Affordable Rent as provided in this Article 4. At the time that any unit in the Project is offered for sale, the BMR Units shall be offered for sale at Affordable Sales Prices to Eligible Households as provided in Article 3, above. Notwithstanding Section 3.1 above, if the BMR Units are occupied by Tenants who qualify as Eligible Households at the time such units are offered for sale, Developer shall first offer the BMR Units to such Tenants. 4. Section 4.6, “Waiver of Rights Under the Costa-Hawkins Act,” is added to the Agreement as follows: “4.6 Waiver of Rights Under the Costa-Hawkins Act. In consideration of the right to offer BMR Units for rent under this Article 4, Developer hereby waives and releases the City from any and all claims that may arise under the Costa-Hawkins Act (Chapter 2.7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code), with respect to the Rent restrictions contained in this Agreement. In the event Developer, or its successors should challenge the validity of such Rent restrictions, the BMR Units 3.b Packet Pg. 131 3 shall immediately be offered for sale at Affordable Sales Prices pursuant to Article 3.” 5. Except as modified by this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Developer City _________________________ _________________________________ City Manager or City Manager Designee Date: ____________________ Date: ____________________________ Approved as to form: _________________________________ City Attorney or City Attorney Designee 3.b Packet Pg. 132 4 EXHIBIT C MAXIMUM INITIAL AFFORDABLE RENTS FOR AFFORDABLE UNITS AND MAXIMUM INCOME LEVEL OF TENANTS (Provided for reference. These limits are adjusted annually, as determined and published by the City. Project shall be subject to the Affordable Rents and Household Income limits in effect at the time Developer submits marketing plan to City.) A. Affordable Rents. Affordable Rent is defined in Section 1.1 of this Agreement. The table below illustrates how Affordable Rent is calculated, based upon 2022 State Income Limits adopted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development and contained in California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Section 6932. Number of Bedrooms AMI* for Assumed Household Size 70 Percent of AMI Maximum Annual Rent Maximum Monthly Affordable Rent** (1/12 of Maximum Annual Rent) 2BD $151,560 $106,155 $31,847 $2,654 * AMI is Area Median Income. **A reasonable allowance for tenant-paid utilities must be deducted from the Tenant's monthly payments to the Developer. See definition of Rent in Section 1.1 for other fees and charges that must be deducted from the Tenant's monthly payments to the Developer. 2022 utility allowances are available at: https://www.scchousingauthority.org/assets/1/6/2022_UA_Schedule_Calculation_Sheets,_effe ctive_10-1-21.pdf1 B. Maximum Household Income of Tenants at 70% AMI (Income Limits) Household Size (Number of Persons) Maximum Gross Annual Household Income Three (3) $106,155 Four (4) $117,950 Income limits for larger households available upon request from the City. 3.b Packet Pg. 133 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14609) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Consent Calendar City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: 1985 Louis Road (First Congregational Church of Palo Alto) [22PLN - 00159]: Appeal of a Director’s Decision Approving a Safe Parking Program Permit to Allow Overnight Parking of up to Four (4) Vehicles at the Subject Property. Environmental Assessment : Exempt. Zoning District: R -1 (Single- Family Residential). From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council uphold the Director’s Decision to approve a Safe Parking Permit at 1985 Louis Road, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto. Executive Summary: On July 20, 2022, the Planning and Development Services Department received a timely request for an appeal of the Safe Parking Permit application, 22PLN -00159 at 1985 Louis Road, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto. This item is on the consent calendar and if approved would affirm the Director’s decision. The Council may alternatively choose to pull it off consent with support from at least three Council members. If pulled the item would be considered at a future noticed public hearing. The Appellant is asking for the following items to be considered: Vehicle emissions relating to potential idling of vehicles, overall proximity to residential uses, the fact that the County of Santa Clara does not authorize the use of background checks for Safe Parking, and overall potential security issues. These requests go beyond what is currently required by the current Safe Parking Program and implemented at two other Safe Parking sites. Staff recommends that Council deny the appeal request and uphold the Director’s Decision to approve the project. Background: 4 Packet Pg. 134 City of Palo Alto Page 2 City Council approved the Safe Parking ordinance in January of 20201, which is now Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.42.160. Since this approval, five congregations applied for Safe Parking Permits. Of the five, two have been approved and are in operation; one is on hold by the applicant’s choice; one received approval but withdrew after the application was appealed by neighbors; and the last is the subject of this appeal. The two in operation, located at 3373 Middlefield Rd. and 505 E. Charleston Rd., have been operating since May 2021 and October 2021, respectively. There have been no calls that required police emergency response or that led to a police report being taken. Additionally, the 505 E. Charleston permit was originally appealed by the neighbor, and considered by Council on August 9, 20212. Council voted to pull it from Consent, however, the appellant withdrew their appeal before the appeal hearing was held. Project Description On May 11, 2022, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA) applied for a Safe Parking Permit. The permit allows four (4) passenger vehicles to park onsite during the hours of 7:00 pm to 7:00 am. The Safe Parking Lot would be operated by MOVE Mountain View (MOVE MV), as per the agreement dated March 25, 2022 (Attachment D). Required Findings A Safe Parking Permit application is required to meet the following Findings: 1. The proposed safe parking use complies with the standards listed PAMC 18.42.160(f), as follows: a. Qualifying site. Safe parking may be allowed on a parcel with an existing, legal church or religious institution use. b. Number of vehicles. At no time shall more than 4 vehicles be used for safe parking. c. Hours of operation. A safe parking use may only occur between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. i. The applicant has chosen to further limit this to 7:00pm to 7:00 am which is allowed. This ensures the overnight parkers have left the premises prior to on-site preschoolers arriving. d. Noise. Audio, video, generator, or other amplified sound that is audible outside the vehicles parked in the safe parking program is prohibited. e. Shelter in vehicles. All persons receiving safe parking shall shelter within the vehicles. No person shall be housed in tents, lean -tos, or other temporary facilities. f. Required facilities. Accessible restroom facilities, including a toilet and handwashing sink, shall be available to persons utilizing the site for safe parking 1 Link to January 13, 2021 Staff Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas - minutesreports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/safe-parking-10789.pdf 2 Link to August 9, 2021 Staff Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas -minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2021/id-12386.pdf 4 Packet Pg. 135 City of Palo Alto Page 3 at all times during the hours of operation. These facilities may be the existing onsite facilities or mobile facilities brought onsite on a temporary basis to serve persons utilizing safe parking. g. Contact information. The following emergency contact information shall be posted on site in a place readily visible to persons utilizing safe parking: (i) a contact phone number for the safe parking program operator; (ii) the police non - emergency phone number; and (iii) 911. The safe parki ng program operator shall be available at all hours of operation at the posted phone number and shall be the first contact for non-emergency matters. h. Connection to county case management system. The safe parking use shall be managed and operated by a safe parking program operator that participates in the federal Homeless Management Information System with Santa Clara County or other county. i. Safe, clean, orderly premises. The safe parking area and other onsite areas accessed by persons utilizing safe parking shall be maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition and manner. j. Compliance with laws. The safe parking use shall be operated in a manner that is fully in conformance with all state and local laws including regulations and permit requirements. 2. The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the safe parking use. Director’s Approval The project was tentatively approved with conditions on July 6, 2022, subject to a 14 -day appeal period (Attachment C). Per PAMC 18.42.160(d)(2)(ii), and notice was sent to all owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property. As a courtesy, the Planning and Development Services Department arranged a community meeting for neighbors to learn more about the project. A recording of the July 12, 2022 meeting and copy of the Q&A report are available online.3 As noted in the appellant’s statement (Attachment B), some attendees were disappointed with the virtual meeting which had more than 70 attendees. Staff attempted to efficiently answer questions using the Q&A feature but to some, this approach was viewed as restricting an open discussion about the specific project and the Safe Parking Program and homelessness generally. The appellant is a group of neighbors representing at least 29 individuals and 19 properties in vicinity of the proposed project, including one who lives directly adjacent at 940 Embarcadero Road. The appeal letter (Attachment B) states their concerns, including : • Vehicle emissions relating to potential idling of vehicles • Overall proximity to residential uses 3 See Meeting Recording and Q&A Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and- Development-Services/1985-Louis-22PLN-00159 4 Packet Pg. 136 City of Palo Alto Page 4 • The fact that the County of Santa Clara does not authorize the use of background checks for Safe Parking • Potential security Discussion: Idling Vehicles Car emissions from idling safe parking vehicles near residential properties is a concern expressed by the appellant. While it is not anticipated idling would occur often due to moderate temperatures and fuel costs to run a vehicle for extended periods of time, idling cars is a possibility. Per PAMC 10.62.030, vehicle idling is not allowed except in certain circumstances. Specifically, it is only allowed when “necessary to provide heat to an occupied vehicle if the outside ambient temperature is below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, or idling is necessary to provide cooling to an occupied vehicle if the outside temperature is more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit”. The majority of the year, the outside temperature is above 40 degrees and less than 85 degrees between 7pm and 7am. During the winter months (approximately November through March), nighttime temperatures are sometimes in the 30’s. Staff anticipates that during the winter, occupants will use extra blankets and clothing layers to maintain heat in the car. If they become too uncomfortable to sleep, they would turn on the car for a period of time until it is comfortable enough to sleep again. Additionally, i n the event of dangerously cold temperatures, Santa Clara County opens additional Warming Centers.4 Last year, the County operated two overnight warming center locations in San Jose from December 17, 2021, to April 30, 2022. In Palo Alto, two rotating shelters, Heart & Home and Hotel de Zink, also provide indoor temporary shelter during the winter months. The appellant includes historic weather graphs and information in the Attachment B and argues that car idling will occur more frequently than staff expec ts and will result in pollution potentially compromising the health and safety of nearby residents; impacts to health and safety are a consideration in the approval of a Safe Parking Program permit. The applicant has prepared a response letter to the appeal statements included in Attachment C and states that in 2021 there were only 11 nights below 40 degrees and that the applicant intends on providing blankets to assist with cold weather-related concerns. Moreover, any idling from cars would not likely be perceived by neighbors as their windows would likely be closed during weather. Overall Proximity to Residential Uses The appellant requests the four spaces proposed for Safe Parking Program be relocated toward Louis Road. This action, the appellant suggests, would provide a greater distance from residential structures, offer more privacy for the Program’s participants and benefits from less 4 Additional information on Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management’s Cold Weather Safety programs is available here: https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/residents/cold-weather- safety#:~:text=need%20of%20assistance.-,Overnight%20Warming%20Locations,pm%20%2D%207%3A00%20am. 4 Packet Pg. 137 City of Palo Alto Page 5 automobile traffic on Louis Road, better parking lot lighting and proximity to the church’s security cameras. The Safe Parking Ordinance did not establish a required minimum distance. However, through the community outreach for the 3373 Middlefield permit, a minimum of 25 ft was established as an initial precedent. The proposed parking spaces would be approximately 34 feet away from nearest residential property line. The applicant acknowledges the two parking lots on the site and notes that the parking lot near Louis Road is used by individuals participating in various activities and meetings at the church, including groups not affiliated with the church that meet regularly in the evening and use the on-site parking spaces nearest Louis Road. The applicant further asserts the parking lot near Embarcadero is less noisy and provides more privacy to safe parking particip ants. Background Checks Discussion surrounding background checks was also discussed as a part of the appeal request for the 505 E. Charleston permit (see footnote 2). In summary, Santa Clara County does not support their contractors (MoveMV) in conducting background checks at temporary shelters as a part of the “housing first” approach to their supportive housing system, including homelessness prevention services, temporary shelter programs, and supportive housing programs. Additionally, in response to the previous appeal request, MoveMV has added the following screening questions to their standard application for participants in the Safe Parking Program: 1) if they are on parole or probation, and if so, 2) if there are any legal restrictions on where they are allowed to reside. The appellant references the California Fair Employment and Housing Act as a law the allows providers to use criminal background checks and includes references to a number of jurisdictions in California that require some form of background checks or screenings as a part of their safe parking programs; this information is available in Attachment B. Staff appreciates resident interest for background checks but is concerned such action may not align with the City Council’s housing for social justice and economic balance priority and this type of screening may not address perceived safety risks. A criminal background check in housing decisions is permissible within the parameters of state and federal discrimination laws, namely the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the federal Fair Housing Act. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing requires that background checks focus only on those criminal convictions that have a “direct and specific negative bearing on a substantial, legitimate, and nondiscriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider, such as the safety of other residents, the housing provider’s employees, or the property.” State regulations also require that if criminal background checks are used as part of a housing decision, there must be “no feasible alternative practice that would equally or better accomplish the identified interest with less discriminatory effect.” (See 4 Packet Pg. 138 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Section 5 in the DFEH handout “Housing and Criminal History FAQ”, include within Attachment B. See also 2 CCR 12266). State regulations prohibit a “blanket ban” on those with a criminal record or felons residing in housing. (See 2 CCR 12269). Instead, each individual who has a criminal record must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to identify whether any convictions are “directly related”, and whether there is any mitigating information in response to a directly-related conviction. (See 2 CCR 12266). The applicant must have an opportunity to present mitigating in formation him or herself. Mitigating information includes “credible information about the applicant that suggests that the applicant is not likely to pose a demonstratable risk to the health and safety of others, the property, or other substantial, legitimate, and non-discriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider.” The state gives the following examples of mitigating information: • The age of the individual when the criminal conduct occurred; • The amount of time that has passed since the dat e of conviction; • Whether the conduct arose as a result of a disability; • Whether the conduct arose from status as a survivor of domestic violence; • Whether the individual has maintained a good tenant history before and/or after the conviction; • Whether there is evidence of rehabilitation efforts, including satisfactory compliance with all terms and conditions of parole and/or probation; successful completion of parole, probation, mandatory supervision, or post release community supervision; and • Other conduct demonstrating rehabilitation, such as maintenance of steady employment. (See Section 8 in Attachment B, Fair Housing And Criminal History FAQ). State regulations prohibit using some types of criminal history information in a housing decision. This includes arrests that did not result in a conviction, convictions that have been dismissed, expunged, or rendered inoperative, juvenile criminal histories, and arrests that were diverted from prosecution under specific types of diversion programs. (See 2 CCR 12269). Failure to comply with these regulations can be considered a violation of these statutory protections against discrimination in housing. The DFEH has voiced concern that the use of criminal histories in housing decisions can lead to an “unjustified discriminatory effect” as “African Americans, Hispanics (or Latinos), and certain other groups face higher rates of arrest, conviction, and incarceration than the general population. The use of criminal history information in housing decisions can therefore have a disproportionately negative effect on these protected groups.” (See Section 2 in Attachment B, Fair Housing And Criminal History FAQ). A housing provider does not have to have any intention of discrimination to run afoul of these laws. Separately, state law regulates the use of the Megan’s Law database of registered sex 4 Packet Pg. 139 City of Palo Alto Page 7 offenders. Information disclosed from using the database cannot be used for housing or accommodations purposes, except to “protect a person at risk.” (See Penal Code 290.46(j)). Megan’s Law does not impose a blanket ban prohibiting registered sex offenders from living near schools or parks. That blanket restriction was originally passed by the voter initiative in 2006 but was deemed unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court in 2015. (See In re Taylor (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1019). Such restrictions now must be applied on a case -by-case basis in administering probation and parole. Implications of Background Checks In addition to the policy implications described previously, background checks require time and resources. A third party must perform the background check, which creates a cost. The time required to perform the check varies based on the way the operator chooses to implement a check. Whether a few days or a few weeks, the check does create a barrier to providing services to the unhoused person(s) as quickly as possible. Some participants may be deterred from reaching out if they know a background check is required due to fears about engaging with the criminal justice system. It has been suggested that undocumented participants may be further deterred. Participants must, however, have a valid driver’s license and insurance. The public discourse at Council meetings and community meetings has also raised issues regarding perceptions of crime among unhoused persons as well as issues of equity. It can be argued that the need to have background checks performed for those living in their vehicles is based on a perception that these persons may be more likely to have perpetrated a crime and will be more likely to perpetrate a crime in the future. The Council for the Homeless, however, states that a person who is homeless is no more likely to be a criminal than a person who is housed.5 Indeed a number of studies have examined homelessness and crime and support this perspective. For example, the Washington Post found that: “A review of four research papers and interviews with policy experts, economists, housing providers and longtime neighbors of shelters suggests a more complicated narrative. On average, researchers have found supportive housing facilities servicing the homeless and other vulnerable populations rarely lead to higher crime rates or a drop in property values — and sometimes even raise the latter if the shelter helps stabilize a distressed community.”6 Further, while tenants of apartments may have background checks performed in accordance with the law, homeowners are not subject to background checks. This creates a financial 5 The Council notes there is one legal exception: camping ordinances. Homeless persons are more likely to be charged with crime of camping, loitering, or other crimes based on state and local laws. 6 https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/dc-residents-fret-over-shelter-plan-citing-crime-and- property-values/2016/02/27/7be82f4c-d978-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html 4 Packet Pg. 140 City of Palo Alto Page 8 inequity in that a homeowner able to afford a home does not need to provide information regarding any past crimes, yet an unhoused person seeking a place to park in their vehicle overnight does. Lastly, the persons served in the congregation-based Safe Parking Program are living in their vehicles. This site would specifically serve those living only in passenger vehicles, not recreational vehicles. These persons can legally park on many public streets in Palo Alto for up to 72 hours—including streets in the vicinity of UUCPA. No backgro und check is performed for those persons who park on public streets. Thus, while a background check might prevent or deter a person from participating in this program—even a person with a criminal history—a background check will not prevent or deter them f rom seeking shelter in their vehicle and parking in public areas. Security The final concern listed in the appeal request letter was regarding overall site safety and security, specifically incident reporting and on-site supervision. The applicant asserts that there is no visibility into incidents that occur at safe parking sites and that limited drive by supervision by the operator is insufficent to provide any meaningful security . Attachment B includes a list of California jurisdictions reported by the appellant as requiring of overnight supervision. Per correspondence with the Palo Alto Police, dated July 28, 2022, there have been no incidents reported to Palo Alto Police from the two active safe parking sites. MoveMV has reported only one incident within Palo Alto involving a participant that needed to be relocated to another safe parking facility that allowed pets to accommodate the participant’s dog. Incidents at safe parking facilities that require attention may be reported to MoveMV, to the church, to the City’s Planning and Development Services Department or, if needed, through a police report. Planning Staff checks in with MoveMV and the churches from time to time, as required by PAMC 18.42.160 (e), and no incidents have been reported or observed. The churches participating in Safe Parking see this use as an extension of their ministry. MoveMV includes site security as a part of its standard operations. Each site has check-in and check-out staff in the evenings and mornings to ensure no one be sides the designated participants arrive, and that the participants leave in the morning by the required time. Overnight, a rotating security crew is used to monitor all of MoveMV’s sites, with at least two check-ins to each parking lot. They are also on-call to respond to any incidents at the parking lots. Policy Implications: If the subject appeal stays on consent, the Director’s decision to approved the safe parking facility would be sustained and the applicant could begin operating the facility in com pliance with the approval. If pulled by three or more Council members, the decision would be stayed pending a noticed hearing by the City Council likely in late September. 4 Packet Pg. 141 City of Palo Alto Page 9 Stakeholder Engagement: Notices of the tentative decision were provided in accordance with the Municipal Code. In addition to the community meetings described above, staff has been in regular communication with the applicant and appellant. Applicant, appellant, and community members who have asked to be notified have been advised of this item being scheduled on the agenda and opportunities to provide public input. Public Comments: To date, a number of public comments were received via email, and are attached to this report as Attachment F. Environmental Review: This project is exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Attachments: • Attachment4.a: Attachment A - Location Map • Attachment4.b: Attachment B - Appeal Documents • Attachment4.c: Attachment C - FCCPA Appeal Response Letter • Attachment4.d: Attachment D - Director's Approval Letter • Attachment4.e: Attachment E - Link to Project Documents • Attachment4.f: Attachment F: Correspondence 4 Packet Pg. 142 003-54-020 003-54-021 003-54-049 003-54-048 003-54-047 003-53-018 003-53-017 003-53-016 003-53-012 003-53-013 003-53-014 003-53-015 003-54-046 003-54-051 003-54-050 003-53-027 003-53-028 003-53-029 003-53-030 003-53-031003-53-005 003-53-006 003-53-007 003-53-008 003-53-026 003-53-024 003-53-023 003-53-022 003-53-021 003-53-020 003-53-019 003-53-009 003-53-010 003-53-011 003-50-022 003-50-031 003- 003-5 003-50-020 003-50-021 003-53-025 003-39-066 003-39-065 003-39-063 003-39-064 003-39-041 003-39-042 003-39-061 003-39-043 003-39-062 003-39-044 3-39-045 3-38-027 003-38-026 003-39-070 003-39-069 003-39-068 003-39-067 003-38-022 003-38-023 003-38-024 003-38-044 003-38-025 003-39-039 003-39-038 003-39-037 003-39-036 003-39-035 003-39-033 003-39-034 003-39-040 003-40-075 003-40-060 003-40-057003-40-005 003-40-004 003-40-058 003-40-059003-40-003 003-41-082 003-40-002 003-50-023 003-50-024 003-50-029 003-41-00 003-41-001 003-41-080 003-41-081 003-50-025 0 003-50-030 003-50-028 B A R B A R A D RIV E E MB A R C A DE R O R O A D VE I R I S W L O UIS R O A D P R I M R O S E W A Y 1 1 885 881 2002 1992 1950 19321916 1900 1969 19191911 890 8 7 7 1920 2042 2022 2080 2096 2106 2126 2146 2111 2091 2065 2039 2060 2020 2004 1996 1982 1966 1950 2019 2001 1989 1 9 8 5 3 0 21052093 2075 2040 1 3 0 1 2 6 1 2 0 1 2 2 9 1 19 0 7 1 1 6 9 0 1 1 1 8 8 9 7 8 9 3 1 1 9 142 140 138 134 143 141 139 136 129 921 111 115 121 125 135 131 9 1 7 31 61134 1 3 0 51 41124 2 0 1 2 0 9 4 0 9 4 4 2 2 1 1 0 4 0 9 5 3 9 4 7 9 4 8 1 2 6 1 8 1 1 A 9 4 8 A This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Assessment Parcel Palo Alto Assessment Parcel Palo Alto Assessment Parcel Outside Palo Alto abc Road Centerline Small Text (TC) Curb Face (RF) Pavement Edge (RF) Address Label Points (AP) Current Features 0' 87' Attachment A: Location Map 1985 Louis Road CITY O F PALO A L T O I N C O R P O R A T E D C ALI FO R N 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 efoley2, 2022-08-03 11:33:00 Assessor Parcels (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Meta\View.mdb) 4.a Packet Pg. 143 4.b Packet Pg. 144 Page 1 of 10 Todor Ganev 940 Embarcadero Rd Palo Alto, CA 94303 City of Palo Alto Planning Department: 250 Hamilton Avenue - Fifth Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 July 20, 2022 Dear City of Palo Alto Planning Department: I represent a group of neighbors residing in the vicinity of First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA) at 1985 Louis Road. I am writing to formally appeal the decision to approve the Safe Parking Program sponsored by Move Mountain View (MMV) at FCCPA. The application in question (22PLN-00159) was conditionally approved on July 6, 2022. As a preamble, allow me to clarify that we have nothing against helping the unhoused and those less fortunate. In fact, many of us regularly volunteer and donate to such causes. However, we are forced to resort to this appeal, because we have serious concerns about this particular program and especially about the way it is being implemented by FCCPA and MMV. We have tried, in good faith, to discuss mutually acceptable solutions with FCCPA, but, unfortunately, they have not been receptive to the neighbors’ suggestions, despite declaring the opposite. In the interest of clarity, we can categorize the concerns in two main groups: A. The impact on the immediate Church neighbors’ health, safety, and welfare. B. The broader impact on the safety and welfare of the entire neighborhood. Our concerns are as follows: A. Impact on the immediate Church neighbors’ health, safety, and welfare. Palo Alto Municipal Code: 18.42.160 (d)(1)(ii) states. "The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area". The safe parking spots chosen by FCCPA clearly violate this Municipal Code requirement. Namely: 4.b Packet Pg. 145 Page 2 of 10 The parking spaces and facilities for this program are closer to neighbors’ houses and properties than any other church sites currently operating Safe Parking in Palo Alto. Since the vehicle dwellers will be allowed to idle their cars as an exemption to the City environmental regulations, this will put the immediate neighbors at risk. There are at least 5 children living in the residences that share fences with the Church, one of whom suffers from asthma. (Documentation, including a Doctor’s note confirming that the elevated pollution can adversely affect the child are available, but not included here, in order to protect the minor child’s identifying information) FCCPA are asserting that that since the vehicles will be allowed to idle only when temperatures are below 40 degrees or above 85 degrees Fahrenheit, such idling will be rare. This is not a real excuse, because even rare idling is a hazard to the neighbors. However, it is highly doubtful that these will be rare occasions. Even a perfunctory perusal of historical hourly nighttime data for Palo Alto (c.f. https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/usa/palo-alto) reveals that in January and February 2022 temperatures fell below 40 degrees for multiple nights in a row. (Please refer to the charts enclosed at the very end of this letter) In addition, this regulation may be well-intentioned, but appears practically unenforceable. As a solution to the health and welfare concerns of the immediate neighbors, we have requested FCCPA, on multiple occasions, to move the safe parking spots to the Louis Road side of the Church. Looking at the geometry and other considerations, that parking lot is a much better choice as it: x Is further away from any residential structures x Has more space to spread clients out for privacy. x Has Church security cameras which monitor the parking lot. x Has better lighting than the Embarcadero lot. x Louis Road has less automobile traffic than Embarcadero Road. FCCPA has refused to move the parking spots further away from the impacted neighbors and has offered no valid reasons why they are not willing to accept this very reasonable compromise. To wit: FCCPA have stated (most recently at a community meeting on 7/12/22) that placing the parking spots on the Louis side will interfere with the preschool that rents rooms at FCCPA. But, in contradiction, pastor Rev Altman herself has publicly stated (see, for example, PaloAltoOnline.com article of 7-15-22) that the Church has set the hours for the safe parking program at 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. so that the vehicle dwellers will not be there when the preschool is in session and children are present. Similar statement was made also at the 7/12/22 community meeting. Therefore, this is not a valid reason. Another unconvincing argument from FCCPA has been that the Louis Road lot is the primary lot that most of the Church and community members use for evening events. They are claiming that it would be more disruptive for the vehicle dwellers to park there amongst the frequent comings and goings in the evening. It is not even entirely clear what FCCPA means by this statement, but any way one looks at it, this is also unpersuasive. The safe parking spots will be reserved, plus why would the vehicle dwellers be inconvenienced by the benevolent Church attendees? Further, some minor inconvenience (if any at all) 4.b Packet Pg. 146 Page 3 of 10 during occasional events cannot even begin to compare with long-term risks to the neighbors’ health and welfare. In short, per this section, we respectfully request that the City of Palo Alto Planning Department rescind the temporary permit granted to approve the Safe Parking Program sponsored by Move Mountain View (MMV) at First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA.) until FCCPA moves the safe parking spots to the Louis Road side, so as not to put the health and welfare of the immediate neighbors at risk. B. Broader impact on the safety and welfare of the entire neighborhood Here are some of the issues that will predictably impact the entire neighborhood and are of major concern to many of us. 1. SAFETY. Our community members are entitled to a proactive approach to safety, with criminal background screening provided before problems occur. However, this is not what this program entails. The screening process for potential clients of this program is not publicly known. The responses to questions about the screening process have been vague and, at times, contradictory. Move Mountain View has stated that it will not check to see if applicants are convicted sex offenders or have recently committed a violent felony. There is conflicting information about whether this is legally prohibited by California Housing First laws. In short, Move Mountain View are essentially gathering a group of unscreened individuals, placing them in proximity to each other (and to residential homes/schools), and not safeguarding the community by running criminal background checks of these vehicle dwellers. Failure to screen for sex offenders or recent violent felons is inconsistent with the best practices set by other cities. See examples from other SPP programs across Santa Clara County and the State: 1. Cupertino (guidelines suggest screening by experienced service provider, including Megan’s law check)1; 2. Culver City (the only people eligible for the program are “[i]ndividuals who are 18 years and older, [drive] an operational vehicle, and [complete and pass] a background check”)2; 3. Fullerton (“[a]ll participants will be required to pass a background check to be eligible to enter the program. Registered sex offenders, a history of criminal arrests, or a conviction for a violent crime are disqualifiers for the program… Each participant will be vetted by the City of Fullerton and Fullerton PD”)3; 4. Los Angeles (the Safe Parking LA website states that “[a]ll adults are also screened in the National Sex Offender database”)4; 5. Monterey (participants must be alcohol and drug free, free of police warrants, and the program will not accept applicants with severe mental illness)5; 4.b Packet Pg. 147 Page 4 of 10 6. Morgan Hill (applicants are vetted through the Morgan Hill PD and must pass a background check)6; 7. Redwood City/San Jose (Life Moves excludes violent felons and sex offenders)7; 8. San Diego ("[a]ll adults are run through the Megan’s Law database and the National Sex Offender Registry. They are also asked if they have been convicted of a violent crime which disqualifies them for enrollment." Also, "[the operator’s] case managers will work with the Sheriff’s Department...”)8; 9. San Luis Obispo (background check required)9; 10. Santa Barbara (City of Lompoc) (resolution of the City Council requires that “participants shall submit to a criminal history background check)10; 11. Santa Cruz (the Safe Spaces Parking Program will “[d]etermine criminal background to exclude those that have a record for sexual predation, violent crime or criminal behavior associated with substance abuse.”)11; and 12. Walnut Creek (background checks for violent crimes, sexual assaults or open warrants by the police).12 In fact, the Homeless Policy Research Institute released a study of safe parking programs and noted that “[m]ost programs… screen out sex offenders and recent violent felons using a background check system” (emphasis added).13 Much like landlords presently conduct background checks for their prospective tenants, these other programs recognize the importance of screening. The new FEHA law just prohibits providers from issuing blanket bans for criminal records and limits allowable denial to crimes that could have a direct impact on the community, such as violent crimes, sexual offenses, etc. I have attached an FAQ regarding this law for reference. Such a requirement would not be onerous. In order to participate in the SPP program, the Guests must have a valid license, car insurance and registration. Thus, applicants to the program should already have the documentation required in order to apply. Additionally, the ultimate goal of the program is to transition participants to stable housing and find a job. A quote from a 2018 Mercury News article about Move MV/Lots of Love states that "[t]he goal is not to merely give them a safe space, but to get them out of their vehicles and into permanent homes. Everyone who participates will have to sign up for housing and demonstrate they are serious about the task."14 Participants also need to show willingness to work with case workers to find permanent housing. Accordingly, the Palo Alto SPP program should be finding participants who are willing to provide the information for a background check, as it demonstrates "seriousness about the task" and is an indicator of greater likelihood of their success in the program. This is especially true since background checks will often be required by landlords and employers as participants work to transition to more permanent housing (see, e.g., a survey by HR.com shows 96% of employers require background checks).15 Further, as FCCPA is in close proximity to a number of homes with young children, local elementary and middle schools (e.g., Greene Middle School, Duveneck Elementary School, Stratford school) the failure to check for sex offenders is of particular concern and may adversely affect the health and safety of the surrounding area. 4.b Packet Pg. 148 Page 5 of 10 This presents an obvious conflict with the Safe Biking to School and similar initiatives of the City and the Palo Alto Unified School District. 2. LACK OF INCIDENT TRACKING . There is no public visibility into incidents that happen at these sites. Unlike public police logs, there is no way for citizens-at-large to know about fights, loud music, public drunkenness, and other public nuisances, unless the Palo Alto Police are called and file an incident report. In fact, at recent meetings FCCPA and MMV made efforts to deflect and suppress all questions about past incidents at other Safe Parking locations. 3. LACK OF SUPERVISION. Move Mountain View has indicated that they only have resources for someone to drive by a couple of times a day. This does not provide any real security. It is in stark contrast with other SPP locations across California which provide for overnight supervision. Alameda County Safe Parking Program - [the safe parking program] includes “evening security”.16 Cupertino (Winter Faith) - shelter manual suggests an overnight supervisor 17 Fullerton (Pathways of Hope) - Security guards will be on site during all program hours. The program location will be surveilled by the Fullerton PD as part of [its] patrol route. Vehicles will be searched by security upon arrival to the lot each night.18 Livermore - "City will provide an overnight attendant at the Parking Lot during the hours the lot is available for the Safe Parking Program. The overnight attendant will be responsible for checking in parking guests, enforcing program rules, ensuring parking guests have left the premises by the designated time, and reporting incidents and program status to the City."19 Long Beach - provides “overnight security”. Also “security staff will be on site one-half hour prior to, during and one-half hour post the operational hours of the program”. Finally, “[v]ehicles will not be allowed to park within a three-block radius of the lot to minimize impacts to the local community. The provider will monitor for this and violators of this rule will be warned; repeat violators will be exited from the program. There will be zero tolerance for substance use or acts of aggression at the site.” (emphasis added).20 Los Angeles - “All program locations include access to a restroom facility and the security of a guard.”21 Morgan Hill (FOCUS program/Morgan Hill Bible Church) - Lots are protected by “hired security detail” and also have volunteers for the first and last two hours blocks of the program.22 Palmdale - “"The program is staffed by nighttime parking lot monitors and operates 7 days a week from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m."23 Redwood City - lot located across the street from Police station 4.b Packet Pg. 149 Page 6 of 10 Sacramento - the site is “staffed around the clock”24 San Diego (Jewish Family Safe Parking Program) - onsite security guard for all hours of the program 25 San Luis Obispo (40 Prado Safe Parking Program) - someone is on site providing supervision and “cameras monitor the parking lot 24/7”26 Santa Barbara (City of Lompoc) - Resolution of City Council states that “monitoring and oversight shall be provided during safe parking hours.”27 Union City - "The City of Union City Community and Recreation Services Department will be providing an attendant to be present throughout the night at all of the locations."28 Walnut Creek (Trinity Safe Parking Program) - Guardian Security will provide one staff person per shift to perform security services for the program from 9:15 pm to 6:15 am, seven days a week.29 Further, the vehicle dwellers are supposed to leave the church every morning and park at least 0.5 miles away, but there is no clear provision for how this rule will be enforced and verified. And 0.5 miles still means that they will remain in our neighborhood, without control in proximity to the schools and on school biking routes. 4. PROCEDURAL. Many of the neighbors feel that they were not properly informed about FCCPA’s plans and they have either not been allowed to participate in discussions with FCCPA or their feedback has been minimized or even entirely ignored. For example, many of the nearby neighbors on Morton Way were not informed, and, as one disturbing example, even the residents of the house on 22 Morton Way, which shares a fence with the Church and is quite close to the chosen parking spots, (bounds seen on FCCPA application map) only learned about the plans late, and only by chance, from word of mouth. Neighborhood feedback has been either editorialized or outright ignored by both Move Mountain View and Church representatives. A meeting was held on 7/12/22 (Recording of the meeting available at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development- Services/1985-Louis-22PLN-00159) and it was advertised as a community meeting, but it did not include a true discussion. The meeting involved only one-sided extolling of the program and silencing any inconvenient questions or rebuttals submitted by online chat. Some neighbors even complained that their written questions were being edited in real time during the meeting. We need a real discussion, with the neighbors’ concerns being heard and addressed properly and in good faith, not only in words or symbolic gestures. 4.b Packet Pg. 150 Page 7 of 10 Conclusion Once again, let me reiterate, that we have nothing against helping the unhoused and those less fortunate. However, we are forced to submit this appeal, because the proposed program implementation at the First Congregational Church contains fundamental flaws and risks to neighborhood health, safety, and welfare, which the program sponsors have been unwilling to address. Please revoke the temporary Safe Parking Program permit granted to the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto and Move Mountain View and deny any further permits until the issues with the program flaws have been resolved in a fair and satisfactory manner. Sincerely, Todor Ganev P.S. As I mentioned, I represent other neighbors who reside in the area, have concerns and find it necessary to submit this appeal. I have included their names and addresses here by their own request and with their permission: Maria Sanchez, 22 Morton Way, Palo Alto CA 94303 Pedro Rodillo, 22 Morton Way, Palo Alto CA 94303 Rita Chuang , 22 Morton Way, Palo Alto CA 94303 Susy Fan, 2181 Louis Rd, Palo Alto 94303 Robin Love, 2096 Louis Rd, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Jessica Fan, 2093 Louis Rd, Palo Alto, CA 94303. Stephanie Yu, 2093 Louis Rd, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Purvi Kapadia, 2126 Louis Rd, Palo Alto CA 94303 Kalpesh Kapadia, 2126 Louis Rd, Palo Alto CA 94303 Maria Jiao, 1982 Louis Road, Palo Alto 94303 4.b Packet Pg. 151 Page 8 of 10 Laura Oliveira, 2146 Louis Rd Palo Alto CA 94303 Rafael Oliveira, 2146 Louis Rd Palo Alto CA 94303 Shalini Advani, 2142 Bellview Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Stephanie Jun, 40 Primrose way. Palo Alto, CA 94303 Justin Chueh, 1992 Barbara Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Kathryn Jordan, 114 Walter Hays, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Grace Chang, 165 Heather Ln, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Karen Latchford, 171 Heather Ln, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Ian Latchford, 171 Heather Ln, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Nishita Kothary, 1071 Embarcadero Rd, Palo Alto 94303 Niraj Shah, 1071 Embarcadero Rd, Palo Alto 94303 Angela Dayton, 1595 Channing Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Katie Kostal, 190 Walter Hays Dr, Palo Alto, CA, 94303 Randy Stoltenberg, 874 Garland Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Ekta Kapur, 2368 Saint Francis Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Manoj Batra, 2368 Saint Francis Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Angie Ball, 1425 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94301 References 1. Safe Parking Guidelines provided by the Winter Faith program. 2. https://www.culvercity.org/Services/Housing-Health-Human-Services/Safe-Park-Program 3. https://www.cityoffullerton.com/documents/Safe%20Parking%20FAQ.pdf 4. https://www.safeparkingla.org 5. http://www.onestarfishsafeparking.org/program-requirements.html 6. FOCUS Program: http://ca-morganhill.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/23469/Focus-Safe- Parking- Program_PDNewsletter_Fall2017 7. ttps://www.211ca.org/detail/?idServiceAtLocation=211santacl- 70563584&location=santa%20cruz%20county%20ca&user= 8. https://www.jfssd.org/our-services/adults-families/safe-parking-program/safe-parking-north- county/ 9. This is required by ordinance. https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2540 4.b Packet Pg. 152 Page 9 of 10 10. https://www.cityoflompoc.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=27025 (Section I.D(2)). 11. https://www.afcsantacruz.org/safespaces-program.html (under procedures link) 12. https://trinitycenterwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Safe-Parking-Program- Description.pdf. This program appears to currently be on pause, possibly due to funding, but was operational for nine months. 13. https://socialinnovation.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Safe-Parking-Literature- Review.pdf 14. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/12/mountain-view-nonprofit-kicking-off-2-year-trial- to-get-car-dwellers-off- streets 15. https://www.hr.com/en/resources/free_research_white_papers/hrcom-background-screening- june-2019- esearch_jwvmqi89.html 16. https://alcosafeparking.org/?page_id=88 17. his Overnight Shelter manual is offered as an example on the Winter Faith website. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B51fV-mxPo3_QkkzbU5kYndzZEk/view 18. https://www.cityoffullerton.com/documents/Safe%20Parking%20FAQ.pdf 19. https://www.tvapc.org/partner-news/livermore-safe-parking-program/ https://evogov.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/meetings/134/attachments/7066.pdf 20. http://www.longbeach.gov/everyone-home-long-beach/news/long-beach-safe-parking- program/ 21. https://www.safeparkingla.org/ 22. http://ca-morganhill.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/23469/Focus-Safe-Parking- Program_PDNewsletter_Fall2017 and https://www.mhbible.org/safeparking 23. https://www.hopeofthevalley.org/our-programs/safe-parking-program/ 24. https://sacramentocityexpress.com/2021/04/09/city-launches-additional-safe-parking-site-on- south-front-street-to-serve-people-staying-in- ehicles/#:~:text=The%20City%20of%20Sacramento%20has,vehicles%2C%20depending%20on%2 0their%20sizes. 25. https://www.jfssd.org/our-services/adults-families/safe-parking-program/safe-parking-north- county/ 26. https://friendsof40prado.org/safe-parking-program-expanded/ 27. https://www.cityoflompoc.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=27025 (Section I, D (12)). 28. https://www.unioncity.org/DocumentCenter/View/3779/Careavan-Brochure-11-13-2019 29. https://trinitycenterwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Safe-Parking-Program- Description.pdf. 4.b Packet Pg. 153 Page 10 of 10 Examples of Temperatures falling close to or below 40 Degrees Fahrenheit at Night in 2022 4.b Packet Pg. 154 Addendum to the Appeal of the conditional approval of application 22PLN-00159 This document is an addendum to the Appeal of the conditional approval of application 22PLN-00159 by First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA) at 1985 Louis Road. The document’s purpose is to address certain assertions made at the July 12, 2022 meeting and elsewhere and reinforce arguments for the Appeal. Na mely: A. Vehicle idling will not be rare, contrary to incorrect assertions. B. Vehicle idling is a health hazard, especially for children and those suffering from asthma. A. Vehicle idling will NOT be rare The Safe Parking rules, as currently stated, will allow unrestricted vehicle idling at night if the temperatures fall below 40 degrees Fahrenheit. The Appeal, as filed on July 20 , 2022, featured just a few examples of temperatures falling below 40 degrees in the past months. As stated there, that was just a perfunctory perusal of data, to make a point, and that even rare idling is a hazard the neighbors, especially to the children. More detailed review of Palo Alto climate data statistics from multiple past years (see for example, USclimatedata.com) shows that normal temperatures in January routinely fall below 40 degrees Fahrenheit and this is a possibility in all 31 days in January (Table 1. below). Similar normal temperatures can be seen for February (Table 2. below). Temperatures that are close to 40 F, albeit a bit higher, can be seen in other months (c.f. USclimatedata.com). Further, it appears that the temperature-based rules for idling will be very difficult to enforce. It is not clear how the vehicle dwellers are expected to measure temperature and comply. It is conceivable that if the temperature is somewhat over 40 degrees, idling will still occur. There is also the potential of confusion, unnecessary arguments and conflicts over a few degrees difference in measurements. In view of the above, the only reasonable conclusion is that idling will NOT be rare. Therefore, once again, we urge FCCPA to consider that the effect of idling will be significant and move the Safe Parking spots further away from the neighbors’ fences, if not out of good will toward the existing neighbors, then in order to comply with Palo Alto Municipal Code: 18.42.160 (d)(1)(ii) which states “The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area". 4.b Packet Pg. 155 Table 1. Daily Normal Temperatures for January, Palo Alto CA (Source: USClimateData.com) This space intentionally left blank 4.b Packet Pg. 156 Table 2. Daily Normal Temperatures for February, Palo Alto CA (Source: USClimateData.com) This space intentionally left blank 4.b Packet Pg. 157 B. Vehicle idling is a health hazard, especially for children and those suffering from asthma. It is well-known that vehicle exhaust is a health hazard. There are numerous publications and directives by various reputable sources, such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency, The California Office of Environmental Health Assessment and others. For example, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (https://www.epa.gov/schools/idle- free-schools-toolkit-healthy-school-environment) states: “Idling vehicles contribute to air pollution and emit air toxins, which are pollutants known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects. Monitoring at schools has shown elevated levels of benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and other air toxics during the afternoon hour coinc iding with parents picking up their children. Children’s lungs are still developing, and when they are exposed to elevated levels of these pollutants, children have an increased risk of developing asthma, respiratory problems and other adverse health effects. Limiting a vehicle’s idling time can dramatically reduce these pollutants and children’s exposure to them.” Please note that the US EPA voices concern about vehicle idling even during the relatively short time when parents are picking up their children from school. Then, following basic logic, the prolonged vehicle idling near the children’s homes that will occur at the currently chosen FCCPA’s Safe Parking program spots presents an even greater hazard than said vehicle idling during the shorter school pickup time. Also, the US EPA specifically mentions the risk of asthma and other respiratory diseases in children due to idling. Let me reiterate that there are at least 5 children living in the immediate vicinity of the Safe Parking spots, one of whom does suffer from asthma. (medical documentation is available, but not included here, in order to protect the minor’s identity) There are additional potential health byproducts to the idling that are not discussed here, including, for example, noise and lack of sleep, which also can lead to a decline in one's wellbeing. Finally, the area already has traffic pollution, as Embarcadero Road is a busy street, (traffic issues are not discussed here, as they are being addressed by the City and the residents via other initiatives), so it is inconsiderate to force even more pollution and potential harm on the existing residents, when a very reasonable solution exists – again, as previously stated, FCCPA can simply move the Safe Parking spots further away from the residents’ fences, within their larger Louis Rd parking lot. It is unfathomable why FCCPA authorities are refusing this relatively minor consideration to their existing neighbors without a valid or compelling reason. 4.b Packet Pg. 158 THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING THE MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA FROM UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, AND FROM THE PERPETRATION OF ACTS OF HATE VIOLENCE AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING. Fair Housing And Criminal History The Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits discrimination against tenants or homeowners based on various protected characteristics, such as race, national origin, ancestry, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, and gender identity. Housing providers sometimes check whether a person has a criminal history when making a housing decision, such as whether to rent to an individual. While providers have legitimate interests in screening potential tenants to determine if they can fulfill their obligations as tenants, individuals with criminal histories face barriers to housing even when their history bears no relationship to their ability to be responsible tenants. New regulations from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) address when and how housing providers may lawfully consider criminal histories, in order to protect against unlawful discrimination. DFEH is providing this guidance concerning the use of criminal history by providers or operators of housing. Which California laws apply to the use of criminal history by housing providers? California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) protects people from housing discrimination based on protected characteristics including race, color, national origin, religion, disability, gender, gender identity, familial status, veteran/military status, sexual orientation, and source of income. Most housing providers are also covered by the Unruh Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of immigration status, citizenship, and primary language, among others. Having a criminal history is not in itself a protected characteristic under FEHA or the Unruh Act. However, regulations that went into effect on January 1, 2020 implement FEHA with respect to the use of criminal history in housing (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Sections 12264-12271). When does a housing provider violate California law if they consider someone’s criminal history? A housing provider’s policy or practice regarding criminal history will violate California law when it has an unjustified discriminatory effect on members of a protected class, even when the provider had no intent to discriminate. In California as in the rest of the nation, African Americans, Hispanics (or Latinos), and certain other groups face higher rates of arrest, conviction, and incarceration than the general population. The use of criminal history information in housing decisions can therefore have a disproportionate negative affect on these protected groups. In addition, a housing provider’s policy or practice regarding criminal history will violate California law if it constitutes intentional discrimination on the basis of a protected characteristic. For example, it is unlawful for housing providers to: use criminal history screenings to intentionally exclude individuals because of their race, only run criminal history screenings on certain racial groups, or treat individuals in different racial groups differently based on comparable criminal history information. Additional information relevant to this question are provided in the FAQs below and the regulations. 1 2 PAGE 1 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING 4.b Packet Pg. 159 Fair Housing And Criminal History Who must comply with California’s fair housing laws? • Landlords • Property management companies • Homeowners associations • Public housing authorities • Real estate agents • Home sellers • Property insurers • Builders • Mortgage lenders • Tenant screening companies • Consumer reporting agencies • Others Can a housing provider advertise or indicate a blanket ban against applicants with criminal records? No. Housing providers cannot make any statement indicating a blanket ban on renting to anyone with a criminal record. The law prohibits advertisements, screening policies (oral or written), or statements with blanket bans such as “No Felons” or “We Don’t Allow Criminals Here.” However, it is not unlawful for a housing provider to advertise or state that it will run a lawful criminal history check. May a housing provider lawfully check an applicant’s criminal history? Yes. Generally, a housing provider may check the criminal history of an applicant, although there are some types of criminal history information that providers may not seek or consider (see FAQ 6 below). If a housing provider intends to deny someone housing (or otherwise take an adverse action against someone) it must be based on a past criminal conviction. And, the law requires the provider to follow certain guidelines, which are set forth in the regulations (see FAQ 7 below). Most importantly, the conviction the provider is concerned about must be a “directly-related conviction.” This means a criminal conviction that has a direct and specific negative bearing on a substantial, legitimate, and nondiscriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider, such as the safety of other residents, the housing provider’s employees, or the property. In determining whether a criminal conviction is directly-related, a housing provider should consider the nature and severity of the crime and the amount of time that has passed since the criminal conduct occurred. For example, a ten-year-old misdemeanor conviction for a driving offense would not likely be directly-related to fulfilling financial obligations because there is no rational relationship between the violation and the identified business interest. In contrast, a recent criminal conviction for residential arson could be directly-related to the risk that an individual may injure other residents or property because there is a rational relationship between recently committing residential arson and injuring residents or property. 3 4 5 PAGE 2 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING 4.b Packet Pg. 160 Fair Housing And Criminal History 6 What types of criminal history information are a housing provider prohibited from considering? It is unlawful for a housing provider to seek or consider the following: • Arrests that did not lead to a conviction; • Information indicating that an individual has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody, detained, or held for investigation by law enforcement; • Infractions; • Referral to or participation in a pre-trial or post-trial diversion program or a deferred entry of judgment program, unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below); • Criminal convictions that have been sealed, dismissed, expunged, or otherwise rendered legally inoperative, unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below); or • Adjudications or matters processed in the juvenile justice system, unless pursuant to an applicable court order or unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below). If a housing provider would like to consider criminal history information (aside from the prohibited information detailed in FAQ 6 above), what should the provider’s policy or practice look like? A housing provider may consider certain criminal history, but the provider’s policy or practice should: • Be narrowly tailored and focus on whether any criminal conviction is “directly- related” (see FAQ 5 above); • Provide an opportunity for applicants to present individualized, mitigating information either in writing or in person if the housing provider is concerned about an applicant’s past conviction; • Provide written notice of the opportunity to all applicants to present mitigating information if a housing provider is concerned about a past conviction; • Consider the factual accuracy of the criminal history information of the applicant, meaning the background report does not contain outdated, incorrect, or falsified information or information that is erroneously attributed to the individual being considered; • Delay seeking, considering, or using a third-party report of criminal history information until after an individual’s financial and other qualifications are verified; • Provide a copy or description of the criminal history background check policy to an applicant upon request; and • Consider mitigating information in determining whether to rent to an applicant with a past criminal conviction. 7 PAGE 3 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING 4.b Packet Pg. 161 Fair Housing And Criminal History 8 9 What is mitigating information? Housing providers should consider mitigating information when considering an applicant’s criminal history. Mitigating information means credible information about the applicant that suggests that the applicant is not likely to pose a demonstrable risk to the health and safety of others, the property, or other substantial, legitimate, and non-discriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider. Mitigating information must be credible information that a reasonable person would believe is true based on the source and content of the information. Mitigation information includes but is not limited to: • The age of the individual when the criminal conduct occurred; • The amount of time that has passed since the date of conviction; • Whether the conduct arose as a result of a disability; • Whether the conduct arose from status as a survivor of domestic violence; • Whether the individual has maintained a good tenant history before and/or after the conviction; • Whether there is evidence of rehabilitation efforts, including satisfactory compliance with all terms and conditions of parole and/or probation; successful completion of parole, probation, mandatory supervision, or post release community supervision; and • Other conduct demonstrating rehabilitation, such as maintenance of steady employment. May a housing provider rely on third parties to perform criminal history checks? Yes. However, it is not a defense for a housing provider to have relied on a third party’s criminal history report if the use of the criminal history violates fair housing laws, and such third parties are also subject to California’s fair housing laws. Housing providers that rely on criminal histories prepared by third parties, such as consumer reporting agencies, may wish to seek from the third party details on any criminal records discovered so that the housing provider can make a lawful, individualized assessment. Furthermore, other laws limit the extent to which consumer reporting agencies can report such information. It is unlawful for these agencies to report records of an applicant’s arrest, indictment, information, misdemeanor complaint, or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, are more than seven years old (California Civil Code section 1785.13). Where can I obtain more information? Please see our website at www.dfeh.ca.gov for more information and resources. PAGE 4 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING 4.b Packet Pg. 162 Randy Stoltenberg 874 Garland Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94303 July 17, 2022 Jodie Gerhardt Manager of Current Planning City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Ms. Gerhardt- I’m writing to support the appeal of approved Safe Parking Program permit application 22PLN- 00159 by the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto located at 1985 Louis Rd, Palo Alto 94303. We have lived at our current address for 14 years, and while it is not within 600 feet of the church, our neighborhood is within a half mile and could be impacted by this program. Our main concern is for the safety of our children and neighbors. The program as administered by Move Mountain View does not adequately vet the participants. They claim federal and local regulations do not allow proper background checks. If so, then the program should be reevaluated as lack of proper vetting will unnecessarily endanger our neighborhoods. My family has been the victim of assault by the homeless in Palo Alto. The individual in question entered our place of worship during our Sunday services and verbally assaulted many members of our congregation. He had to be physically removed by the stronger men in attendance, but that put them in unnecessary danger. He later showed up at First Congregational Church when my wife was there with our newborn for a preschool parents meeting. You can imagine her alarm at seeing him again knowing his propensity for erratic behavior. One of the teachers took a picture of him as previously requested by the police. He then began to yell profane language threating her if she did not delete the picture. We understand this episode does not define all homeless in our community, but it does display the risk taken by advocating policies that attract the homeless population. We also have friends in Palo Alto that have suffered much more serious, almost fatal, offenses at the hands of homeless people who should not have been allowed in public due to outstanding arrest warrants. The safety of my children is of utmost importance to me. I oppose any effort that would attract a permanent flow of homeless individuals into our neighborhood. I recognize that the majority of those experiencing homelessness are great people who need a hand. But it only takes one bad experience to impact a child, a family, or a neighbor for a lifetime. 4.b Packet Pg. 163 In our congregation, we have cared for many displaced individuals and families over the years. Each of these cases has been handled individually with the resources of the congregation. While I applaud the efforts of the First Congregational Church to reach out to those experiencing homelessness, they are not entitled to assume risk for the entire neighborhood. None of the presenters from the church had small children which I think is a major factor for many of those in opposition to this permit. And even if they did, their desire to participate in this program should not supersede the safety concerns of their neighbors. Also, I know from canvassing the neighborhood that many individuals were not properly notified by the church or the city of this application. While not malicious, the failure to properly inform should at least invalidate the original application. It is not within the spirit of this process to exclude neighbors from the decision to host a Safe Parking Program site. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I repeat my request that the current application approval be revoked and the matter be brought before the City Council so the affected neighbors can have their concerns properly addressed in a public forum. Sincerely, Randy Stoltenberg 4.b Packet Pg. 164 4.c Packet Pg. 165 4.c Packet Pg. 166 4.c Packet Pg. 167 Attached: Findings and Conditions of Approval July 6, 2022 Rev. Eileen Altman 1985 Louis Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 eileen@fccpa.org Subject: 1985 Louis Road, 22PLN-00159, Safe Parking Dear Rev. Altman: The Safe Parking application for the project referenced below was conditionally approved by planning staff on behalf of the Director of Planning and Development Services, as it was found to meet the applicable Findings set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.160(d). PROJECT: Request for a Safe Parking Program permit to allow overnight parking of up to four (4) vehicles as incidental to the existing religious institution. Environmental Assessment: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: R-1. This Director’s decision shall become final fourteen (14) calendar days from the postmark date of this mailing (or on the next business day if it falls on a weekend or holiday) unless a written appeal is filed with the City Clerk pursuant to PAMC Section 18.42.160(d)(3). A public community meeting will be held during this period. If a hearing is not requested, the use may begin on the fifteenth (15) day after the post date of this letter. The project approval shall be effective for eighteen months and may be extended as noted in the conditions of approval. Application for renewal must be made prior to expiration. If you have any questions regarding this determination, please do not hesitate to contact me at emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Emily Foley, AICP Project Planner DocuSign Envelope ID: E801C444-A2C4-4EEE-A426-6B85C78A2B27 4.d Packet Pg. 168 22PLN-00159 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: As set forth in PAMC 18.42.160(d), The director has found the subject safe parking permit is in conformance with the following findings: 1. The proposed safe parking use complies with the standards listed in subsection (f) of this Section 18.42.160. 2. The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the safe parking use. The approval of this project shall be subject to the following conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Planning Division 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "Safe Parking, First Congregational Church of Palo Alto” submitted electronically on June 14, 2022 and on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. QUALIFYING SITE. Safe parking must be operated with an existing, legal church or religious institution use. 3. NUMBER OF VEHICLES. At no time shall more than four (4) vehicles be used for safe parking. 4. HOURS OF OPERATION. A safe parking use may only occur between the hours of 6:00 pm and 8:00 am. 5. NOISE. Audio, video, generator, or other amplified sound that is audible outside the vehicles parked in the safe parking program is prohibited. 6. IDLING OF VEHICLES. Additional idling is allowed if necessary to provide heat to an occupied vehicle if the outside ambient temperature is below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, or idling is necessary to provide cooling to an occupied vehicle if the outside temperat ure is more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit. 7. SHELTER IN VEHICLES. All persons receiving safe parking shall shelter within the vehicles. No person shall be housed in tents, lean-tos, or other temporary facilities. 8. REQUIRED FACILITIES. Accessible restroom facilities, including a toilet and handwashing sink, shall be available to persons utilizing the site for safe parking at all times during the DocuSign Envelope ID: E801C444-A2C4-4EEE-A426-6B85C78A2B27 4.d Packet Pg. 169 22PLN-00159 hours of operation. These facilities may be the existing onsite facilities or mobile facilities brought onsite on a temporary basis to serve persons utilizing safe parking. 9. CONTACT INFORMATION. The following emergency contact information shall be posted on site in a place readily visible to persons utilizing safe parking: (i) a contact phone number for the safe parking program operator; (ii) the police non-emergency phone number; (iii) 911, (iv) a representative for the church, and (v) a representative for the City of Palo Alto (i.e. the Assistant Director of Planning and Development Services). The safe parking program operator shall be available at all hours of operation at the posted phone number and shall be the first contact for non-emergency matters. 10. CONNECTION TO COUNTY CASE MANGEMENT SYSTEM. The safe parking use shall be managed and operated by a safe parking program operator that participates in the federal Homeless Management Information System with Santa Clara County or other county. 11. SAFE, CLEAN, ORDERLY PREMISES. The safe parking area and other onsite areas accessed by persons utilizing safe parking shall be maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition and manner. Litter shall be picked up on a regular basis. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The safe parking use shall be operated in a manner that is fully in conformance with all state and local laws including regulations and permit requirements. 13. ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. Access for Emergency Response vehicles shall be maintained at all times, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 14. INDEMNITY: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 15. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of eighteen month from the original date of approval, unless suspended or revoked sooner as set forth in the PAMC. In the event the use has not commenced within the time limit specified above, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. In no event shall a permit be valid beyond the expiration date of interim Ordinance No. 5490. 16. PERMIT EXPIRATION EXTENSION. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the initial 90-day period, the permit shall be automatically extended for up to an additional 270 calendar days. DocuSign Envelope ID: E801C444-A2C4-4EEE-A426-6B85C78A2B27 4.d Packet Pg. 170 22PLN-00159 17. PERMIT EXPIRATION RENEWAL. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the 270-day extension period, the permit shall be renewed and be valid for a period of up to one year or the expiration of this interim Ordinance No. 5490, whichever is earlier. This renewal shall take the form of an Over-the-counter (OTC) permit and be reviewed by the Director of Planning or his designee. DocuSign Envelope ID: E801C444-A2C4-4EEE-A426-6B85C78A2B27 4.d Packet Pg. 171 Attachment D Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Board members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org 2. Enter the project address “1985 Louis” in the “Search.Find.Connect” box 3. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/1985-Louis- 22PLN-00159 4.e Packet Pg. 172 From:Ann Shimakawa To:Foley, Emily Subject:First Congregational Safe Parking Community Check-in Mtg Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 7:49:00 PM You don't often get email from ann_shimakawa@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Emily, Thank you so much for organizing the community meeting on the Safe Parking program at First Congregational Church. It was very informative and clearly, your team and Move MV deserve a lot of credit for enabling such a worthwhile program. I live several blocks away, so this really won't impact me - but I support the Safe Parking program. It sounds like the Unitarian Church program has been quite successful and I'm hopeful our neighborhood will follow their model of understanding and grace. Best regards, Ann Shimakawa 951 Elsinore Dr 4.f Packet Pg. 173 From:Linda Zausen To:Foley, Emily; Amber@movemv.org Subject:FW: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church Date:Wednesday, July 20, 2022 1:44:34 PM You don't often get email from lzausen@pghwong.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From: Linda Zausen <lzausen@pghwong.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 6:34 PM To: 'Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org' <Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'Rachael.Tanner@cityofpaloalto.org.'; 'Amber@movemv.org' <Amber@movemv.org> Cc: 'Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org' <Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org> Subject: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church I listened into your Safe Parking Neighborhood Check-In on July 12, but some of my questions were not completely answered. What is the MAXIMUM number of people allowed per vehicle? It was stated that the average number is 2 or 3 people, but what is the maximum? It was stated that RVs would not be allowed. What about vans & SUVs? A small SUV is about the same size as a car; a medium-sized SUV about the same as a large car; and a larage-sized SUV about the same as a truck. How long can a program participant remain in a safe parking slot? It was stated that this is a case-by-case basis and that most participants didn’t remain there “very long”. But what is the MAXIMUM length of time one can remain? Is there even a maximum duration? How is the requirement permitting only over-night parking enforced? It was stated that a monitor will check that parking spaces are only occupied by participants with permits in the evening, and another morning check will be made to assure they have vacated their parking spaces. What if someone over-sleeps or gets sick? A sick person, especially a child, wouldn’t be expected to leave at 7:00 am, would he? It was stated that program participants would have to move their cars at least one mile away during the day. Public libraries are desirable places for the homeless, especially when it is very hot or very cold. Rincanada Library is less than a mile from the church. How will you assure that participants do not utilize this facility? It was stated that anyone wishing to appeal this approval would have to do so by July 20, but I could not find any information on your or the City of Palo Alto web-sites as to how one goes about doing this. Nor could I find any telephone numbers or any contact persons who knew of this process. Will there be a full public hearing or is this a done deal? These things were unclear during the meeting. I am a democrat. And I realize that homelessness is a serious problem, and I’m sure that the intentions of the good people at the church are well meant. As are those of the public & non- profit organizations involved in this program. But there are better solutions. I would appreciate heaaring from someone at the City or involved in this program. A one-on- 4.f Packet Pg. 174 one conversation with a “live” person would be much more beneficial than an e-mail string or a ZOOM conference. Linda Zausen 872 Embarcadero Palo Alto 650.888.1280 4.f Packet Pg. 175 From:stephanie jun To:pdsdirector; Foley, Emily Subject:Fwd: [duveneck] Safe Parking Program, Zoom call tomorrow Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 9:15:54 AM You don't often get email from stephaniejun@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To city of Palo Alto officials, I live across the street from first Congo and have been a lifetime resident of Palo Alto and a homeowner in this neighborhood for 15 years. I object to and do not support starting the parking program at the first Congo facility in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Please do not start this program here. There are many other less disruptive sites. Many thanks, Stephanie Jun Begin forwarded message: From: Tilli <tillik@gmail.com> Date: July 11, 2022 at 11:10:43 AM PDT To: Duveneck Elementary <duveneck-elementary@googlegroups.com> Subject: [duveneck] Safe Parking Program, Zoom call tomorrow Dear Fellow Duveneck School Parents: I am writing today on behalf of myself and other neighbors with a serious safety concern for our neighborhood and our children. The First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (@ Louis and Embarcadero) is planning to participate in the so-called “Safe Parking Program”, bringing homeless vehicle dwellers from all over (not just Palo Alto) into their parking lot and our neighborhood. We all support helping the unhoused and Palo Alto is already spends millions and millions of our tax money on related initiatives. However, this particular program is fundamentally flawed and poses significant concerns. Namely: · NOT SAFE The Palo Alto Planning Department has officially stated that even convicted criminals cannot be precluded from participating in the program, even if they are convicted drug dealers or sexual predators, including pedophiles. Moreover, they are intentionally not doing background checks on vehicle dwellers! This presents significant risks, particularly for our more vulnerable, and especially for our children, as there are at least 3 schools in the vicinity of the church. There is also an obvious conflict with the Safe Biking to School initiatives. 4.f Packet Pg. 176 · NO COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS The vehicle dwellers will be exempt from the existing environmental regulations. For example, unlike the tax- paying citizens, vehicle dwellers will be allowed to have cars idling for extended periods of time, blowing exhaust toward the residents. · NO REAL SECURITY The First Congregational Church aims to abdicate their responsibilities to an out-of-town organization, Move Mountain View, which uses tax money to impact Palo Alto neighborhoods. Only drive-by security a couple of times per day is planned. There is a first-hand account from another location that in the past security guards hired by Move Mountain View have been doing drugs together with the vehicle dwellers. · NO ACCOUNTABILITY -It is not clear who is accountable for making sure that incidents that have happened at other so-called "Safe Parking" locations do not happen here. Actual examples exist for trash thrown into neighbors’ yards, smoking, public urination, drugs, noise, dogs barking, fights. · NO TRANSPARENCY The First Congregational Church has failed to properly inform many of the affected neighbors about their intentions, which is a big red flag. Their answers to neighbors’ concerns have so far included confusion and contradictions. · NO CONTROL OVER EXPANSION The vehicle dwellers are supposed to leave the church every morning and park at least 0.5 miles away. This means that they will remain in our neighborhood and around schools without control. Also, if the program takes effect, there is a real concern that RVs and other vehicles not associated with the program will be attracted to our neighborhood. · NO APPRECIABLE SUCCESS This program’s success rate of rehabilitating homeless is very low, as admitted by Move Mountain View. You can google 'Safe Parking Program' on NextDoor and see firsthand feedback from neighbors all over the vicinity. Please join the Public Hearing meeting on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 6 pm via Zoom and express your concerns, if you have them. You can join by following this link: https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/89772126436. You can also join by calling +1 (669) 900-6833 and entering Meeting ID: 897 7212 6436. Please also tell your neighbors or folks around you about this issue and the zoom meeting. According to a City Council member who actually shares our concerns, often busy working parents do not join such meetings, and then a small vocal group of activists wins the motions by default. In addition, you may write/email the members of the Palo Alto City Council (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/City-Clerk/City-Council) with the same concerns and request. You can also send inquiries and emails to Emily Foley and Jonathan Lait today. Here are their email addresses. They are from the Planning department. pdsdirector@cityofpaloalto.org Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org 4.f Packet Pg. 177 Thank you in advance, Tilli -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Duveneck Elementary" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to duveneck-elementary+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/duveneck-elementary/8f0a9a6a-2698-444b- a4ed-1d110a54bb81n%40googlegroups.com. 4.f Packet Pg. 178 From:William R. Harrison To:Foley, Emily Subject:Fwd: "Safe Parking" at First Congregational, Louis Road Date:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 6:40:09 PM You don't often get email from wrharrison614@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From: "William R. Harrison" <wrharrison614@gmail.com> Subject: "Safe Parking" at First Congregational, Louis Road Date: July 5, 2022 at 6:37:59 PM PDT To: Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org Hi, Emily, We object itinerant parking at First Congregational, 1985 Louis Road, because by definition itinerants are those who move from place to place. They have no connection at all with the local community in the 1985 Louis Road neighborhood. These itinerants create risks of sanitation, more vehicle and foot traffic, noise, and possible crime. For these reasons, some of us who live in this neighborhood object to so-called “Safe Parking” at First Congregational. William R. (Bill) Harrison 121 Heather Lane 4.f Packet Pg. 179 From:Tilli To:Foley, Emily; Gerhardt, Jodie; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Fwd: Safe Parking program Date:Monday, August 8, 2022 2:35:10 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear esteemed City Council members- I am a mother of 4 who lives in Palo Alto near the First Congregational Church. While I did not sign the appeal, because I live more than 600m from the church, I am opposed to the program in its present form and am writing to ask that you amend it to make it safe for residents. (Application 22PLN-00159) My biggest ask is for Background checks (so obvious, but yet I can't believe we still have to explain). Other programs in the country have background checks. No reason for us to compromise our residents' safety. What we hear in opposition to background checks is --> "Background checks do not always work, so no need to do them" Response: So if we apply this logic to every law, we will have to live without laws, because no law is perfect in protecting 100% of the citizens. Another thing we hear is-->"We did not have to undergo criminal background checks in order to buy our houses, why do we want it from the vehicles dwellers? Credit check for mortgage is not the same as criminal background check" As far as I recall when I got my mortgage for our house is we had a credit check, and also comprehensive questions on whether one has mental Illness, criminal and civil liabilities, pending court actions, etc. Some may actually find those checks more invasive and stricter than criminal background check. Further, if one bothers to read the actual documents submitted to the City, you will find that just about everywhere else in California where such programs are implemented, the best practices include overnight supervision and many places if not most do require background checks. We want to be able to help the homeless but not feel we are compromising our sense of security and our children's sense of freedom. I believe we MUST require transients who wish to stay to register with the Opportunity Center with full background checks, and to consent to services deemed needed by social services. Tilli Kalisky Palo Alto 4.f Packet Pg. 180 From:Steve Ketchpel To:Foley, Emily; Tanner, Rachael Subject:In support of Safe Parking at First Congregational Church of Palo Alto Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 7:16:09 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from steve.ketchpel@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Emily, Rachael, Thank you for running the information session this evening. I'm a member of FCCPA and strongly support the use of the lot for vehicle dwellers in this program. -Steven Ketchpel 650-799-1626 4.f Packet Pg. 181 From:Laura Cenamor To:Foley, Emily Subject:Parking Safe Place-for those in need Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 7:37:03 PM You don't often get email from lauracutting80@googlemail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Emily, I just listened to the Zoom meeting regarding providing a safe place for vehicle dwellers. I believe that everyone has the right to feel safe and am completely in support of this application moving forward. I don’t really know ‘permit city protocol’ but would you let me know if anything can be done to help this permit be granted? Would more emails in support of moving forward help counter act emails trying to stop it happening? I thought that all of you were wonderful on the call, incredibly articulate and composed! Many thanks, Laura 4.f Packet Pg. 182 From:Angie Evans To:Foley, Emily Subject:Re: 1985 Louis Safe Parking Follow Up Date:Thursday, July 21, 2022 10:10:50 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png image008.png image005.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Emily, I wanted to check back about whether this site got an appeal or not. Thanks so much! Angie On Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 11:56 AM Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hello, Check In Meeting Thank you for attending the Safe Parking Neighborhood Check in meeting on July 12. The meeting recording and Q&A report is posted on the project webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/1985-Louis-22PLN-00159 Next Steps As mentioned in the meeting, the Director of Planning & Development Services has reviewed the materials and tentatively approved the project. The applicant, First Congregational Church, has corresponded via email with some interested community members. Please reach out to the congregation directly if you have questions about their application, program operations, funding, and other aspects of the program. The City reviews their application for compliance with the requirements of the municipal code. The deadline to appeal the issuance of the permit is Wednesday, July 20, 2022. An appellant must: (1) live within 600ft of 1985 Louis Road, (2) fill out the Appeal Request Form; (3) draft a letter stating the reasons for the appeal; (4) email it to both Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org and Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Staff will review the appeal for timeliness and completeness. They will contact you to collect the appeal fee, which is currently $610.50. The fee can be paid online. If the appeal fee is not paid within 5 calendar days of the request, the appeal will be considered withdrawn. If no appeal request is received, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto will be able to begin their Safe Parking operation. Sincerely, Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. 4.f Packet Pg. 183 From:Betsy Hart Rosoff To:Foley, Emily Subject:Re: 1985 Louis Safe Parking Follow Up Date:Monday, August 1, 2022 1:42:08 PM You don't often get email from betsyhartrosoff@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Emily, I read in the Palo Alto Online that neighbors have filed and appeal. Is it possible to see a copy of that appeal? With thanks, Betsy Rosoff On Jul 19, 2022, at 11:56 AM, Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote: Hello, Check In Meeting Thank you for attending the Safe Parking Neighborhood Check in meeting on July 12. The meeting recording and Q&A report is posted on the project webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/1985-Louis-22PLN-00159 Next Steps As mentioned in the meeting, the Director of Planning & Development Services has reviewed the materials and tentatively approved the project. The applicant, First Congregational Church, has corresponded via email with some interested community members. Please reach out to the congregation directly if you have questions about their application, program operations, funding, and other aspects of the program. The City reviews their application for compliance with the requirements of the municipal code. The deadline to appeal the issuance of the permit is Wednesday, July 20, 2022. An appellant must: (1) live within 600ft of 1985 Louis Road, (2) fill out the Appeal Request Form; (3) draft a letter stating the reasons for the appeal; (4) email it to both Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org and Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Staff will review the appeal for timeliness and completeness. They will contact you to collect the appeal fee, which is currently $610.50. The fee can be paid online. If the appeal fee is not paid within 5 calendar days of the request, the appeal will be considered withdrawn. If no appeal request is received, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto will be able to begin their Safe Parking operation. Sincerely, <image001.png>Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org <image002.png><image003.jpg><image004.png><image005.png><image007.png> <image008.png> NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. 4.f Packet Pg. 184 From:Todor Ganev To:Foley, Emily; Gerhardt, Jodie Cc:Spotwood, Alicia; pdsdirector; French, Amy; Lait, Jonathan Subject:RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Date:Wednesday, August 10, 2022 3:46:56 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image011.png image019.png image029.png image031.png image033.png image035.png image036.png image037.png image039.png image041.png image042.png image008.png image009.png image010.png image012.png Addendum_to Appeal_22PLN-00159.pdf Dear Ms. Foley: Per your instructions, please find attached an Addendum to the Appeal. Also, I am hearing that there are more Palo Alto residents asking to be added to those who already placed their names in the original appeal document. How can we go about adding their names? Thank you and best regards, Todor Ganev From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 8:24 AM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Hello Mr. Ganev, Yes, the appeal is tentatively set for the August 22nd meeting. It is considered tentative until the staff report is published at the end of the week. The meeting will be hybrid, meaning both on Zoom and in person. Any additional correspondence emailed to me by Wednesday may be included as an attachment in the Staff Report. After Wednesday, any additional emails should be sent directly to Council at city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. This item will be on the consent calendar. Any member of the public, including yourself may speak during public comment for the consent calendar. There is no staff presentation or Council deliberation or Q&A. The Council is deciding at this meeting whether or not they will have a full public hearing for the appeal. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 5, 2022 11:22 AM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Importance: High Dear Ms. Foley: I did not see an email from you after the one below from 2 weeks ago, so I am wondering whether I have missed something. Has a date on the City Council calendar been set yet? I saw August 22 quoted somewhere, but, of course, I am relying on the official information from you. Is there a zoom link to the City Council meeting, or will it be in person? Also, one procedural question: Is it possible to add more documentation to the appeal at this time? Regards, Todor Ganev From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2022 8:32 AM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Hello Mr. Ganev, Yes, I have confirmed Accela shows the fee has been paid. I will follow up next week with next steps. Thanks, Emily 4.f Packet Pg. 185 Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 2:31 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Dear Ms. Foley, The appeal fee has been paid (Receipt # 369150). Best regards, Todor Ganev From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 12:32 PM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Hi Mr. Ganev, Thank you for the revised letter, the record will be updated accordingly. As a reminder, the appeal fee must be paid by end of the day Monday, July 25th to move forward with the appeal. I am available to assist if you have any difficulty with our online system. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 5:37 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Dear Ms. Foley, Per your gracious advice, please find attached a revised version of the appeal letter, with the identifying information of my son removed. Please also remove the doctor’s note from the appeal and from your records. Thank you again for your consideration. Todor Ganev From: Todor Ganev Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 5:11 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Dear Ms. Foley: Thank you for the fast response. How shall I go about removing my child’s identifying information, do you need me to submit a redacted or revised Appeal letter? Best Regards, Todor Ganev From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 5:06 PM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159 Hello Mr. Ganev, Thank you for your timely appeal request. Per PAMC 18.42.160(d), it will be placed on the Council Consent Calendar within 45 days. All appeal request documents are public information and will be published in the council report. Therefore, I wanted to give you the opportunity to consider removing 4.f Packet Pg. 186 your child’s identifying information from the letter and/or attachments. While I understand your intent, it is not necessary to provide a doctor’s note and may not be desirable to have this in the public record. Additionally, the appeal fee is due within 5 calendar days (end of day Monday, July 25th). Unfortunately, the fee amount quoted in my email below was the previous year’s. The fee due for this appeal is $622.71. The fee can be paid online, but it is necessary to create an ACA account. To Pay: Create an ACA Account following the instructions here: How to register/create an account on the OPS Citizen Portal (Written Instructions) Once you are logged in, use this link: https://aca-prod.accela.com/PALOALTO/Cap/CapDetail.aspx? Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1=22APL&capID2=00000&capID3=00001&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection= Then, click on the Payments tab and select Fees, then you should be able to click Pay Fees as seen in the image below: Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 1:03 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Nguyen, Vinhloc <Vinhloc.Nguyen@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Appeal to Issuance of Permit to Application 22PLN-00159CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Gerhardt and Ms. Foley: With this email, I am submitting a formal appeal to the issuance of permit to application 22PLN-00159 (Safe Parking Program) by First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA). I represent a group of neighbors residing in the vicinity of First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (FCCPA) at 1985 Louis Road. Many of their names are listed in the Appeal Letter. Allow me to clarify that we have nothing against helping the unhoused and those less fortunate. In fact, many of us regularly volunteer and donate to such causes. However, we are forced to resort to this appeal, because we have serious concerns about this particular program and especially about the way it is being implemented. We have tried, in good faith, to discuss mutually acceptable solutions with FCCPA, but, unfortunately, they have not been receptive to the neighbors’ suggestions. Please find attached the following documents: 1. Required Appeal Request Form (file name: “Appeal_Form_22PLN-00159.pdf”) 2. Required Letter stating the reasons for appeal (file name: “Appeal_Letter_22PLN-00159.pdf”) 3. A letter from the Palo Alto Medical Foundation Pediatric Department (file name : ”PAMF_Pediatrics_Letter.pdf” 4. Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (file name: “FEHA_FAQ.pdf”) 5. A letter from Mr. Randy Stoltenberg sharing personal experience and viewpoint of impacted community members (file name: “Stoltenberg_letter.pdf” We respectfully request that you revoke the temporary Safe Parking Program permit granted to the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto and Move Mountain View and deny any further permits until the issues with the program flaws have been resolved in a fair and satisfactory manner. Thank you very much for your kind consideration. Todor Ganev 940 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto CA 94303 From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 11:57 AM Subject: 1985 Louis Safe Parking Follow Up Hello, Check In Meeting 4.f Packet Pg. 187 Thank you for attending the Safe Parking Neighborhood Check in meeting on July 12. The meeting recording and Q&A report is posted on the project webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/1985-Louis-22PLN-00159 Next Steps As mentioned in the meeting, the Director of Planning & Development Services has reviewed the materials and tentatively approved the project. The applicant, First Congregational Church, has corresponded via email with some interested community members. Please reach out to the congregation directly if you have questions about their application, program operations, funding, and other aspects of the program. The City reviews their application for compliance with the requirements of the municipal code. The deadline to appeal the issuance of the permit is Wednesday, July 20, 2022. An appellant must: (1) live within 600ft of 1985 Louis Road, (2) fill out the Appeal Request Form; (3) draft a letter stating the reasons for the appeal; (4) email it to both Jodie.Gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org and Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Staff will review the appeal for timeliness and completeness. They will contact you to collect the appeal fee, which is currently $610.50. The fee can be paid online. If the appeal fee is not paid within 5 calendar days of the request, the appeal will be considered withdrawn. If no appeal request is received, the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto will be able to begin their Safe Parking operation. Sincerely, Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. 4.f Packet Pg. 188 Some people who received this message don't often get email from bon4dance@gmail.com. Learn why this is important From:Bonnie Bernstein To:Foley, Emily Subject:Re: Meeting about First Congregational Church Safe Parking Program Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 1:03:20 PM Attachments:image009.png image012.png image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png You don't often get email from bon4dance@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear Emily, No card was sent to the 4 houses on Bellview Drive that are behind the church and to a neighbor on Louis two doors down from the church. We got notices for the first meeting with the church. Perhaps someone neglected to send the cards. I suggest that you check. If we did not get the cards it is likely others also did not get them. Sincerely, Bonnie Bernstein On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 8:36 AM Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Bonnie, Notice cards were sent to all neighbors within a 600ft radius were sent notice cards on June 29th, approximately two weeks before the meeting. I confirmed your name was on the list of recipients. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Bonnie Bernstein <bon4dance@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 8:18 AM To: pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Meeting about First Congregational Church Safe Parking Program CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Planning Directors, We are neighbors living behind First Congregational Church. We were told by the Church in a meeting months ago that we would be informed about any future community meetings about the Safe Parking project being considered by the Church. We are a bit dismayed that we received no advanced notice about today's meeting. We were informed yesterday by another community member. I assume this is true for other neighbors as well. I believe it is the legal right of neighbors to be given advance notice about meetings on issues that affect our neighborhood so we can prepare our schedules accordingly. Many neighbors do not know that the meeting is going on. I suggest that you reschedule the meeting and post it in the appropriate way so that all neighbors can be informed and participate if they choose to.There are many concerns about this project and starting it without proper notice and discussion with neighbors is a very poor beginning. Sincerely yours, Bonnie Bernstein 4.f Packet Pg. 189 You don't often get email from tganev@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important From:Todor Ganev To:Foley, Emily Cc:pdsdirector; Tanner, Rachael Subject:RE: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church Date:Monday, July 11, 2022 4:19:08 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image008.png image009.png image011.png image007.png image012.png Ms. Foley: I am sorry, but I do not understand your sentence “Additionally the selected spaces are Furthermore, the City does not select which churches may or may not participate.” Looks like something is missing? It appears that your definition of “rational location” is focused on whether the parking locations can be seen from the street. This is a much less persuasive criterionthan the serious criterion of the health hazard created by exhaust gas being blown toward neighbors, threatening the health of multiple children (my children, one of whom, as I said, has asthma, and the next door neighbors’ children - mentioning these particular neighbors, because they are on vacation, but they have shared thatthey feel their health is threatened as well) Further, I do not accept your assurance that idling will be rare – you have no way of predicting temperatures, weather seems to be getting warmer continually, and 85 degrees is routinely measured here. Also, how will this be enforced? When the vehicle dwellers violate the idling rule, am I supposed to stand outside with athermometer and then call someone to complain? As I said, last time when such guests were parking with their exhaust pointing in my bedroom, it took the churchalmost a week to even send them the message. You do not have any complaints registered from me, because for years I have been trying to be a good, benevolent neighbor to the church and I have tolerated them.However, I cannot tolerate hazards to my children’s health, no parent would! One of the purpose of the permit system is to guarantee the citizens’ rights. Pleaseprotect our right to healthy environment and quiet enjoyment, free from nuisance and health hazards, so please reconsider your decision and the chosen parkingspaces location. Best regards, Todor From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 3:39 PM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Cc: pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church Hi Todor, I am sorry you are unhappy with our process. I can confirm that our standard noticing for major projects is 600 ft, and that is the radius to which notices were sent. Over280 cards were sent out, though this does not extend the full length of Morton Street. Likewise, the appeal process is set by the Zoning Code and would require Council approval to change. This community meeting is not required by code, we have added it to our permitting process as a courtesy to the neighborhood. I disagree that there is a “more rational” location. The selected parking spaces for the Safe Parking Permit are mostly screened from view of the street by the refuse binenclosure. There is no such shielding for any spaces on the Louis Rd side. Additionally the selected spaces are Furthermore, the City does not select which churches mayor may not participate. Any church may apply and we enforce that they follow the regulations. I could not address any prior incidents because you are the first person to tell me, there are no reported Code Enforcement cases in our system. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 2:23 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church Importance: High Ms. Foley: I strongly disagree with your statement that sufficient notice for the meetings has been provided. Isn’t there a legal requirement that people within a mile or so of thelocation be informed? There are many neighbors in the vicinity who are still not aware. As one extreme case, Ms. Chuang, who is our neighbor and who actually shares a fence with the church, right next to the poorly chosen parking location, was not even aware about any of this and learned about it just by chance. No one on MortonRoad knew anything and they are also in the immediate vicinity of the church. The same applies for multiple neighbors on the other sides of the church. I also disagree with your explanation about how the Middlefield location for the Unity church was chosen. Please refer to the meeting recording and I hope you will hear that visibility was not the only consideration, in fact, there were safety considerations for which the location was kept away from the big street. In any case, if the case ofthe First Congregational church there is an obviously better location on the Louis side of the road which does not threaten the health of a sick child (and other childrennext door) , why don’t you use your planning prerogatives and enforce that more rational location (there are actually points of lower visibility from the street at that more rational location)? I also don’t understand the logic that you would give a permit to an entity that has proven to be unable or unwilling to control its “guests”, justifying it by saying that theviolations have happened before you gave the permit. If they are prone to violations, or they have a record of creating nuisance or safety issues, they should not get the permit. Finally, you are directing me and the other affected neighbors to appeal before our opinion has been properly considered in the first place. Combined with the fact thatthe neighborhood has not been properly informed, this is unfair to us taxpayers, not to mention it appears to incur unnecessary expenses. 4.f Packet Pg. 190 Some people who received this message don't often get email from tganev@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important Please reconsider this flawed decision. Todor Ganev 940 Embarcadero Rd Palo Alto From: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 12:51 PM To: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Cc: pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church Hi Todor, Thank you for your comments. Please be aware that you have the opportunity to formally appeal the project, but this email alone is not sufficient to do so. Instructionsfor how to appeal are available here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/Safe-Parking-Permit-Applications I would like to clarify that idling of vehicles is only allowed during “extreme” weather, when the outside temperature is less than 40 degrees or greater than 85. For most of the year, the cars should not be idling. In the case of the Middlefield Rd. site, the intention was to limit visibility from major streets (Middlefield). In this case, thespaces selected on the Embarcadero side are least visible from the street. We provided sufficient notice for the meetings, in keeping with our noticing practices for other types of public hearings, and it is a Zoom meeting, which increases accessibility. It is not reasonable to ask the decision be delayed simply because it is summer. Lastly, the church does not yet have an operating Safe Parking Permit, so any recent incidents are currently not operating with the regulations. In the case of anemergency, call 911. The non-emergency police number is 650-329-2413. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Todor Ganev <tganev@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 1:36 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Safe Parking at First Congregational Church CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Foley and Mr. Lait: I am writing today to express a serious concern about the so-called “Safe Parking Program” permit at the First Congregational Church at 1985 Louis Road Palo Alto, CA 94303. In short, I request that you deny this permit and rescind any approvals already given. To clarify, in our neighborhood we all support helping the unhoused (to wit, my own daughter has done volunteering to help homeless people as part of a team organized by a Congressperson), so the issues here are flaws with this particular program and its particular implementation here. 1. My family’s residence is immediately next to the First Congregational Church, we share a fence. The perspective of extended vehicle idling close by is a terrifying health hazard, especially for one of my children who has asthma! This brings into question the location of the proposed safe parking spaces on the Embarcadero Road side of the church. It is obvious, from geometrical and physical considerations, that placing the parking spots on the Louis Road side of the church is much more feasible, as that location allows the idling vehicles to be further away from any residents. Please note that at a recent Safe Parking meeting at another location, the Unity Church, your department made the statement that the spots at that church were specifically chosen to be away from the large road (in that case Middlefield Rd). Then why is the choice here inconsistent with that approach – the parking spots chosen here are actually closer to the large road, (i.e. closer to Embarcadero Rd)? 2. The Palo Alto Planning Department has officially stated that even convicted criminals cannot be precluded from participating in the program, and even if they are convicted drug dealers or sexual predators. This presents significant risks, particularly for our more vulnerable, and especially for our children, as there are at least 3 schools in the vicinity of the church. The vehicle dwellers are supposed to leave the church every morning and park at least 0.5 miles away. This means that they will remain in our neighborhood without control. This does not eliminate the safety concerns, (on the contrary), and is an obvious conflict with the Safe Biking to School initiatives. Along these lines, let me point out that the First Congregational Church has been unable to properly control their “guests” in the past. Just a few of many examples: recently, “guests” of the church (pursuant to another homeless program ) lay down on the Embarcadero road sidewalk blocking it for hours every day on multiple days (photos available) and apparently became aggressive with a neighborhood child who was walking a dog. On another occasions, it took the church authorities almost a week to address a concern of mine that their overnight guests were parking every day with the exhaust pipes of their vehicle pointing at our bedroom (a practice which is highly undesirable and even illegal in some jurisdictions.) In yet another indicative case, a church ”guest” who appeared intoxicated, urinated in my driveway. There are doubts about Move Mountain View being able to provide proper security. Driving by a few times a day is not real security. Also, there is a first-hand account from another location that in the past security guards hired by Move Mountain View have been doing drugs together with the vehicle dwellers. Further, I would like to express the concern that the First Congregational Church and Move Mountain View have not been sufficiently forthcoming and transparent with the neighborhood. There are numerous neighbors in the vicinity who have not been properly informed about the church’s plans. Also, holding a hearing when many people are on summer vacation is not bound to be representative of the neighborhood’s wishes. Can the July 12th meeting be postponed until more neighbors are back in town? In view of the above and additional concerns and incidents whose description I am skipping for the sake of brevity, I request that you deny this permit and rescind any approvals already given. 4.f Packet Pg. 191 Thank you for your consideration, Todor Ganev 940 Embarcadero Rd Palo Alto 4.f Packet Pg. 192 From:Angela Dayton To:Burt, Patrick Cc:pdsdirector; Foley, Emily; John Dayton Subject:Re: Safe Parking Program - Homeless Individual STABBED my 16-year Old Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 5:47:36 PM You don't often get email from angela@angeladayton.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Mayor Burt- Full disclosure that I run a $30M program to assist low-income homeless individuals. Many of them are like the individuals are just down on their luck and trying to survive. I am emphatic to their situations and intimately aware of the challenges they face. I have dedicated my career to helping these individuals access social services, education, and employment. The issue I have with this particular program is that it appears no background checks will be conducted and no real services provided (i.e. counseling; training; movement toward self reliance.) This population would benefit from more than just parking overnight. In addition, there are an abundance of services available to this population that I am happy to assist the church in accessing on behalf of those they want to serve. But unfortunately since they are not conducting background checks and/or informing the community who has been granted permission to park for the night, I cannot support their plight and the city should not support the program either if regulations are not established and followed. Angela Sent from my iPhone On Jul 12, 2022, at 10:08 AM, ANGELA DAYTON, MS <angela@angeladayton.com> wrote:  Mayor Burt- My name is Angela Dayton. We spoke last August after my 16 year old daughter was randomly attacked and had her throat slashed at 9:34am 8/18/21 and was a millimeter away from death due to the actions of a homeless individual in Palo Alto residing at The Opportunity Center. We had just moved to Palo Alto three weeks prior to this brutal attack. We, as a city, cannot take the chance of something like this happening again by “inviting” homeless individuals into our neighborhood. I was just informed that the city is considering offering First Congregational 4.f Packet Pg. 193 Church of Palo Alto (@ Louis and Embarcadero) the ability to offer a “Safe Parking Program”, bringing homeless vehicle dwellers from all over (not just Palo Alto) into their parking lot and our neighborhood. As you can all imagine, I 100% disagree with this action. We are charitable individuals but this decision is being made without considering the safety of the neighborhood, our children, and our city. I will be the first one to speak up about the trauma my daughter and our family has endured and the lifelong scars she has on her neck and face from the attack - some scars from the knife and other from the attacker's fingernails. I would never want this, or something worse, to happen to any of your families in the name of “charity.” If the church is worried about homelessness and wants to be charitable, then the church can expend its funds and services another way. There are so many questions I have about the why behind this action and the how. None of us know what mental health issues these individuals have and it only takes one individual to ruin the lives of our families. The individual that attacked my daughter was not on drugs but did have a history of mental illness. As the city considers this decision, please advised that if the city approves the action, then the city is partially responsible, and liable, for the actions of the individuals being invited to reside in the church parking lot. Charity does not need to come at the expense of citizens safety. Angela Dayton, MS 801-628-5064 ------------------------EMAIL I RECEIVED INFORMING ME OF THIS ACTION- ------------------------ We all support helping the unhoused and Palo Alto is already spends millions and millions of our tax money on related initiatives. However, this particular program is fundamentally flawed and poses significant concerns. Namely: · NOT SAFE The Palo Alto Planning Department has officially stated that even convicted criminals cannot be precluded from participating in the program, even if they are convicted drug dealers or sexual predators, including pedophiles. Moreover, they are intentionally not doing background checks on vehicle dwellers! This presents significant risks, particularly for our more vulnerable, and especially for our children, as there are at least 3 schools in the vicinity of the church. There is also an obvious conflict with the Safe Biking to School initiatives. · NO COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS The vehicle dwellers will be exempt from the existing environmental regulations. For example, unlike the tax- paying citizens, vehicle dwellers will be allowed to have cars idling for extended periods of time, blowing exhaust toward the residents. · NO REAL SECURITY The First Congregational Church aims to abdicate their responsibilities to an out-of-town organization, Move Mountain View, which 4.f Packet Pg. 194 uses tax money to impact Palo Alto neighborhoods. Only drive-by security a couple of times per day is planned. There is a first-hand account from another location that in the past security guards hired by Move Mountain View have been doing drugs together with the vehicle dwellers. · NO ACCOUNTABILITY -It is not clear who is accountable for making sure that incidents that have happened at other so-called "Safe Parking" locations do not happen here. Actual examples exist for trash thrown into neighbors’ yards, smoking, public urination, drugs, noise, dogs barking, fights. · NO TRANSPARENCY The First Congregational Church has failed to properly inform many of the affected neighbors about their intentions, which is a big red flag. Their answers to neighbors’ concerns have so far included confusion and contradictions. · NO CONTROL OVER EXPANSION The vehicle dwellers are supposed to leave the church every morning and park at least 0.5 miles away. This means that they will remain in our neighborhood and around schools without control. Also, if the program takes effect, there is a real concern that RVs and other vehicles not associated with the program will be attracted to our neighborhood. · NO APPRECIABLE SUCCESS This program’s success rate of rehabilitating homeless is very low, as admitted by Move Mountain View. You can google 'Safe Parking Program' on NextDoor and see firsthand feedback from neighbors all over the vicinity. Please join the Public Hearing meeting on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 6 pm via Zoom and express your concerns, if you have them. You can join by following this link: https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/89772126436. You can also join by calling +1 (669) 900-6833 and entering Meeting ID: 897 7212 6436. 4.f Packet Pg. 195 From:angie ball To:Foley, Emily Subject:Re: Safe Parking Program First Congo Date:Tuesday, July 19, 2022 4:55:39 PM Emily, The language here is too vague ( “it is possible the Safe Parking Permit would be revoked”) and doesn’t inspire confidence that it will be properly enforced. It would be better to say "on the second violation" the permit will be revoked. If a staff member from Move MV is absent on any morning the permit should be revoked also. It's important that the language and consequences are specifically outlined. The homeless challenge needs to be addressed and this concept seems like a good one. I just don’t think a preschool parking lot is an acceptable location. A church parking lot that doesn’t host a daily preschool sounds like a better choice. Angie > On Jul 19, 2022, at 2:31 PM, Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote: > > Hi Angie, > > A staff member from Move MV, the safe parking operator, will be onsite every morning to ensure they leave on time. If it was not being enforced, any community member could report this to us, and it is possible the Safe Parking Permit would be revoked. > > Safe Parking participants are required to move their car at least half a mile away from the Safe Parking lot during the day. However, most participants have places to be during the day, whether it's a job, appointments, or running errands. We have not received any reports from neighbors saying that participants are parking in the neighborhood during the day. It is not in the current policies of the Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing to run background checks for any of their programs. However, participants are asked to provide this information on the application. > > Sincerely, > Emily > > Emily Foley, AICP > Planner > Planning and Development Services Department > (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org > www.cityofpaloalto.org > > > -----Original Message----- > From: angie ball <acball2@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:13 PM > To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> > Subject: Re: Safe Parking Program First Congo > > Emily, > > Thank you for your quick response. What happens when all participants don’t leave by the time the kids arrive? I imagine there might be challenges enforcing this. What can the community do if it is not enforced? I have heard that in other areas they have drive by security only once or twice a day. It may be even harder to enforce if there are some mental health issues. 4.f Packet Pg. 196 > > What happens if parkers just move their car to the street in the morning and park there during the day? > > Are there going to be background checks? A sex offender or pedophile should not be part of this program. What is to keep them from moving their car to the street for a few hours when the kids are arriving or leaving school? > > It doesn’t sound like all the communities concerns have been addressed at this point. > > Thanks, > Angie > > >> On Jul 19, 2022, at 9:14 AM, Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Angie, >> >> Thank you for your email. I understand your concerns. The Safe Parking program has mitigated this by ensuring all participants in the program have left the site in the morning before schoolchildren arrive. Also while no formal background check is performed, participants must meet certain requirements (including having a registered vehicle in working condition, valid driver's license, and vehicle insurance, and participating in case management through Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing), and are vetted for if they will be a good fit. >> >> Please let me know if you have any additional questions. >> >> Thanks, >> Emily >> >> Emily Foley, AICP >> Planner >> Planning and Development Services Department >> (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped >> >> The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 7:42 AM >> To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> >> Cc: French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Gerhardt, Jodie <Jodie.Gerhardt@CityofPaloAlto.org> >> Subject: FW: Safe Parking Program First Congo >> >> Good Morning, >> >> I'm not sure why Angie emailed me but I'm forwarding the message to you. 4.f Packet Pg. 197 >> >> >> Alicia Spotwood >> Administrative Associate III >> Planning and Development Services >> (650) 617-3168 >> alicia.spotwood@cityofpaloalto.org >> www.cityofpaloalto.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: angie ball <acball2@gmail.com> >> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2022 6:47 PM >> To: Spotwood, Alicia <Alicia.Spotwood@CityofPaloAlto.org> >> Subject: Safe Parking Program First Congo >> >> [You don't often get email from acball2@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] >> >> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. >> ________________________________ >> >> Alicia, >> >> My kids attended First Congregational preschool on Louis Road over 20 years ago. My Grandaughters are starting there this fall. I just learned that Palo Alto is considering using their parking lot as a Safe Parking Program. I am not comfortable with this consideration and was shocked when I learned that no background checks were going to take place! >> >> Providing unfettered access doesn’t provide the necessary security and safety that is required in a Palo Alto 4.f Packet Pg. 198 neighborhood. We can’t solve one problem by creating another one. We need to balance the needs of homeless people with the safety and comfort needs of the school children, their families and the environment. >> >> I don’t think these children’s needs are being adequately considered. >> >> Thanks, >> Angie Ball >> > 4.f Packet Pg. 199 You don't often get email from ann_shimakawa@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important From:Ann Shimakawa To:Foley, Emily Subject:Re: safe parking Q & A session from Dec 2020 Date:Thursday, July 7, 2022 1:24:12 PM Attachments:image012.png image013.png image010.png image008.png image009.png image005.png You don't often get email from ann_shimakawa@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important Hi Emily - Thank you! I'll watch the Dec 15 meeting video, but I would appreciate getting the Q & A document, if possible. There's a lot of discussion in our neighborhood regarding the proposed Safe Parking application for First Congregational church and a lot of stories about programs that are quite different from the program at First Congregational. I think the Q & A document would be really helpful to understand the specifics of the Safe Parking program in our neighborhood. thank you again! -ann On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 01:02:55 PM PDT, Foley, Emily <emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Ann, I’m sorry that link does not appear to be working. I’ll look into this. In the meantime, a recording of the December 2020 video is available here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/3505-Middlefield-Road-Peninsula-Bible-Church. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Thanks, Emily Emily Foley, AICP Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 617-3125 | emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped The City of Palo Alto is doing its part to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We have successfully transitioned most of our employees to a remote work environment. We remain available to you via email, phone, and virtual meetings during our normal business hours. From: Ann Shimakawa <ann_shimakawa@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2022 5:36 PM To: Foley, Emily <Emily.Foley@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: safe parking Q & A session from Dec 2020 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Foley, I was looking for the link containing background information on the Safe Parking program. On the city website: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and- Development-Services/Safe-Parking-Permit-Applications, i was unable to find the Dec 2020 meeting minutes from this link on the Safe Parking Permit page: Please read questions that arose during the December 2020 community meeting and answers provided by the City, congregations, Move Mountain View, and Santa Clara County. Q&A The link seems to take me to an XCAP meeting from Oct, 2019. Is it possible to get the Safe Parking Q & A session from Dec 2020? Thank you for your assistance. Best regards, Ann Shimakawa 951 Elsinore Dr 4.f Packet Pg. 200 From:R H To:Foley, Emily Subject:Recording of past safe parking meetings Date:Thursday, July 7, 2022 11:57:30 AM [You don't often get email from rhadmkt@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Hi Emily, Couple questions. 1. We finally received the post card of the up coming meeting for July 12 (First Congregational Church). For appeal, it says 10 days from the day we receive the notice. Is it 10 calendar days or 10 business days? The card is post marked on 7/1/2022 but is in my mailbox on 7/5/2022 late afternoon. 2. I want to understand this “safe parking” program more. Can you please provide the recording of the last 3 neighborhood checkins so I can familiarize myself to this program. FYI. We were never invited to the church’s initial meeting (my house boards the church). Rita Sent from my iPhone 4.f Packet Pg. 201 From:ANGELA DAYTON, MS To:Burt, Patrick Cc:pdsdirector; Foley, Emily; John Dayton Subject:Safe Parking Program - Homeless Individual STABBED my 16-year Old Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 9:08:47 AM You don't often get email from angela@angeladayton.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Burt- My name is Angela Dayton. We spoke last August after my 16 year old daughter was randomly attacked and had her throat slashed at 9:34am 8/18/21 and was a millimeter away from death due to the actions of a homeless individual in Palo Alto residing at The Opportunity Center. We had just moved to Palo Alto three weeks prior to this brutal attack. We, as a city, cannot take the chance of something like this happening again by “inviting” homeless individuals into our neighborhood. I was just informed that the city is considering offering First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (@ Louis and Embarcadero) the ability to offer a “Safe Parking Program”, bringing homeless vehicle dwellers from all over (not just Palo Alto) into their parking lot and our neighborhood. As you can all imagine, I 100% disagree with this action. We are charitable individuals but this decision is being made without considering the safety of the neighborhood, our children, and our city. I will be the first one to speak up about the trauma my daughter and our family has endured and the lifelong scars she has on her neck and face from the attack - some scars from the knife and other from the attacker's fingernails. I would never want this, or something worse, to happen to any of your families in the name of “charity.” If the church is worried about homelessness and wants to be charitable, then the church can expend its funds and services another way. There are so many questions I have about the why behind this action and the how. None of us know what mental health issues these individuals have and it only takes one individual to ruin the lives of our families. The individual that attacked my daughter was not on drugs but did have a history of mental illness. As the city considers this decision, please advised that if the city approves the action, then the city is partially responsible, and liable, for the actions of the individuals being invited to reside in the church parking lot. Charity does not need to come at the expense of citizens safety. Angela Dayton, MS 801-628-5064 4.f Packet Pg. 202 ------------------------EMAIL I RECEIVED INFORMING ME OF THIS ACTION---------------- --------- We all support helping the unhoused and Palo Alto is already spends millions and millions of our tax money on related initiatives. However, this particular program is fundamentally flawed and poses significant concerns. Namely: · NOT SAFE The Palo Alto Planning Department has officially stated that even convicted criminals cannot be precluded from participating in the program, even if they are convicted drug dealers or sexual predators, including pedophiles. Moreover, they are intentionally not doing background checks on vehicle dwellers! This presents significant risks, particularly for our more vulnerable, and especially for our children, as there are at least 3 schools in the vicinity of the church. There is also an obvious conflict with the Safe Biking to School initiatives. · NO COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS The vehicle dwellers will be exempt from the existing environmental regulations. For example, unlike the tax-paying citizens, vehicle dwellers will be allowed to have cars idling for extended periods of time, blowing exhaust toward the residents. · NO REAL SECURITY The First Congregational Church aims to abdicate their responsibilities to an out-of-town organization, Move Mountain View, which uses tax money to impact Palo Alto neighborhoods. Only drive-by security a couple of times per day is planned. There is a first-hand account from another location that in the past security guards hired by Move Mountain View have been doing drugs together with the vehicle dwellers. · NO ACCOUNTABILITY -It is not clear who is accountable for making sure that incidents that have happened at other so-called "Safe Parking" locations do not happen here. Actual examples exist for trash thrown into neighbors’ yards, smoking, public urination, drugs, noise, dogs barking, fights. · NO TRANSPARENCY The First Congregational Church has failed to properly inform many of the affected neighbors about their intentions, which is a big red flag. Their answers to neighbors’ concerns have so far included confusion and contradictions. · NO CONTROL OVER EXPANSION The vehicle dwellers are supposed to leave the church every morning and park at least 0.5 miles away. This means that they will remain in our neighborhood and around schools without control. Also, if the program takes effect, there is a real concern that RVs and other vehicles not associated with the program will be attracted to our neighborhood. · NO APPRECIABLE SUCCESS This program’s success rate of rehabilitating homeless is very low, as admitted by Move Mountain View. You can google 'Safe Parking Program' on NextDoor and see firsthand feedback from neighbors all over the vicinity. Please join the Public Hearing meeting on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 6 pm via Zoom and express your concerns, if you have them. You can join by following this link: https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/89772126436. You can also join by calling +1 (669) 900- 6833 and entering Meeting ID: 897 7212 6436. 4.f Packet Pg. 203 From:Yair Bannett To:Foley, Emily; Gerhardt, Jodie; Spotwood, Alicia; French, Amy; pdsdirector; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Safe Parking Program (Application 22PLN-00159) Date:Tuesday, August 9, 2022 7:42:42 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from yairban@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council members, My name is Yair Bannett. I am a Palo Alto resident in the Triple El neighborhood. I am writing to express my concerns about the Safe Parking Program at The First Congregational Church of Palo Alto (at the corner of Embarcadero Rd and Louis Rd). I am especially concerned about the location chosen for this program. The church chose to locate the idle cars in a corner of the parking lot that is adjacent to several homes instead of placing it in the large areas that are facing the two main roads (Embarcadero and Louis). I am very concerned about the potential health implications of idle cars located very close to residential homes. While the cause is very worthy, please listen to the many concerns raised by residents in our neighborhood and take action to modify the program. Sincerely, Yair Bannett 4.f Packet Pg. 204 From:ANGELA DAYTON, MS To:Foley, Emily; Tanner, Rachael; Eileen Altman; Burt, Patrick Cc:Jessica Galbraith; Kathryn Kostal; rmstolt@gmail.com; Henigin, Linda Subject:Safe Parking Program Contract and Outstanding Questions Date:Wednesday, July 13, 2022 10:38:17 AM You don't often get email from angela@angeladayton.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Unfortunately the attendees of the Safe Parking Program meeting were not able to speak and many of our questions were not answered. In public service programs, accountability and transparency are imperative and as citizens we did not feel like the meeting last night was transparent. (I’ve cc’d and bcc’d citizens who expressed an interest in receiving the answers to the questions below.) I am not a selfish individual that doesn’t want to help those who need a assistance. I have dedicated my career to implementing best practices of service delivery that assist low income homeless individuals receive job training, employment and housing. Even though my 16-year old was stabbed (throat slashed) and brutally attacked by a homeless individual in Palo Alto by West Elm last August, I still believe in helping homeless individuals. I am more than happy to sit on MoveMV’s board; design service delivery that is effective; and offer insights into proper oversight and management of the public funds being dedicated to this project. I want a win-win for all and not an “us“ against “them” situation. There is always ways to create a win-win but all sides have to be considered and compromises have to be made. Please see below for the list of information requested and questions we would like answered: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Since public funds are being used to support the Safe Parking Program, please send over the following: 1. contract (or grant agreement) regarding this program that outlines the program implementation, service delivery, and 2. budget narrative that showcases the compensation that the church and MoveMV are receiving and their associated program profit. 3. The program design that outlines the case management, program delivery, intake process, agreements between the program and the participants. 4. The Request for Proposals, Funding Opportunity Announcement, or Sole Source that was used to choose the service provider (MoveMV). 5. All resources being used by MoveMV for their program delivery and their case management training developed with public funds. Unfortunately, the MoveMV.org website does not outline the case management offered to participants. Many critical questions were not answered in the Q&A. 1. Why are you not working with the local workforce investment board? 2. What are the eligibility guidelines that outline the eligibility criteria being used to determine eligible participants of the program including, but not limited to, the definition of "connection to the community?" 4.f Packet Pg. 205 3. What type of psychological assessments will be done? 4. If an individual has an outstanding warrant, then does the organization contact the police? 5. How many congregation members actually live within a mile of the church? 6. Is the church prepared for a lawsuit when an individual on their property commits a violent act? 7. How much insurance is the church required to have to cover the liability of this program? 8. Is the organization going to offer a bond that can be available to a potential victim? 9. Please provide the HUD link being used to set the standard for not conducting background checks. 10. What benchmarks have been set to guide the program operators? 11. What research and data has been reviewed to determine best practices for implementation of the program? 12. Please provide the research and data used to determine the need for this program in Palo Alto. 13. What steps are taken to secure permanent housing for the individuals in the program? Per the MoveMV.org website, the program has only been able to transition 24% of participants into permenant housing. Why is the percentage so low and what program improvements are being made to increase that percentage? 14. Ideally, the individuals in need of this program can qualify for additional public services like workforce training grants offered by the workforce investment system. Do you have a established partnerships with local, state, and federal service providers that can also assist those in need? 15. If the participant isn’t employed, then what efforts does the program use to help them with employment placement? Thank you for taking the time to assist us in learning more. Sincerely, Angela Dayton, MS 4.f Packet Pg. 206 From:Cornerstone Admin To:Foley, Emily Cc:Helen Wong Subject:Safe Parking Project @ 1985 Louis Date:Thursday, July 7, 2022 2:38:22 PM You don't often get email from admin@cornerstonelearningfoundation.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Emily, We are the school who is renting the spaces from First Congregational church of Palo Alto. We learned that there will be public hearing on 7/12 to discuss the updates and hear the neighbor’s comments. What are the next procedure after this meeting? The City will approve or disapprove the project immediately after this meeting? Or there will be more discussions with the community before the decision is made. And what is the timeline? Thanks! Teresa Cornerstone School 4.f Packet Pg. 207 From:Ann Shimakawa To:Foley, Emily Subject:safe parking Q & A session from Dec 2020 Date:Wednesday, July 6, 2022 5:36:28 PM You don't often get email from ann_shimakawa@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Foley, I was looking for the link containing background information on the Safe Parking program. On the city website: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and- Development-Services/Safe-Parking-Permit-Applications, i was unable to find the Dec 2020 meeting minutes from this link on the Safe Parking Permit page: Please read questions that arose during the December 2020 community meeting and answers provided by the City, congregations, Move Mountain View, and Santa Clara County. Q&A The link seems to take me to an XCAP meeting from Oct, 2019. Is it possible to get the Safe Parking Q & A session from Dec 2020? Thank you for your assistance. Best regards, Ann Shimakawa 951 Elsinore Dr 4.f Packet Pg. 208 From:Betsy Hart Rosoff To:Tanner, Rachael; Foley, Emily Subject:Support for First Congo Safe Parking Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 12:57:05 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from betsyhartrosoff@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Thank you for coordinating the zoom information session. It was reassuring to hear from church leadership and to learn more details about the program from Move Mountain View. The tone within my neighborhood has been one of sensational fear mongering and I hope that this additional information will help. Please accept this email as a sign of support from our household in the Triple El neighborhood. Sincerely, Betsy Rosoff 907 El Cajon Way 4.f Packet Pg. 209 From:Mary Beth Train To:pdsdirector; Foley, Emily Cc:movemvemail@gmail.com; Eileen Altman; Angie Evans Subject:Support for First Congregational"s application for the Safe Parking Program Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 6:34:48 PM You don't often get email from mbt3305@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I support First Congregational's application for the Safe Parking Program. The program has success in many locations. This church has carefully considered the location so it doesn't impact the neighborhood. I am a homeowner within the boundaries of the Highway Community Church area, and we have had no problems because the service is well-monitored. The Palo Alto Police Department has attended a presentation in support of the application by the Unitarian Church. Thank you for this opportunity to inform the community about this application. -- Mary Beth Mary Beth Train - Home office phone 650-324-7346 *voice only, not text* -mbt3305@yahoo.com 4.f Packet Pg. 210 From:Bill Sundstrom To:Foley, Emily Subject:Support for Safe Parking Plan 1985 Louis Rd 22PLN-00159 Date:Sunday, July 17, 2022 11:15:31 AM You don't often get email from wsundstrom@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Foley, I live at 2174 Louis Rd and thus on the same block as the First Congregational Church at 1985 Louis Rd. Because I understand that some folks in town are organizing to appeal the conditional approval of the safe parking plan at the church, I wanted to express my support for the plan. I'm proud that the church and the city are stepping up to do this small thing to support our unhoused community members. The potential risks seem very small to me. I strongly support final approval. Thanks, Bill Sundstrom 2174 Louis Rd, Palo Alto 4.f Packet Pg. 211 From:Jim Fox To:Foley, Emily Subject:Support for Safe Parking Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 9:02:44 AM [You don't often get email from jimafox@pacbell.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Ms. Foley, I am a long-time Palo Alto resident contacting you to express my support for safe parking programs that provide safe parking and support programs for our neighbors who live in their cars. I live very close to UUC PA on Charleston, which has a safe parking program, and personally have no complaints, nor have I heard any frim any of our neighbors. It is significant that there have been for no problems reported by Stevenson House (which had initially expressed serious concerns, none of which were borne out). I support the proposed Safe Parking program at 1st Congregational Church; I expect that the "concerns" expressed by some of their neighbors will also prove to be unfounded. Sincerely, Jim Fox 4.f Packet Pg. 212 From:Kathy Jordan To:pdsdirector; Foley, Emily Subject:writing to express concern about the parking program proposed for FCC Palo Alto Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 5:18:06 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from kjordan114wh@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mr. Lait and Ms. Foley: I write to express concern about the proposed parking program that is proposed for FCC Palo Alto. As a neighbor, I question the efficacy of such a program. What evidence is there that providing parking leads to the participants to actually subsequently obtain and pay for housing somewhere? Please point those of us in the community to this evidence. Also, what evidence does the City and FCC Palo Alto have that these participants cannot afford housing in another community? Does or will the City and FCC Palo Alto have or plan to obtain information from the potential participants on their income, employment, record of conduct and so forth? How will it be determined as to who can participate in this program? What criteria will participation be based upon? Who will be accountable for any adverse impact to the neighbors and neighborhood from providing parking to the participants, in case there is any? Will it be FCC Palo Alto? Will it be the City --- for allowing this program? Why will the potential residents not be screened for criminal record or other record of conduct? Under what authority does the City of Palo Alto Planning department and FCC Palo Alto plan to bring participants to the neighborhood without screening the participants for their prior conduct? This is not a housing program as I understand it, but a parking program. Again, who will be accountable in case of any adverse impacts to the neighborhood and neighbors? Thanks in advance for your answers. Best, Kathy Jordan 4.f Packet Pg. 213 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14055) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Housing Element Draft Goals, Policies and Programs Title: Consider a Recommendation to Review and Endorse the 2023 -31 Draft Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs and Updated Sites Suitability Inventory and Analysis; Provide Direction on Possible Land Use Policy Changes to Promote Housing in Certain General Manufacturing (GM) and Research, Office and Limited Manufacturing (ROLM) Districts; and, Receive an Update on the Housing Element Project Schedule. From: City Manager Lead Department : Planning and Development Services Recommendation: Staff Recommends the City Council take the following actions: 1. Approve the 2023-31 Housing Element draft Goals, Policies, and Programs reflected in Attachment A; 2. Review and provide guidance on programs for the ROLM/GM districts near Bayshore Freeway; 3. Approve the updated housing inventory site suitability inventory and analysis; and 4. Review an updated project schedule. Executive Summary: The State requires that the City update its Housing Element by January 2023. Two significant components of the update include: 1) identifying sufficient sites to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 6,086 units and 2) creating goals, policies , and programs to spur housing development for all segments of the community. Previously, Council accepted the staff’s proposal to review these components separately. Council endorsed the site selection review at its March 21, 2022 meeting. Since the beginning of the year, staff has been working with the Housing E lement Working Group (Working Group), Council Housing Element Ad Hoc Committee (Ad Hoc), and the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) to prepare Housing Element goals, policies, and 5 Packet Pg. 214 City of Palo Alto Page 2 programs. Because of the compacted project timeline, staff was not able to fully detail the goals, policies, and programs prior to Working Group and PTC review. Instead, staff continued to revise the goals, policies, and programs with greater specificity for each level of review. Staff requests the Council review and endorse with any necessary modifications the draft goals, policies and programs in Attachment A. Highlights of two key program initiatives: • The Housing Incentive Program (HIP), the City’s alternative to State Density Bonus, will play a large role in future housing production and affordability. Staff proposes to expand the development incentives and geographic areas to enable more property owners and developers to take advantage of the HIP. • A majority of the Council Ad Hoc encouraged staff consider greatly expanded development potential for GM/ROLM zoned sites near the Bayside Freeway to promote greater housing opportunities. Modifying zoning standards on those sites could allow for greater height, density, floor area ratio (FAR), and reduced parking requirements. Staff is requesting Council feedback on this Ad Hoc proposal. The Council direction on the General Manufacturing (GM)/Research Office Limited Manufacturing (ROLM) districts would warrant adjustments to the City’s housing sites inventory list. Staff and the public have continued to review the identified housing sites for suitability after the March 2022 Council meeting. After further review, additional sites have been removed based on several factors leaving a deficit in meeting its RHNA requirement (Table 1 has more information). Depending on the direction of the GM/ROLM discussion, staff has developed options to replace the removed units and staff request s the Council endorse staff’s update to its site suitability analysis and proposal to replace the removed units. Lastly, staff has revised the process timeline. At the March 2022 Council meeting, staff presented a timeline showing a projected March 2023 Council adoption. Because of new State requirements as well as other unforeseen delays, staff propose a new deadline for Council adoption of June 2023. Background: Since 1969, the State has required all local jurisdictions to adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. Local jurisdictions meet this requirement by adoptin g housing elements as part of their “general plan” (the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan). The Comprehensive Plan serves as the City’s "blueprint" for how the city will grow and develop. State law mandates inclusion of eight elements in general plans: land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space, safety, housing, and most recently, environmental justice. Jurisdictions may elect to include additional elements. 5 Packet Pg. 215 City of Palo Alto Page 3 The Housing Element is the City’s plan to provide housing for its current and future resi dents and is the only element that requires certification by the State. The Housing Element covers a period of eight years; the City is currently in the 5th Cycle of Housing Elements that covers the years between 2015 and 2023. The 6th Cycle will cover the eight years between 2023 and 2031. The deadline to receive State certification for the 6 th Cycle Housing Element is January 31, 2023. For reference, the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element is available online.1 Housing Element Update Progress Staff has been working closely with the Working Group since April 2021 to identify Housing Element sites and more recently, goals, policies, and programs. The Working Group concluded its sites review in January 2022 and goals, policies, and programs work in May 2022. The Working Group conducted 14 meetings as well as two workshops. The Working Group may conduct one more meeting to review the public review draft Housing Element, however their responsibilities have essentially concluded. The PTC also recently concluded its review of the draft goals, policies, and programs in June 2022. Because the goals, policies, and programs were still being refined during Working Group and PTC review, staff requested that the Working Group provide a “high level” review. The PTC received a version that was refined with more specificity and program details. Since the PTC’s review, staff has made other changes to provide program implementation timelines, quantified objectives and other modifications based on feedback from the City’s consul tant, HCD and the public. Public participation is a key piece of the Housing Element update. While meeting with the Working Group and PTC, staff continued to conduct public outreach meeting with organizations supporting special needs housing, including seniors and persons with developmental disabilities; developers; renters; and civic groups including the Chamber of Commerce and the Rotary Club. Staff also reached out to owners of properties on the sites inventory to notify them of their inclusion on the sites list and to answer any questions owners may have about the Housing Element and what that means for their property. Goals, Policies, and Programs There is a general structure and hierarchy of steps for effective housing implementation , according to State Housing Element law and State Housing and Community Development (HCD) guidelines. In general, a jurisdiction will identify a set of goals for the community to strive to attain. For each goal, a set of policies are identified to help achieve the overarching goal. Under each policy are programs that assist with the implementation of each policy. Housing 1 City of Palo Alto Housing Element (2015-2023): https://paloaltohousingelement.com/wp- content/uploads/2021/04/Certified-15-23-Housing-Element.pdf 5 Packet Pg. 216 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Element programs contain specific actions and quantifiable objectives that help ensure equitable, effective, and timely implementation. The general order of effective housing implementation is as follows: • Goals: Housing goals are articulated as general “end condition statements,” which describe the desired outcome or end state. Goals describe ideal future conditions for a topic and tend to be general and broad in nature.  • Policies: Policies are statements on the position the city takes to implement a goal. Policies contained in the Housing Element are important statements as they provide a clear and unambiguous statement that guides a specific course of action for decision‐makers to achieve a desired goal.  • Programs:  Housing programs define the specific actions the city will undertake to achieve the stated goals and policies.  • Implementing Objectives: The implementing objectives are specific action items that help implement the overall program. Objectives must be specific, measurable, and attainable. Please note that HCD pays special attention to the program objectives to ensure the highest level of implementation for each program that is possible.   HCD Emphasis on Programs and Implementing Objectives The State HCD Department is reportedly focusing much more on the programs and implementing objectives with a cursory review of goals and policies. In fact, programs are codified while goals and policies are not. With that emphasis, there will be a brief discussion on goals and policies with the focus mostly on programs and implementing objectives. State Requirements for Housing Element Programs Per California Government Code Section 65583(c), the Housing Element shall contain a schedule of actions (also known as “programs”) the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the stated policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element. For the upcoming housing cycle, HCD has increased its scrutiny in reviewing proposed programs. Programs must include specific actions the locality will take to implement its policies and achieve its goals and objectives, and a specific timeframe for implementation. In addition, programs must identify the agencies or officials responsible for implementation, describe the jurisdiction’s specific role in implementation, and (whenever possible) identify specific, measurable outcomes. Importantly, the City Council is advised to carefully review the draft Programs because HCD will evaluate the City’s compliance with the Housing Element annually with the expectation that the City will meet its implementation schedule and objectives.   5 Packet Pg. 217 City of Palo Alto Page 5 HCD has identified the following criteria as key components of an effective housing program:   1. Definite time frames for implementation (e.g., annually during the planning period).  2. Identification of agencies and officials responsible for implementation (e.g., planning department).  3. Description of the local government’s specific role in program implementation (e.g., a description of how the city will promote ADU construction).  4. Description of the specific action steps to implement the program.  5. Proposed measurable outcomes (e.g., adoption of a rezone ordinance).  6. Demonstration of a firm commitment to implement the program (e.g., Create a separate landing page on the city’s website that provides information on ADUs and city requirements by July 2023.  7. Identification of specific funding sources, where appropriate (e.g., Community Development Block Grant funds).  The 6th Cycle Housing Element will also place greater emphasis on addressing the housing needs of vulnerable groups and populations that have been identified in the City’s housing needs assessment and identifying ways to reduce housing barriers that have been identified in the City’s Housing Constraints chapter. Table 1, identifies the primary focus areas for 6th Cycle Housing Element programs and policies. A significant new program requirement is Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). While jurisdictions have addressed fair housing in previous housing elements, the State now requires each jurisdiction include proactive programs for underrepresented groups that include outreach and information sharing opportunities to empower tenants and take action to increase tenant protections, improve housing mobility and address other fair housing protections. Table 1: Description of New State Requirements Focus Area Program Requirement Development Standards State law requires jurisdictions to remove identified constraints. This may include reduced parking requirements, increasing height limits, and removing other barriers to development identified in the housing element update process. Maintenance and Monitoring of Sites Inventory Requires that jurisdictions monitor their sites inventory to ensure that no net loss of residential capacity occurs, such that the City can accommodate the number of units remaining in the City’s share of the regional housing need. Programs may include: to create a mechanism to ensure that if residential capacity on a particular site is decreased by approval of a zoning change or approval of a development application that results in fewer units than specified in the inventory, additional sites or capacity must be identified 5 Packet Pg. 218 City of Palo Alto Page 6 elsewhere within 180 days of the approval. Provide for By- Right Housing Requires jurisdictions to amend the zoning code to allow “by-right” approval of housing developments on sites identified in the City’s site inventory that have been identified in previous housing elements. By-right approvals mean that multifamily housing is allowed by a site’s land use and zoning designations, and no additional discretionary approval is required. Alternative Housing Program Requires jurisdictions to modify the zoning code to allow and provide standards for alternative housing types and homeless service centers (i.e., group homes, supportive housing, transitional housing, residential care facilities, and low-barrier navigation centers), to comply with state law. Conservation of At-Risk Housing Existing Requires jurisdictions to protect at-risk housing. Programs could include modifying existing programs to increase protections and assistance for tenants in developments with expiring affordability agreements and provide more technical assistance for property owners to apply for funds for rehabilitation and preservation of affordability. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Programs are required to address the findings of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing analysis in the Housing Element. Those programs could be designed to: • Enhance mobility strategies and promoting inclusion for protected classes • Encourage development of new affordable housing in high-resource areas • Enhance community engagement and education, particularly for landlords and tenants around fair housing topics • Implement place-based strategies to encourage community revitalization, including preservation of existing affordable housing • Protect existing residents from displacement Current Housing Production Efforts A State emphasis for the Housing Element Update is increasing housing production. The Council has also recognized the need. In the past few years, the City has implemented five programs in an attempt to increase housing production in the City. These programs include: 1. Housing Work Plan – The Housing Work Plan, approved by the Council in 2018, included several initiatives to relax development standards. Program examples include reduced parking standards, elimination of density restrictions, and the introduction of the Housing Incentive Program. As part of the plan, the Council set a goal to approve 200 units of housing annually. 2. Housing Incentive Program – The Housing Incentive Program (HIP), the City’s alternative to the State Density Bonus Program, further relaxed development standards. The HIP eliminated lot coverage and increased FAR in commercial zones. The HIP is applied in certain areas of the City. Although HCD will not allow jurisdictions to assume higher density development under State Density Bonus Law, they are anticipated to accept the City’s HIP since it is clearly codified in the Zoning Ordinance. 5 Packet Pg. 219 City of Palo Alto Page 7 3. Affordable Housing Combining District – Now known as the Affordable Housing Incentive Program (AHIP), the AHIP allowed for additional incentives for affordable housing developments. 4. Workforce Housing Combining District – The Workforce Housing Combining District (Workforce Housing), which requires legislative action, allowed for greater height and FAR if the developer set aside a percentage of units for households earning between 120%-140%. 5. Planned Home Zoning – The Planned Home Zoning (PHZ) application reactivated Planned Community (PC) Districts for housing projects that provide at least 20% affordable housing units and more housing units than net new jobs generated by any commercial component. This is a discretionary and legislative application process that allows qualifying projects to seek modification from the City’s zoning standards. In the past, almost all affordable housing development was developed with PC zoning because of the flexibility the zoning provided. Another purpose of the PHZ was to collect data and learn what zoning standards were frequently being requested for modification and therefore, a possible constraint to housing production. With the data, the City could make changes to the zoning code, streamline the application process and provide a greater level of certainty for developers and expectations to the community as to what the City would allow in terms of development standards. The PHZ application was not intended to be a long term solution because the process is costly, takes too long and is challenging for some neighbors because it invites uncertainty and frustration as development projects deviate from the established zoning standards . While there were some individual successes with each program above, collectively, implementation of the programs did not meet the Council goal of approving/producing 300+ housing units annually as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan policies. The Wilton Court project used the Affordable Housing Overlay to produce 58 units of affordable housing. One project at 788 San Antonio Road received planning approval 102 units of housing using the HIP. The City received several PHZ prescreen applications, however only one formal PHZ application was submitted. State SB 35 Requirements Although not a specific State Housing Element requirement, the City’s future housing production will also be closely tied to Senate Bill (SB) 35. SB 35 went into effect on January 1, 2018 and changed the local review process for certain development projects. SB 35 applies to California cities and counties where production of new housing has not met the state- mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation targets. If a jurisdiction does not meet its RHNA production for above-moderate housing, “by-right” requirements may apply. Depending on a jurisdiction’s above-moderate unit production and the percentage of affordable housing proposed in a project, a project may qualify as “by right .” If a project is SB 35 eligible, projects 5 Packet Pg. 220 City of Palo Alto Page 8 could only receive review per the jurisdiction’s objective standards with no CEQA review and must be approved within 90 to 180 days of project submittal, depending on project size. Other Housing Element Components In addition to the Goals, Policies, Programs, and the Sites Inventory, the Housing Element will include several other meaningful components. The Needs Assessment chapter identifies housing needs for various household types, income levels, and special needs groups, including seniors and people with disabilities. The Constraints chapter assesses potential constraints to housing production and affordability and includes governmental constraints (e.g., zoning, process, fees) and non-governmental constraints (e.g., land and construction costs, market conditions). Staff and consultants are continuing to work on these chapters. They will be released as part of the Public Review Draft in December 2022. For further background information on the Housing Element, please review prior staff reports: May 10, 2021 Joint City Council/PTC meeting https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city- manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2021/id-12116.pdf March 21, 2022 City Council meeting https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas- minutes/city-council-agendas-minutes/2022/20220321/20220321pccsm-amended-linked- revised.pdf PTC Review The PTC met on June 8 and June 29, 2022 to review and recommend the Housing Element goals, policies and programs. Understanding that the number of meetings to review the goals, policies and programs was limited, the PTC created its own Ad Hoc to help provide additional guidance prior to the meeting. The PTC was supportive of the Working Group and staff’s work on the programs and provided further input and direction. The PTC provided several policy and program revisions. One emphasis was that the PTC wanted to ensure the programs did not increase the jobs/housing imbalance. Any additional allowable development was for residential and not further commercial development. There were no major or significant changes proposed by the PTC. Four new implementing objectives recommended by the PTC are: 1. Reconsider the process when a tenant income exceeds the maximum allowable income limit in a BMR rental unit. This would only include units created through the City’s BMR program, in which a percentage of units in a market rate development are set aside as 5 Packet Pg. 221 City of Palo Alto Page 9 below market rate. This would not apply to 100% affordable housing projects, which may have lender-specific requirements for over income tenants in those developments. 2. Expand the safe parking program to City park parking lots and to provide case management support. Also, to explore opening City bathing facilities such as the Cubberley locker facilities to the homeless population. 3. Explore more State Homekey funding or similar funding sources to convert hotels to permanent or interim housing for persons at risk of homelessness or the homeless. 4. Requiring a 90 day notice period for a rent increase of more than 6% instead of the State requirement of 10% rent increase. The Commission also supported other staff updates and supported a recommendation from the City Council Ad Hoc from June 23, 2022 encouraging more flexible development standards around the GM/ROLM zoned properties by the Bayshore Freeway. This implementing objective is included in the attachment and discussed in greater detail later in this report as it requires formal Council action if there is interest to proceed and would have implications to the City’s site suitability inventory. The PTC was very supportive and understanding of the time constraints to prepare the draft Housing Element and understood that there would be further staff refinements based on continued public input and feedback from t he City’s consultant. Included with this report as Attachment B is an annotated version showing track changes version of the Goals, Policies and Programs endorsed by the PTC. The vast majority of the changes shown in that document include the introduction of timelines and quantified implementing objectives, which were not previously presented to the PTC as staff was still working on those details. Formatting changes represent a lot of the markups shown in Attachment B, for instance, merging some programs together or shifting implementing objectives to other more appropriate sections. Lastly, some of the program and objectives language was fine-tuned based on a careful review by City consultants to better align language with HCD requirements. None of the changes referenced above substantively alter the policy direction endorsed by the PTC, though, as noted in Attachment A, staff does recommend one implementing objective be eliminated. Program 1.6 G, which relates to a massing study for the 3000-3300 block of El Camino Real, could still be advanced by the City if interested but staff believes in retrospect that its incorporation in the housing element is not appropriate or necessary. In fact, with approximately 90 implementing objectives listed in Attachment A, from a resource standpoint, staff will continue to identify other objectives that could be eliminated without compromising the City’s ability to obtain certification or implement meaningful reforms to spur greater housing production. Discussion: 5 Packet Pg. 222 City of Palo Alto Page 10 Many goals and programs are proposed to meet the various Housing Element requirements including meeting its RHNA, increasing housing production and implementing proactive fair housing measures. These proposed goals, policies, and programs should be viewed as the City’s agreement or contract with the State, specifically, that the City will implement and fulfill its requirements as outlined in the programs and implementing objectives. Programs may be implemented throughout the planning period, except that programs that are necessary to meet RHNA production must be completed by the end of 2023. Preparation of Housing Goals and Policies The Housing Element is required to have goals and policies identified to address State requirements as listed below. Because goals and policies are more generalized statements and do not reflect the City’s proposed specific actions for implementation, HCD does not critically review the goals and policies. HCD will be focusing much more of their review on the City’s programs and implementing objectives. In a review of HCD review letters for southern California Housing Elements, staff notes that there have been relatively few comments focused on goals and policies. Based on this understanding, the emphasis of this report is on the City’s proposed programs and implementing objectives. Below is an overview of draft Housing Element goals and policies that are included in Attachment A. Housing Element Goals In the preparation of the housing element, the State requires that the housing element cover six general categories. The categories are as follows: A. Conservation and preservation of existing housing stock, B. Assist in affordable housing development, C. Provide adequate RHNA sites for a variety of housing types, D. Removal of constraints, E. Housing for persons with special needs, and F. Fair housing. Based on these six general categories, staff prepared goals around these general categories. These goals and policies have been refined over time based on feedback from the Housing Element Working Group, Council Ad Hoc review, public input and PTC review/endorsement. The six proposed City Housing Element goals are as follows: Goal 1.0 - Housing Preservation Preserve and improve or replace in kind the existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods. Preserve or replace in kind affordable housing units in the community to maintain adequate housing opportunities for all residents. Goal 2.0 - Affordable Housing 5 Packet Pg. 223 City of Palo Alto Page 11 Assist in the provision of safe, attainable, and sustainable housing, especially affordable housing, to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. Goal 3.0 – Housing Development Support holistic and strategic housing development with a variety of housing types, prices, tenures, densities, and locations, to address the diverse needs of all current and future residents. Goal 4.0 – Removing Governmental Barriers Provide for a government environment that facilitates housing development. Goal 5.0 – Housing Diversity Establish a variety of housing types and services to accommodate the diversity of persons and households with special needs. Goal 6.0 – Fair Housing Promote equal opportunity in all City housing types (ownership and rental, market rate and affordable) for all residents to have safe, decent and accessible housing. Housing Element Policies The proposed City policies were prepared in support of each of the goals. Some of the policies have been carried over from the current Housing Element. The complete list of policies is listed in Attachment A. Below are highlights of the more significant new policies: Policy 1.3 Use existing and new funding sources to fund rehabilitation loan and grant programs to assist in the preservation of both deed-restricted and naturally occurring affordable housing units. Policy 2.2 Enhance incentives that expand development standard concessions and other inducements offered as tools to facilitate the development of more affordable housing, with a mix of affordability levels within mixed-income housing. Policy 4.3 Implement development standards, objective design standards, and architectural and green building standards that encourage new high-quality rental and ownership housing. Housing Element Programs Staff began working on the development of Housing Element programs with the Working Group at the beginning of the year. Staff outlined the basic State required programs and polled the Working Group for additional programs to be added to the Housing Element. These programs 5 Packet Pg. 224 City of Palo Alto Page 12 and implementing objectives reflect local housing needs, available land and financial resources, and mitigation of governmental and non -governmental constraints to housing production and affordability. Because of time constraints, staff was only able to work with the Working Group on the “higher level” concepts of the programs. Between Working Group and PTC meetings, staff was able to refine the programs and began detailing implementing objectives. Staff will continue to revise them based on Council direction. The final draft version will be completed with the public review draft Housing Element. The public review draft is scheduled to be released in late 2022. Staff has used a variety of sources to prepare the programs: a. Feedback from developers and other housing stakeholders; b. Past development trends (project approvals); c. Pending applications, including PHZ and legislative projects; and d. Development and economic feasibility studies (given limited development trend data in the City, staff needed to analyze existing zoning standards and market conditions to better understand governmental constraints). A description of these studies is included later in this report. Highlighted Programs There are approximately 26 proposed programs and 90 implementing objectives, many of which focus on State requirements. The complete list of programs is provided in Attachment A; the more significant programs are highlighted below. Housing Incentive Program (HIP) [Program 3.4] The HIP is the City’s alternative to the State Density Bonus Law. Staff proposes to significantly revise the HIP with additional incentives for developers to increase housing production and to make the HIP more attractive to developers than the State Density Bonus Law. Currently, the HIP applies to commercially zoned properties in the CD-C, CC(2), CN and CS zoned properties along El Camino Real and CS parcels on along San Antonio Road between Middlefield and East Charleston Road. Program 3.4 would extend the HIP to multi-family zones in the City that are not immediately abutting R1 zoned properties. Attachment B shows parcels currently eligible for the HIP and the proposed extension. The HIP development standards would be relaxed further, and code amendments would enable a faster processing timeline if the application meets objective standards. Following the passage of recent state housing bills, staff have observed a significant increase in development interest and anticipates more applications from developers utilizing State Density Bonus Law to seek concessions or waivers of local development standards. Under the Density 5 Packet Pg. 225 City of Palo Alto Page 13 Bonus framework, the project applicant takes the initiative to determine which standards may be relaxed. The purpose of the revised HIP is to create an alternative to State Density Bonus Law in which City policy determines how and when development standards are relaxed. Concurrent with the housing element, staff has started analyzing as is beginning to identify zoning levers that may require modification and the extent to which changes are needed to advance the City’s housing goals. Residential Conversion of GM/ROLM Properties [Program 1.1B and 3.5E] During a discussion with the Council Housing Element Ad Hoc Committee, the Ad Hoc proposed a change to the General Manufacturing (GM) and Research, Office, Limited Manufacturing (ROLM) zoned sites near W. Bayshore Road. Previously, staff had proposed to introduce a multifamily residential use to the GM zone (since multifamily is already allowed in ROLM). Program 1.1B establishes the rezone with a based density of 50 dwelling units per acre. The Council Ad Hoc discussed possible increases in these districts to allow minimal development standards; an even more expanded version of the HIP. Those sites would be allowed to have additional height, density, and minimal parking standards significantly in excess of existing standard or contemplated standards. Because generally these sites are larger than many of the non-vacant parcels in other parts of the City, the Ad Hoc felt that there was a greater opportunity for higher density and larger developments. Staff has prepared 3.5E to reflect the Ad Hoc’s proposal and requests Council feedback on the direction. If endorsed by the Council, this would enable some adjustments to the City’s draft suitable sites inventory. Stanford Lands [Program 1.6] This program specifically applies to Stanford owned properties and anticipates zoning changes consistent with conceptual proposals previous presented by Stanford. One implementing objective related to Palo Alto Square (3000 El Camino Real) was removed since the PTC’s review which anticipated about 350-450 housing units. Staff continues to engage this long term leaseholder but more dialogue is needed before including this site in the housing element. The City Council also expressed frustration when it reviewed the suitable site inventory in March 2022 that more sites from Stanford University was not included. An implementing objective has been incorporated into this program to ensure conversations continue with Standard University to identify sites for the next, 7th Cycle Housing Element. Affordable Housing Incentive Program [Program 3.3] This program provides for additional incentives, such as greater height, for developers interested in building 100% affordable developments. The incentives are even more flexible than the incentives offered in the HIP, including greater height allowances for 100% affordable developments. This Affordable Housing Incentive Program went into effect in July 2022, 5 Packet Pg. 226 City of Palo Alto Page 14 replacing the Affordable Housing Combining District and is proposed to be extended to all properties identified in the housing suitable sites inventory. Continued Refinement Staff and consultants have not finalized key chapters of the housing element related to AFHH and its constraints analysis that will necessarily inform the implementing objective s and may require refinement. Additionally, the City’s consultant continues to engage with HCD and adjustments may be needed to better align the draft programs with State law. Staff does not anticipate substantive policy changes but there may be some adjus tments to the timeline or quantified objectives following the Council’s review. Staff will highlight any changes for the Council when it reviews the draft Housing Element . While not expected, if there are any substantive policy changes requiring Council input before the draft is released, staff will return to Council. Housing Sites Revisions The City Council approved the housing sites at its March 2022 meeting. As a recap to the March 2022 numbers, the City’s RHNA requirement was 6,086 units plus a 10% buffer for a total of 6,695 units. Staff had identified sites that yielded 7,086 units meaning there were 391 units more than what the City needed to meet its RHNA, even with the 10% buffer. For more detail, please see Table 2. However, as mentioned during the March meeting, the presented housing inventory list was a “snapshot in time” and is subject to change. Staff continued to make refinements, including additions and removals, to the sites list as new information is identified. Removal of sites, described below, removed approximately 1,400 units. The City received additional prescreening and formal planning applications since March; these added approximately 900 more units. Therefore, there is a slight deficit in meeting RHNA. Staff has outlined some options in how to meet that deficit. Removed Units Staff has received correspondence from the public identifying inaccuracies with existing baseline data undercounting the number of existing units on some sites, which impacts projected net unit yields, and sites owned by Google that are unlikely to redevelop during the planning period. Based on this public feedback, staff has made adjustments to the suitable site inventory resulting in the removal of approximately 400 units. Staff too have continued to review the suitable site inventory to improve accuracy and ensure sites identified can realistically be redeveloped in the planning period. Accordingly, staff recommend removing the following additional sites that amounts to another, approximately, 400 units: 1. All CC(2) sites on California Avenue: While the commercially zoned areas of California Avenue present excellent opportunities for housing development, the regulatory 5 Packet Pg. 227 City of Palo Alto Page 15 framework to facilitate lot consolidation, modify zoning standards and adjust parking on this street requires robust community engagement. This would be an effort akin to a coordinated area plan that staff does not anticipate could be completed in a meaningful timeframe for inclusion in the Housing Element. 2. Commercial sites smaller than 5000 square feet: Small lots are less likely to redevelop due to parking requirements and other zoning standards, particularly if commercial uses are provided on the ground floor. 3. Parcels adjacent to low-density zoned districts: With the anticipated adjustments to development standards that would increase allowable height, density, reduce setbacks or modify other zoning standards, removing sites abutting low density zoning would provide a one lot buffer to proposed higher density, upzoned parcels . Abutting in this context includes parcels that share a property line with a low density parcel but does not include lots separated by a street or alley. 4. Costar rating of 4 or higher: CoStar Group is a commercial real estate information and analytics provider. CoStar ranks properties for redevelopment using a 1-5 rating system with “1” as a practically uncompetitive building that may require significant renovation, possibly functionally obsolete to “5” which represents an office building is exemplary state-of-the-art. Staff removed any site with the 4 or 5 Costar rating. Moreover, staff sent mailed notices to all property owners on the housing list requesting they contact the City if they did not want their property to be included in the City’s housing inventory. This action removed another, approximately, 400 sites. With the addition of units through submitted formal applications and prescreen ing applications minus the number of units removed from the removed sites, the City is left with a deficit of approximately 320 units. Table 1 below details the changes to the site inventory by category. Table 2: Revised Site Selection Recommendations Council Approved March 21, 2022 Staff Proposed Changes NOTES RHNA Allocation 6,086 6,086 No Net Loss Buffer +609 +609 Total Units Required 6,695 6,695 Strategy Unit Yield NOTES Pipeline Units 565 785 A number of formal applications have been submitted since March 2022 ADUs 512 512 A slightly higher number due to rounding. 5 Packet Pg. 228 City of Palo Alto Page 16 * This number has increased due to the number of recently submitted prescreen applications. Please note that staff did not use the prescreen unit count but a default density of 40 du/ac on the prescreen sites. Staff included these prescreen application sites because it demonstrates developer interest on the site. ** The unit yields reflected in table may continue to be adjusted based on changes in applications received and new information learned. Replacement of the Removed Units To address the deficit, staff has developed options to replace the removed units. Staff recommends replacing the removed units via the following options in order of preference: 1. Increase the GM/ROLM housing densities for properties located near the Bayshore Freeway to increase potential realistic capacity yields . At a minimum, staff recommend increasing the unit density from 32 dwelling units (du) per acre to 50 du / acre to help address the deficit. This would increase the projected unit yield by approximately 700 units making up the difference and providing a slightly improved buffer should other sites need to be removed. MFA 457 287 #1 Upzone 1,640 1,091 #2 Caltrain Stations 798 495 #3 Transit Corridor 274 178 #4 Faith Based Institutions 148 137 #5 City Owned Parking Lots 168 168 GM zoned sites 596 562 ROLM zoned sites 902 650 Stanford Proposed Sites 1. Pasteur Dr. 425 425 2. 3128 El Camino Real 144 144 3. Transit Center 270 270 Staff Suggested Sites* 183 677 Total Unit Yield 7,086 6,381 Difference (Unit Yield - Units Required)** 391 -319 5 Packet Pg. 229 City of Palo Alto Page 17 The City Council may want to consider further changes to the zoning standards in the this area based on an initial conversation with the Council Ad Hoc which contemplated building heights or 85 feet or taller, floor area ratios up to 3.0 or more , and substantially reduced parking requirements to facilitate higher density housing in an area that is close to employment centers and has reasonable access to goods and services. Staff is studying a higher density (120 units / acre) and taller building heights in the Hous ing Element environmental impact report to ensure the Council has information about environmental impact to inform its decision, however, if there is sufficient interest in pursuing higher density at this location staff and consultants need that direction. 2. As an alternative to the options above, the City Council could direct staff to increase the units per acre anticipated for City owned surface parking lots. In March 2022, staff presented the housing list conservatively setting the potential housing density of City owned parking lots to a realistic density of 40 dwelling units per acre. That density achieves a yield of 168 units from the six identified parking lots. If the density was increased to 100 du/acre, that would address the deficit. In December 2021, Council discussed redeveloping City-owned parking lots with a preference for housing, specifically affordable housing. The Working Group also supported redeveloping City- owned parking lots for affordable housing. For context, Wilton Court represents a project that is about 120 du/acre. To make up the deficit, staff requests the Council determine which option it prefers, or a combination or the two, or an alternative not presented in this report. Physical & Economic Feasibility Analysis The City is in the process of analyzing the physical and economic feasibility of prototypical Housing Element opportunity sites. This analysis will help identify specific constraints to housing development in the Zoning Ordinance and inform the Housing Element Program s that aim to reduce these constraints, including specific zoning changes. Once completed, this analysis will: 1. Identify development typologies that are physically feasible with existing zoning standards. 2. Determine whether these development typologies are financially feasible. See factors in Table 2 (column 1). 3. Explore zoning levers to improve physical feasibility of development typologies. Test zoning modifications in Table 2 (column 2 and 3) alone or in combination. 4. Determine impacts of various zoning changes on financial feasibility 5. Identify specific zoning changes to be undertaken within the first year of Council adoption of the Housing Element 6th cycle. 5 Packet Pg. 230 City of Palo Alto Page 18 Table 2: Summary Matrix of Elements to Test and Analyze Implications for Financial Feasibility Zoning Levers/ Possible Modifications Other Factors Rent vs. own (on-site BMR vs. mitigation fee) Parking State Density Bonus Law Residential vs. mixed use (i.e., impact of ground floor retail requirement) Height Retail Preservation Ordinance Underground vs. podium parking Density/FAR (including HIP overlay) Opportunity costs of not building office Development impact fees (esp. parks) Lot coverage Policy Implications: Approval of the Housing Element Goals, policies, and programs will dictate housing development in the City for the next eight years. In certain instances, staff anticipates proposing to relax development standards to increase height, FAR and density allowances to spur housing production. Certain areas in the City could see new or substant ial housing development. Comprehensive Plan policies and programs supporting multifamily and mixed- use development include density near transit and use of city properties for housing: • Policy L2.4, which states, “Use a variety of strategies to stimulate housing, near retail, employment, and transit, in a way that connects to and enhances existing neighborhoods” • Program L2.4.7, which states, “Explore mechanisms for increasing multi-family housing density near multimodal transit centers.” • Program L2.4.3, which states, “Allow housing on the El Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park. Explore multifamily housing elsewhere in the Stanford Research Park and near Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC).” • Program L2.4.5, which states, “Update the municipal code to include zoning changes that allow a mix of retail and residential uses, but no office uses. The intent of these changes would be to encourage a mix of land uses that contributes to the vitality and walkability of commercial centers and transit corridors.” • Program L2.4.8, which states, “Identify development opportunities for BMR and more affordable market-rate housing on publicly owned properties in a way that is integrated with and enhances existing neighborhoods.” Resource Impacts: 5 Packet Pg. 231 City of Palo Alto Page 19 The implementation of the Housing Element will require staff resources to complete rezones, program implementation, and prepare studies. Generally, all will need to be completed within the first couple of years of Housing Element adoption. This will involve greater staff resources and use of consultants for the studies and potential environmental review . Timeline: At the March 2022 Council meeting, staff presented the Council with a project timeline with the Council adopting the Housing Element in March 2023. That ti meline was already compacted and represented an optimistic, best-case scenario to make the March 2023 adoption deadline. However, there have been some challenges in the process that have resulted in the need to push back the scheduled Council adoption date. The revised schedule is also very compact and leaves little room for unplanned tasks, meetings, or delays. This revised schedule shows Council adoption of the Housing Element in June 2023. While the City would miss the statutory deadline, it appears that many other Bay Area jurisdictions will also be missing the statutory deadline. There are some potential consequences for failing to adopt a compliant Housing Element. They are as follows: a. The City may not be eligible for State housing funds. Most State housing programs require a certified Housing Element. b. Litigation may be brought by any interested party (Gov. Code 65587(b)) or the Office of the Attorney General OAG) (Gov. Code 65585). c. HCD has also established the Housing Accountability Unit (HAU). The HAU provides education, technical assistance and if needed, referral to the State OAG to force legal action to jurisdictions which may not be in compliance with housing law. Some upcoming milestones include: August 2022 Council consideration of HE programs November 2022 Release of 30 day public review draft January 2023 Submit to HCD for 90 day review (first round) May 2023 PTC review of draft HE June 2023 Council consideration of draft HE July 2023 Submit to HCD for 60 day review (second round) September 2023 Receive HCD comments/substantial compliance? January 2024 Completion of rezoning sites Please note that the timeline shows two rounds of HCD review. HCD has been advising jurisdictions to expect a third round of review. HCD has also advised that jurisdictions should 5 Packet Pg. 232 City of Palo Alto Page 20 receive a substantial compliance letter from HCD prior to adoption to avoid having to readopt the HE based on further HCD changes. Stakeholder Engagement: Staff met with groups with special needs, including seniors and persons with de velopmental disabilities, developers, renters as well as civic groups including the Chamber of Commerce and the Rotary Club. Staff has also reached out to all property owners to notify them of their inclusion on the sites list as well as answering any questions they may have about the Housing Element and what that means for their property. Environmental Review: The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element will require environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While many of the impacts of the new Housing Element may have been studied as part of the Comprehensive Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, which was certified and adopted by the Council by Resolution No. 9720 on November 13, 2017, some additional analysis will likely be required. Staff and the City’s CEQA consultant are still in the process of evaluating the appropriate CEQA document that will need to be prepared. Attachments: Attachment5.a: Attachment A: Draft Goals Policies and Programs (Council Clean Version) (PDF) Attachment5.b: Attachment B: Draft Goals Policies and Programs (PTC Track Changes) (PDF) Attachment5.c: Attachment C: HIP and Suitable Site Inventory (Map) (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 233 Goals & Policies Goal 1.0 – Housing Preservation Policy 1.1 Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorating or substandard residential properties using sustainable and energy conserving approaches. (Existing Policy H1.1) Policy 1.2 Work with property owners and nonprofit housing providers to preserve assisted multi-family units at risk of conversion to market rents and extend the affordability covenants in perpetuity whenever feasible. Policy 1.3 Use existing and new funding sources to fund rehabilitation loan and grant programs to assist in the preservation of both deed-restricted and naturally occurring affordable housing units. Policy 1.4 Ensure the retention or replacement in kind of existing lower income units that are identified for potential redevelopment. Goal 2.0 – Affordable Housing Policy 2.1 Increase opportunities for affordable housing development through use of flexible development standards. (Adapted from existing Program Objective H3.1.5) Policy 2.2 Enhance incentives that expand development standard concessions and other inducements Preserve and improve or replace in kind the existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods. Preserve or replace in kind affordable housing units in the community to maintain adequate housing opportunities for all residents. Assist in the provision of safe, attainable, and sustainable housing, especially affordable housing, to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. 5.a Packet Pg. 234 offered as tools to facilitate the development of more affordable housing, with a mix of affordability levels within mixed-income housing. Policy 2.3 Achieve a diversity of rental and homeownership opportunities, including apartments, townhomes, condominiums, single-family houses, and accessory dwelling units, micro-units and alternative housing options to accommodate the housing needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community. Policy 2.4 Encourage property developers and owners to adopt sustainable and green practices housing programs that protect residents’ quality of life. Goal 3.0 – Housing Development Policy 3.1 Support the redevelopment of suitable lands for mixed uses containing housing to encourage , infill development. Optimize the use of existing urban services, and support transit use. (Existing Policy H2.2) Policy 3.2 Provide adequate sites, zoned at the appropriate densities and development standards to facilitate both affordable and market rate housing production. Policy 3.3 Prioritize funding for the acquisition of housing sites near public transit and services, the acquisition and rehabilitation or replacement in kind of existing housing, and the provision for housing-related services for affordable housing. (Adapted from Existing Program H3.4.1) Support holistic and strategic housing development with a variety of housing types, prices, tenures, densities, and locations, to address the diverse needs of all current and future residents. 5.a Packet Pg. 235 Goal 4.0 – Governmental Barriers Policy 4.1 Exempt permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees adopted by the City. (Existing Program H3.3.2) Policy 4.2 Provide for streamlined, timely and coordinated processing of development projects and associated environmental clearances to minimize project-holding costs. Policy 4.3 Implement development standards, objective design standards, and architectural and green building standards that encourage new high-quality rental and ownership housing. Policy 4.4 Heighten community awareness and receive community input regarding the social, economic and environmental values of maintaining economic diversity in the City by providing affordable and mixed income higher density housing along transit corridors and at other appropriate locations. Goal 5.0 – Housing Diversity Policy 5.1 The City will support local agencies and organizations in the creation or preservation of housing and associated supportive services that serves the City’s population with special needs. Group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special needs, housing designed for seniors and persons with disabilities, emergency and transitional shelter for persons experiencing homelessness, are some examples of the types of needed housing. Provide for a government environment that facilitates housing development. Establish a variety of housing types and services to accommodate the diversity of persons and households with special needs. 5.a Packet Pg. 236 Policy 5.2 Encourage universal design of housing products and environments, making them usable by a wide range of persons with different physical and mental abilities. Policy 5.3 Coordinate with regional agencies providing services to the homeless, for needs assessment and resource allocation. Goal 6.0 – Fair Housing Policy 6.1 Support programs and agencies that seek to eliminate housing discrimination. (Existing Policy H4.1) Policy 6.2 Conduct fair housing outreach and education for residents, property owners, and housing providers to ensure each understands their rights and responsibilities. Policy 6.3 Identify mechanisms to increase production and access to housing. Policy 6.4 Enforce notification and relocation assistance requirements for lower income households displaced due to demolition, condominium conversion, and persons displaced due to code enforcement activities of illegally converted or substandard residential dwellings. Policy 6.5 Support and provide ways to empower community members to participate in community development. Promote equal opportunity in all City housing types (ownership and rental, market rate and affordable) for all residents to have safe, decent and accessible housing. 5.a Packet Pg. 237 Programs & Implementing Objectives Program 1.1: Adequate Sites Program Through zoning and comprehensive plan designations, the City maintains a residential site inventory that is adequate to accommodate the City’s share of regional housing needs. The City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is 6,086 units (1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 units for above moderate income). With anticipated pipeline projects (785 units) and projected accessory dwelling unit production (512 units); a total of 1,297 units can be credited toward the City’s RHNA. Based on the City’s sites inventory capacity analysis (see Appendix ___), the remaining 4,789 can be achieved through various strategies to accommodate future housing needs. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Amend the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of property identified as needed to meet the City’s RHNA obligations. For sites identified as suitable for lower-income residential development, the designations shall allow future development to achieve at least 30 units per acre and allow at least 16 units per site. B. Rezone ROLM and GM zoned properties to permit multi-family residential housing as an allowed use with a base density of 50 dwelling units per acre for those properties nearest Bayshore Freeway and generally bounded by East Charleston Road and Loma Verde Avenue. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2024 Quantified Objective: The City will amend the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation of 347 properties located in commercial, industrial or residential zoning districts that combined will generate a realistic yield for 4,789 housing units. C. Maintain an updated inventory of housing sites and actively promote sites available for lower- and moderate-income housing development to potential developers, private and non-profit organizations, and other interested persons. Post information on the City’s website and update as necessary to maintain accurate information. D. Maintain an updated list of residential housing projects that have been submitted, approved, and denied throughout the housing cycle. Time Frame: Post information on the City’s website by June 2023 and update annually, or more often if needed. Programs that identify adequate sites, with appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate Palo Alto’s RHNA allocation for each income level: 5.a Packet Pg. 238 Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income households during the planning period. E. Provide technical assistance and information on parcels available for lower-income developments to private or non-profit housing developers. Technical assistance includes land development counseling by staff planners. Time Frame: Develop technical assistance program by June 2024 and set/publish regular hours for assistance on the City’s website. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 5 Policies: 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 4.4 Program 1.2: Site Inventory Monitoring Program In 2017, Senate Bill 166 (SB 166), otherwise known as “no net loss”, was passed to ensure that cities and counties “identify and make available” additional adequate sites if a housing project is approved at a lower density or with fewer units by income category than what is identified in the Housing Element. In conjunction with the Adequate Sites Program above, the City will further implement a monitoring program that evaluates the current capacity of housing sites for all income levels throughout the duration of the planning period. The City commits to tracking its available housing sites database to ensure that it remains in compliance with State law and provides sufficient housing sites at all income levels during the Sixth Cycle. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Monitor the development of vacant and nonvacant properties identified in the sites inventory and ensure that adequate sites are available to meet the remaining RHNA by income category; amend the sites inventory list and rezone additional properties as needed. Time Frame: Conduct review of sites inventory annually and report findings in housing element progress report; correct any deficiency within 180 days if identified. Qualified Objective: The City will maintain a sufficient number of reserve housing inventory sites to remain compliant with State law. In the event the City falls short of that requirement, it has committed to resolving the deficiency with 180 days. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3 Policy 3.2 5.a Packet Pg. 239 Program 1.3: Sites Used in Previous Housing Cycle The Housing Element may reuse available nonvacant sites included in one previous housing element inventory, vacant sites included in two previous housing elements, and sites rezoned for RHNA after the statutory deadline, providing the sites are subject to a program that allows the project by right if it includes 20% lower-income units. The City will amend its code to address these requirements. Some sites within this Housing Element were used in previous cycles and this program is included to address the by right approval requirement. Per Government Code Section 65583, the by right provision is limited to carryover sites used to meet lower-income RHNA where development includes at least 20% affordable units for lower income households. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Revise the Municipal Code to include the by right approval requirement of projects that propose 20% lower-income units on the 16 carry over sites included in the housing sites inventory. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 Quantified Objective: Amend zoning standards for 16 properties (14 nonvacant and 2 vacant sites) to enable a projected realistic housing yield of 390 housing units. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 4 Policy 4.2 Program 1.4: City-Owned Land The City owns several surface parking lots that can be redeveloped to replace and add parking while creating new housing opportunities, including affordable housing. This program seeks to identify suitable sites for redevelopment and to pursue partnerships for redevelopment. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Identify City-owned surface parking lots suitable for redevelopment that includes replacement public parking and requires affordable housing units. Prepare a request for proposals to solicit interest in a public/private partnership for redevelopment of one or more sites in the City’s University Avenue Downtown area. Time Frame: Complete by December 2024 Quantified Objective: Subject to available funding and following the RFP effort, the City will select a development partner to secure project approval for the construction of an affordable housing project. B. Review all City-owned parcels and identify sites based on availability, size, access to services and related metrics that would be appropriate for 5.a Packet Pg. 240 transitional housing. Once parcel(s) have been identified, pursue partnerships and funding opportunities to build transitional housing. Time Frame: Complete December 2024 subject to public/private partnership. Quantified Objective: Subject to identification of suitable sites and formation of public/private partnership; provide transitional housing opportunities for 75 or more beds during the planning cycle. C. Maintain an updated list of City owned parcels available for residential development and post on the City's website. Update annually to reflect residential housing projects that have been submitted, approved, and denied throughout the housing cycle. Time Frame: Post information on the City's website by June 2023 and update annually. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 above-moderate households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3 Policies: 2.3, 3.2 Program 1.5: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Facilitation This program aims to annually monitor provisions made to ADU legislation and amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance as necessary to ensure compliance with State law. Furthermore, the City is committed to reducing barriers to alternative types of housing such as ADUs. In recent years, multiple bills have added requirements for local governments related to ADU ordinances. The 2016 and 2017 updates to State law included changes pertaining to the allowed size of ADUs, permitting ADUs by right in at least some areas of a jurisdiction, and parking requirements related to ADUs. More recent bills reduce the time to review and approve ADU applications to 60 days, remove lot size requirements and replacement parking space requirements and require local jurisdictions to permit junior ADUs. AB 68 allows an ADU and a junior ADU to be built on a single-family lot, if certain conditions are met. The State has also removed owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs, created a tiered fee structure that charges ADUs based on their size and location, prohibited fees on units of less than 750 square feet, and permitted ADUs at existing multi-family developments. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Develop, maintain and update a City Summary Guide to ADUs and JADUs to promote, educate, and assist homeowners with developing ADUs/JADUs. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 and maintain annually thereafter. Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of 512 ADUs over the planning period. 5.a Packet Pg. 241 B. Continue to monitor and publish information related to ADU production and application review timelines; meet with ADU stakeholders and review application processing performance to identify potential impediments and make adjustments as needed. Time Frame: Meet with ADU stakeholders at least once every two years starting in 2024; prepare information reports bi-annually. Quantified Objective: Prepare bi-annual reports documenting findings to assist in the facilitation of 512 ADUs over the planning period. C. Investigate a process that waives development impact fees for ADUs under certain conditions. Time Frame: Complete investigation by January 2024. Review process every two years to see if additional changes can be made. Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of XX ADUs over the planning period. D. Perform a review of ADU trends and commit to adjustments if assumptions are not met. Additional actions could include additional public outreach efforts, ADU incentives, and financial assistance. Time Frame: Review ADU trends every two years starting in 2024. Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of XX ADUs over the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.3, 3.1, 4.3 Program 1.6: Stanford University Lands Stanford University owns a significant amount of land in Palo Alto, including the Research Park, Stanford Health Care and Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, the Stanford Shopping Center, 27 University Avenue (Transit Center) and other property. Half of the jobs generated in Palo Alto are located on Stanford University owned land. A number of sites suitable for housing have been identified by Stanford University or long term leaseholders. This program addresses these sites and also sets forth a longer view policy discussion that is intended to ensure additional sites can be identified for the next housing cycle (Seventh Cycle). Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. For the housing opportunity site located at the corner of Pasteur Drive and Sand Hill Road and the adjoining property at 1100 Welch Road, as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, amend zoning regulations to allow approximately 425 units with five residential stories over two levels of above grade parking and up to 85 feet in height; redevelopment of the Welch Road property shall include a plan to protect or mitigate tenant displacement. 5.a Packet Pg. 242 B. For the housing opportunity site located at 3128 El Camino Real (McDonald’s), as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, amend zoning regulations to allow at least 144 housing units with a transitional building height ranging from 50 nearest El Camino Real and up to 75 feet in height set back from the street to minimize a wall effect; allow a minimum of 315 housing units if combined with an adjacent property. C. For the housing opportunity site located at 3300 El Camino Real, as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, allow up to 200 housing units, up to a 1.4:1 floor area ratio (FAR) and approximately 65 feet in height with a 20% inclusionary housing requirement consistent with the City’s Planned Home Zoning process; commercial office approved or permitted on this property is in addition to the floor area allowed for the future housing project. D. Encourage primarily affordable housing development at 27 University Avenue (Palo Alto Transit Center) by amending the zoning code to establish affordable housing as a permitted land use with building heights up to 85 feet and a minimum of 270 housing units. Time Frame: Complete implementing objectives A-D by January 31, 2024. Quantified Objective: Rezoning these site specific parcels will enable a potential realistic housing yield of 839 housing units, including 126 affordable units and 713 above moderate-income units. Housing development on each site would accommodate fifteen to twenty percent (15% - 20%) of deed- restricted inclusionary housing units. City will establish a memorandum of understanding with Stanford that will ensure the development of these sites with housing that is not reserved for Stanford students. E. Engage Stanford University in a dialogue about future multi-family housing opportunities within the Stanford Research Park. Identify locations suitable for housing and mixed-use development and zoning modifications and housing incentives as appropriate for consideration in the Seventh Cycle Housing Element Update. F. Engage Stanford University and long-term leaseholder Simon Properties for possible residential redevelopment opportunities at the Stanford Shopping Center for consideration in the Seventh Cycle Housing Element Update. Time Frame: For implementing objectives E and F, initiate conversations with stakeholders prior to December 31, 2027 and strive to complete discussion prior to end of housing cycle. Quantified Objective: Establish a concept plan or memorandum of understanding with appropriate stakeholders that identify the location and amount of future housing at these locations by the end of the planning period. G. [NOTE: Staff recommends this program be deleted]. Prepare a massing study to analyze contextual height, massing and design considerations for properties located 3000-3300 El Camino Real area in order to review development on all the sites in a holistic manner. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Qualified Objective: Study shall be used to inform development standards to promote housing within this commercial corridor. 5.a Packet Pg. 243 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3 Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 Program 2.1: Affordable Housing Development The City is committed to increasing the supply of affordable housing. The City will continue to prioritize households at the extremely low-income level and seek new funding opportunities and partnerships to improve housing conditions for vulnerable and lower-income communities. The City will work with developers to facilitate affordable housing development by providing development incentives as provided for in Program 3.3 and gap financing as a local match to state, federal, and other public funding sources. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Use funds available through the City’s residential and commercial affordable housing fund to provide gap funding for qualifying affordable housing projects. Housing funds are derived from development impact fees, in-lieu inclusionary fees and, if adopted by voters in November 2022, through proceeds from a local business tax. Time Frame: Annually review fund balances an if sufficient funds warrant, prepare a Notice of Funding Availability. The fund balance will vary over time based on development activity and for the business tax, first collection is anticipated to start no sooner than January 2024. Qualified Objective: The City intends to dedicate approximately one-third of the business tax proceeds toward homelessness and affordable housing initiatives. Over the planning period, the City anticipates it would generate approximately twenty million dollars ($20 M) for use toward affordable housing and homelessness projects. Based on this projection, the City would expect to be able to support gap funding for the production of 55 affordable housing units during the planning cycle. B. Prepare an updated nexus and feasibility study and adjust the residential in- lieu fee, rental impact fee and commercial housing development impact fee, as appropriate. Time Frame: Initiate study prior to December 31, 2026 with estimated completion by June 30, 2028 (The City’s impact fees are currently up to date – this timeline aligns with the requirements of State law, AB 602). Qualified Objective: Use the study to adjust impact fees as necessary to support continued contribution to the City’s affordable housing fund without burdening housing production with excessive fees that cannot be supported by the City’s development standards. Programs that assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households: 5.a Packet Pg. 244 C. Partner with qualified housing developers to identify affordable housing development opportunities with emphasis on promoting housing choices that serve the needs of special needs populations, including seniors, homeless, female-headed households, large families, low-income, and/or persons with disabilities. Time Frame: By December 31, 2023 establish relationships and coordinate meetings with housing developers to discuss affordable housing opportunities; meeting annually throughout the housing cycle. Qualified Objective: Identify with partners at least three affordable housing opportunity sites and facilitate project approval and permitting to realize implementation. D. Research and identify additional State and federal funding opportunities for affordable housing projects. Disseminate information on funding opportunities on the City’s website and/or to potential developers during technical assistance meetings. Time Frame: Ongoing. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 5 Policies: 2.3, 3.3, 5.1 Program 2.2: Below Market Rate (BMR) Program The City is committed to providing more affordable housing opportunities through programs such as the City’s BMR program. The purpose of the program is to create and retain a stock of affordable housing in Palo Alto for people of low- and moderate-income. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to require development of three or more net-new residential units to provide at least fifteen (15%) of those units as inclusionary units at below market rates for ownership housing or pay a fee toward the City’s affordable housing fund. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: 15% of the net new multi-family ownership housing stock will be deed-restricted to affordable housing (two-thirds at 100% AMI and one- third at 120% AMI), except in instances where an in-lieu payment may be accepted. The City will collect in-lieu payments for new multi-family rental housing based on project floor area times a dollar amount set by the City’s fee schedule, currently $24.52; payments will be used to support qualifying affordable housing projects. Some rental home builders may elect to provide inclusionary units to qualify for the State Density Bonus, in such instances no additional in-lieu payment will be received. 5.a Packet Pg. 245 B. Update the City’s feasibility study from 2020 and consider a tiered inclusionary housing requirement for ownership and rental housing where market conditions support a higher inclusionary rate; consider requirements for lower income units at a reduced inclusionary requirement. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2026. Qualified Objective: Prepare a study and present findings to the City Council with options to modify the City’s inclusionary requirements. If supported, enact municipal code changes to implement changes. Implementation of this objective may have the effect of modifying the quantified objective in A above. C. Amend the City’s BMR program to ensure continued affordability of income- restricted ownership units for the life of the project (exempting certain affordable projects taking advantage of tax credit financing). Once amended, conduct outreach with home builders and other stakeholders regarding amended program. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2028. Qualified Objective: Conduct outreach with home builders and other stakeholders and draft an ordinance to extend income restrictions in accordance with the implementing objective. D. Review the City's Below Market Rate rental procedures for households who exceed the maximum income limit during their tenancy. [Note: this can only apply to units in the City’s BMR program, 100% affordable projects may have other lender-dictated requirements.] Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Qualified Objective: Update rental procedures to ensure reasonable transition time for households whose incomes increase but end up disqualifying individual(s) from deed-restricted housing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3 Policies: 2.3, 3.2 Program 3.1: Fee Waivers and Fee Reductions Application and development impact fees support staff resources and off-set facility costs and support the use, expansion and maintenance of a variety of City services including parkland, libraries, and public safety facilities and other services. High fees can also impede housing production by increasing the per unit cost of development, impacting projected returns and potentially discourage new home building. This program seeks to identify, study and implement cost reduction strategies that promote housing and do not negatively impact City facilities or services. Programs that address constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing at all income levels and abilities: 5.a Packet Pg. 246 Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Amend the City’s municipal fee schedule to waive City staff costs associated with the processing of an affordable housing planning application, except for directly related consultant supported costs. Time Frame: October 2023 Qualified Objective: Reduce application processing costs by approximately $20,000 per affordable housing application and processed for a planning entitlement. B. Prepare an economic feasibility study to analyze the impact development impact fees may have on housing production; adjust fees as appropriate to enable a reasonable return on investment and ensure sufficient fee collection to support City services. Time Frame: October 2025 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 3, 4 Policies: 3.1, 4.1 Program 3.2: Constraints to Housing The Constraints chapter of the Housing Element identifies several conditions and practices that act to constrain housing development. By addressing these conditions and practices, the City can streamline development processes, and promote future residential development. The City will continue to monitor its policies, standards, and regulations to ensure the City’s regulatory framework facilitates residential and balanced mixed-use development in the community. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to monitor new local policy initiatives for effectiveness in combatting identified constraints to housing development. B. When new land use regulations, impact fees or procedural changes are being considered by the Planning and Transportation and City Council, the City shall prepare an analysis in the accompanying staff report detailing how the regulation may impact housing production, if at all, and recommended solutions to address those impacts. C. Continue to monitor application of the Municipal Code standards for constraints to housing projects and recommend changes annually, as appropriate, to enhance the feasibility of affordable housing. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 4 Policies: 2.1, 2.3, 4.2 5.a Packet Pg. 247 Program 3.3: Affordable Housing Development Incentives The Planning and Development Services Department, in its review of development applications, market conditions and through conversations with non-profit housing providers may recommend to the City Council waiving or modifying certain development standards or propose changes to the PAMC to encourage the development of low- and moderate-income housing. The City assists affordable housing production with flexible development standards, streamlined application review processes, direct financial assistance and other incentives to encourage affordable housing. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Amend the municipal code to extend the affordable housing incentive program to apply to all housing opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element and zoned for commercial, industrial or multi-family residential; consider extending to religious institution sites located in the R1 district. B. Amend the affordable housing overlay (incentive program) regulations to allow housing projects to achieve a floor area ratio of 2.4:1.0 without requiring commercial floor area (except on University and California Avenue); allow compliance with State Density Bonus parking standards if more permissible than local requirements; and housing projects income restricted to 60% of the area medium income level or below, allow up to sixty (60) feet in height. Time Frame: Completed by December 31, 2024 Qualified Objective: Amend the zoning code and comprehensive plan as necessary to extend the provision of affordable housing incentive program to 347 additional properties and extend codify additional incentives described herein. C. Assess existing development review process to determine if an expedited permit process can be implemented for affordable housing projects. Time Frame: Initiate assessment by December 2023 with implementation of assessment option initiated by December 2024. Quantified Objective: The timeframes associated with permit processing can be viewed as a constraint to affordable development. The City aims to process planning entitlements for affordable housing projects exempt from environmental review with 90 days from application submittal. D. Research and identify additional State and federal funding opportunities for affordable housing projects. Disseminate information on funding opportunities on the City's website and/or to potential developers during technical assistance meetings. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. 5.a Packet Pg. 248 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.2, 4.2 Program 3.4: Housing Incentive Program (HIP) The HIP was enacted in 2019 as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law and provides development incentives including no housing density restrictions, increased floor area ratios and increased lot coverage. This program seeks to expand the suite of development incentives and extend the program to residential districts. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to allow HIP projects to benefit from relaxed development standards including, increased floor area ratios and waiver from lot coverage requirements. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Monitor development activity and document how many projects take advantage of the HIP as opposed to base district zoning standard or other State incentives, such as State Density Bonus law. B. HIP qualifying projects that also comply with City approved objective standards shall be administratively reviewed with one courtesy meeting before the Architectural Review Board but subject to appeal to the City Council. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Monitor projects for compliance with desired review schedule, track application processing timelines and number of applications appealed to Council; use data to inform future modifications to the HIP program. C. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, modify the local Housing Incentive Program to amend development standards that promote greater housing production; align the City’s parking requirements to be consistent with State Density Bonus law; allow for sites subject to the City’s retail preservation ordinance – except in the ground floor (GF) and retail (R) combining districts and strategic locations generally depicted in the draft South El Camino Real Design Guidelines – a reduction in the amount of retail replacement floor area needed for redevelopment and waive the retail preservation requirement for identified housing opportunity sites. D. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, extend and amend the local Housing Incentive Program to multi-family residential districts to amend development standards that promote greater housing production and to align the City’s parking requirements to be consistent with the State Density Bonus law. E. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, extend the local Housing Incentive Program to the ROLM and GM districts in northeast portion of the City nearest the Bayshore Freeway and generally bounded by East Charleston Road to the 5.a Packet Pg. 249 east and Loma Verde Avenue. The Housing Incentive Program development standards shall be amended to increase height and floor area allowances for housing projects; reduce parking requirements, including consideration of parking maximums that do not exceed provisions of the State Density Bonus Law, and adjustment to other development standards to enable greater housing production. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code and comprehensive plan to codify implementing objective; as with A and B above, monitor program and housing production generated from program – make adjustments as warranted. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.2, 4.4 Program 3.5: Expedited Project Review The City continues to explore opportunities to improve the efficiency of the development review process. As a response to a housing shortage in the State of California, Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) was passed to restrict local rules that limit housing production. SB 330 helps strengthen the Permit Streamlining Act, by creating a more efficient two-step application process. The City has already made improvements towards expediting the development process for housing in the City by developing objective standards. Additionally, in conformance with Government Code Section 65940.1 (SB 1483), the City has all schedule of fees, application forms, Zoning Ordinance/Municipal Code, and other relevant information publicly accessible on the City’s website. The City will continue to find ways to make the development process more efficient to uphold SB 330, by further streamlining the permit process and directly coordinating with developers to ensure a timely application and development process. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Identify opportunities to implement changes to reduce administrative burdens during permitting, such as automating processes, creating reference guides, and streamlining review processes. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: The City recently received a building permit audit with recommendations to improve application processing and streamlining; most of these improvements are anticipated to be completed by December 2024. Staff is exploring other document management and project tracking solutions, including software based solutions to ensure projects are being processed in a timely manner. B. Formalize a procedure to offer no-cost pre-application consultation services for new housing developments. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 5.a Packet Pg. 250 Qualified Objective: Provide a no-cost pre-consultation meeting for up to 90 minutes for any multi-family housing project. C. For housing projects subject to the City’s Architectural Review Board, limit the number of hearings before the ARB to a maximum of two meetings. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024 Qualified Objective: Amend the zoning code to limit multi-family housing projects to two hearings before the City’s ARB unless additional review is agreed upon by the home builder and City; document the City’s performance. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 4 Policy: 4.2 Program 4.1: Replacement Housing Development on nonvacant sites with existing residential units is subject to a replacement requirement pursuant to Government Code Section 65583. The City will amend its code to require the replacement of units affordable to the same or lower income level as a condition of approval for any development on a nonvacant RHNA site consistent with those requirements set forth in California Density Bonus Law. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Amend the City’s municipal code to require housing opportunity sites identified as meeting the lower income regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) allocation, and other applicable sites with existing affordable units, to require a one for one replacement of deed restricted units or units occupied by lower income tenants, when redeveloped. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2024. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code to achieve objective. B. Expand the SB330 requirements to require any commercial development to replace any demolished residential units as a part of any redevelopment. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2025. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code to achieve objective. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 1, 3 Policies: 1.2, 1.4, 3.3 Programs that conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable- housing stock: 5.a Packet Pg. 251 Program 4.2: Housing and Neighborhood Preservation The City is committed to preserving its existing housing stock (or replace in kind) and neighborhoods. All residents deserve to live in safe and hazard free housing. Preserving the City’s neighborhoods helps sustain the City’s high quality of life. Preservation of its housing and neighborhoods is a continued priority for the City. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Annually communicate with renters through direct mailing to multi-family apartment buildings and through the City’s website, resources available to renters, including expectations for housing quality and steps to take for suspected substandard housing conditions. Time Frame: Initiate in 2025 and annually thereafter. Qualified Objective: Prepare relevant information and post online, explore best outreach approaches to communicate with renters. B. In response to any complaint about substandard housing received by the City’s Code Enforcement Program, staff will provide information to the resident or homeowner about the City’s Rehabilitation Program. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Staff will respond to any complaints received, provide access to relevant information and when necessary, connect the complainant with mediation services offered by the City through contract provider. C. The City will conduct increased outreach to increase awareness of housing resources, fair housing workshops, and tenant protection. Specifically, the City will conduct at least one fair housing workshop annually for community-based organizations that serve residents and housing providers in areas of the City with the highest number of substandard housing complaints to Code Enforcement. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually, with first workshop to occur by December 2024. Quantified Objective: Disseminate information to the public to increase the awareness of support for home rehabilitation with the goal of reaching at least 5 new households annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1, 6 Policies: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 6.2 Program 4.3: Home Rehabilitation The City is committed to maintaining quality housing conditions throughout the City. The City will continue to implement the Residential Rehabilitation Program through the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which offers financial assistance through grants and identifies new funding opportunities for loans to qualified lower-income households to repair and maintain their homes. 5.a Packet Pg. 252 Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Implementing Objectives: A. Annually dedicate CDBG funds as available to support the City’s Rehabilitation Program; seek additional funding to supplement CDBG funding. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. Qualified Objective: Participate and remain in good standing with the CDBG program; distribute funds in accordance with fund guidelines and requirements. B. The City will conduct increased outreach to increase awareness of CDBG funds and availability of said funds. The City will conduct one fair housing workshop annually to disseminate information regarding program requirements and availability of funds. The City will also update their website annually with information on the program. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually, with first workshop to occur by December 2024. Qualified Objective: Disseminate information to the public to increase the use of available CDBG funds with the goal of reaching at least 5 new households annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1, 6 Policies: 1.1, 1.3, 6.2 Program 4.4: Seismic Retrofit Palo Alto was among the first jurisdictions to enact progressive seismic upgrade legislation and successfully established a program that required structure assessment reports and incentives to encourage seismic retrofits. Much more is known today about the effect earthquakes have on different building typologies and engineering solutions to make buildings safer. An analysis of the City’s housing stock finds there are multi-family housing units located in soft-story buildings that are vulnerable to a seismic event. In addition to addressing the safety concerns associated with seismically vulnerable buildings, structurally enhancing these buildings will reduce the potential for displacement and serve to make the City’s housing stock more resilient. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Amend the City’s seismic hazards identification program to strengthen regulations and require seismic upgrades of vulnerable housing stock through a combination mandatory provisions and voluntary incentives. Time Frame: Initiate effort in 2023, complete by 2026. Qualified Objective: Amend the City’s seismic regulations to advance implementation objective. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policy: 1.1 5.a Packet Pg. 253 Program 5.1: Preservation of At-Risk Housing The City will continue to support the preservation of affordable housing projects that could potentially convert to market-rate units during the planning period. The City will monitor all units and assist property owners in maintaining the affordability of these units and provide relocation resources to tenants if preservation is unsuccessful. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund / HOME Investment Partnership Program Implementing Objectives: A. Provide direct notification to property owners and tenants of lower-income deed restricted housing units of the state requirement to notify affected households about the termination of the affordability restrictions at six and twelve months, and three years. Time Frame: Twice during the reporting period, once in 2024 and again in 2028. Qualified Objective: Mail requirements to qualifying property owners as specified. B. Engage the property owner of 4230 Terman Drive (Terman Apartments) with 72 affordable housing units at risk of conversion to market rate units during the housing cycle to explore opportunities for continued affordability. Time Frame: Initiate conversation in 2024. Qualified Objective: Hold meetings with property owner to explore opportunities to ensure the continued affordability of the rental units; implement additional protections, such as financial incentives, as able. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policies: 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 Program 5.2: Funding Partnerships Preserve and protect affordable, middle-income and at-risk housing through site acquisition or partnership opportunities, such as the California Community Housing Agency (CalCHA) or similar programs or agencies. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund / HOME Investment Partnership Program Implementing Objectives: A. Review CalCHA partnership requirements and present an option to decision- makers for inclusion to the program; identify existing housing sites meeting criteria for preservation, prepare and adopt necessary resolutions or agreements to operationalize program. Programs that preserve assisted housing developments at-risk of conversion to market-rate: 5.a Packet Pg. 254 Time Frame: Make decision to engage with CalCHA (or similar programs) by June 2025. B. Continue seeking funding sources, especially for extremely low income housing, including supporting the ongoing development of the Bay Area Housing Financing Authority (BAHFA). Time Frame: Annually and ongoing. Qualified Objective: Support the BAHFA to provide services to 50 extremely low-income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policy: 1.3 Program 6.1: Housing For Persons With Special Needs The City’s municipal code is periodically updated to address a wide range of issues and California and Federal law. The City will continue to monitor its policies, standards, and regulations to ensure that they comply with applicable law. The City will also facilitate the development of housing for persons with disabilities and other special needs through incentives for affordable housing development. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund, CBDG Implementing Objectives: A. For extremely low income housing units, update the City’s affordable housing guidelines to establish preferences for populations with special needs. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024. B. Contract with and financially support non-profit services providers such as the Opportunity Center, that help meet the supportive services needs of the City’s diverse community, especially those with extremely low incomes. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually as funds are available. Qualified Objective: Support the Opportunity Center with the goal of providing services to 50 low-income households during the planning period. C. In order to assist in the housing needs for special needs populations, the City will: • Engage with housing stakeholders and housing providers, on the identification of needs and new solutions, • Encourage housing developers, through the City’s BMR requirements, to designate a portion of new affordable housing units for special needs populations, and Programs that promote equal housing opportunities, regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or ability: 5.a Packet Pg. 255 • Partner with the County and other agencies to pursue funding sources designated for housing for special needs groups, including seniors and persons with disabilities. Time Frame: Starting in 2023 and annually thereafter. Qualified Objective: Meet annually with housing service providers and the Santa Clara County representatives to identify opportunities to further support special needs populations. D. Work with Stanford and other higher education institutions to require that student, faculty, and staff housing be proactively addressed in master plans. Time Frame: Starting in 2023 and annually thereafter. Quantified Objective: Meet annually with housing service providers and the Santa Clara County representatives to identify opportunities to further support special needs populations. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 6.3 Program 6.2: Multi-Family Housing and Large Household Units Due to the high cost of housing and scarcity of land, housing units large enough to accommodate large households are limited. Large households are defined as 5 or more persons living in the household. The City considers large households as a vulnerable population within the City and is committed to exploring additional opportunities for multi-family housing developments. Furthermore, the City will continue to advocate and promote the production of housing units of all to accommodate all persons and family sizes. Large household units have three or more bedroom units. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Explore incentives to encourage larger units, such as FAR exemptions for three or more bedroom units. B. Promote and encourage a mix of different bedroom units in each development. C. The City shall encourage housing designs that meet the needs of extended, multigenerational, and/or large families. Time Frame: Initiate in 2027 and conclude before December 31, 2029. Qualified Objective: Meet with housing stakeholders and conduct public hearings before the Planning and Transportation Commission to receive public and commissioner input on ways to achieve stated objective. Make recommendations to Council and follow up with an ordinance to effect a change in local zoning regulations as directed. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 5, 6 Policy: 2.3, 5.1, 6.3 5.a Packet Pg. 256 Program 6.3: Mixed-Use Development Mixed-use projects are a more efficient use of land and can make housing development more profitable and therefore more likely to be constructed and are appropriate in certain areas. Mixed-use development downtown or near high quality transit and rail service can enhance the local economy and support small businesses. In addition, the City is cognizant of its jobs/housing balance and will continue to focus on proactive solutions that better align housing needs generated by new job growth and strive to reduce its existing jobs/housing imbalance. Palo Alto will consider and implement development standards that incentivize greater housing production and temper the strong market demand for commercial development. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to focus on proactive land use policies, such as commercial office growth restrictions to promote an improved jobs to housing balance. Time Frame: Ongoing B. Amend the City’s municipal code to reduce commercial floor area allowances or other commercial incentives at strategic locations to shift the economic benefit of redevelopment toward home building. Time Frame: December 31, 2025 C. Review the City’s Workforce Housing Overlay regulations and consider amendments to better align the target housing population (120%+ to 140% AMI) with a housing typology that provides clear reduced rents compared to market rate rents for a comparable unit. Engage with organizations, research case studies and identify successful tools used to facilitate missing middle housing opportunities; report findings to the City Council and implement through text amendments or policy changes, regulations to promote workforce housing opportunities. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2026 D. Examine extending the University Ave In-Lieu Parking program for residential projects and consider an in-lieu parking program for the California Avenue area. Discuss with home builders and other stakeholders the feasibility of marketing different housing typologies without on-site parking (paid through in-lieu fee) and implications to City parking resources; present findings to the City Council with options on how to proceed. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3, 6 Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 6.3 5.a Packet Pg. 257 Program 6.4: Homelessness Program Santa Clara County adopted the Santa Clara Community Plan to End Homelessness, which is designed to address homelessness throughout Santa Clara County as a whole. The City’s Homeless Prevention Program was created as a result of the County’s Community Plan to End Homelessness. The Program is for Palo Alto households who are at risk of becoming homeless as defined by HUD and focuses on self-sufficiency and stabilization. And for those experiencing homelessness and waiting for more permanent housing, provide services that offer immediate support. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Expand geographic and service areas of the City’s Safe Parking Program. Consider using City park parking lots for the program. Expand program services to include case management and explore opportunities to provide supervised access to City facilities, such as the Cubberley Community Center facility locker rooms. Time Frame: Initiate by 2026, complete by December 2028. B. Create a social services directory and make it available to residents at public counters and on City website. Time Frame: Complete by June 2023. Expand the City’s homeless prevention program to include renter protections and financial assistance for rent, security deposits, and utilities. Identify funding sources to support households at risk of homelessness; engage with homelessness stakeholders, conduct hearings before the Planning and Transportation and City Council and make recommendations to support objective; implement based on available funding. Time Frame: Initiate in 2026 and complete by June 2028. C. Continue to pursue the Homekey (LATP) site for use as a temporary bridge housing facility to provide accommodations for individuals who are actively engaged in services leading to permanent housing. Engage with stakeholders, including the State Department of Housing and Community Development, LifeMoves, Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing, and the Santa Clara County Housing Authority to advance the project and to provide transitional housing and support services for 88 households. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2024. D. Explore additional opportunities for Homekey funding or other similar funding sources to convert hotels to permanent or interim housing for persons experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. Work with stakeholders to identify additional funding opportunities and locations to support homelessness population and those at risk of homelessness. 5.a Packet Pg. 258 Time Frame: Ongoing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6, 6.3 Program 6.7: Alternative Housing Under this program, the City will continue to support alternative types of housing, such as large household units, single-room occupancy units, and managed living units or “micro-units,” to accommodate extremely-low-income households. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Coordinate with HIP Housing or similar house sharing services to provide shared housing arrangements. Identify opportunities to extend home sharing services to Palo Alto and promote on the City’s website as appropriate. Time Frame: Initiate conversations in 2024. B. Encourage innovative housing structures, such as micro-unit housing and new shared and intergenerational housing models to help meet the housing needs of aging adults, students, and lower-income individuals citywide. Meet with housing stakeholders and conduct public hearings before the Planning and Transportation Commission to receive public and commissioner input on ways to achieve stated objective. Make recommendations to Council and follow up with an ordinance to effect a change in local zoning regulations as directed. Time Frame: Initiate in 2027 and conclude before December 31, 2029. C. Review and amend the Zoning Ordinance to address State legislation pertaining to the definitions of family, Employee Housing, Residential care facilities, Group Homes and/or Boardinghouses. D. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address AB 101 (Low Barrier Navigation Centers "by right"), AB 139 (emergency shelter requirements), AB 2162 (Supportive and Transitional Housing "by right") and Health and Safety Code 17021.8 (Farmworker Housing) requirements, as well as the Employee Housing Act (H&S Section 17021.5) and residential care facilities for seven or more persons. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 2.3, 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 6.3 5.a Packet Pg. 259 Program 6.8: Fair Housing The City of Palo Alto is committed to providing equitable opportunities to all residents of Palo Alto in order to expand access to housing and increase housing mobility. The City will take actions to overcome patterns of segregation, address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity, and foster inclusive communities. The action items listed below will assist the City in reducing barriers to housing, including but not limited to racial inequities, high housing costs, and public awareness of existing resources. AB 686 (2017) requires each city to administer its programs and activities related to housing in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. Palo Alto will take actions to overcome patterns of segregation, address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity, and foster inclusive communities. To address the requirements of AB 686, the City participates in the 2020- 2025 Santa Clara County Consolidated Plan (ConPlan). The County’s ConPlan identifies eight housing goals for the County and each of its participating jurisdictions including Palo Alto. Additionally, the ConPlan identifies regional and local barriers to fair housing around the region, with heavy emphasis on racial and economic disparity, land use and zoning, and lack of assistance and resources. Programs were identified to reduce barriers in the City including adjusting zoning amendments to expand affordable and alternative housing opportunities and increasing accessibility to information. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: Fair Housing Services A. Distribute educational materials to property owners, apartment managers, and tenants relative to fair housing requirements, regulations, and services via the City’s website, social media, community announcements and similar forums. Time Frame: Initiate by May 31, 2024 and update annually thereafter. B. Provide multi-lingual fair housing information to the public via the public counters, message boards, City website, neighborhood watch, and in response to telephone inquiries. Time Frame: Ongoing, update material and information annually. C. Partner with Project Sentinel to conduct random testing at least once per year during the planning period. Refer individuals to State Fair Employment and Housing, HUD Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity division, and other legal services as appropriate. Time Frame: Ongoing. D. Allocate annual funding for fair housing services through the Action Plan process for the use of CDBG funds. Time Frame: Annually as part of the CBDG update. 5.a Packet Pg. 260 E. Work with Project Sentinel and renter organizations to conduct an annual workshop to educate tenants and landlords about fair housing requirements. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Aim to reduce fair housing complaints by educating approximately 20 tenants and landlords annually. Fair Housing Impediments F. Encourage mixed-income developments accessible to lower income residents citywide, especially in high opportunity and resource-rich areas through use of the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, Housing Trust Funds, development of city-owned properties, and use of grant funding for housing. Time Frame: Ongoing Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. Tenant Protections G. Institute Tenant Protections to prevent anti-displacement including the following: relocation assistance; eviction reduction program; rental survey program; security deposit limit; fair chance ordinance; right to counsel. Time Frame: Begin implementation in December 2023. Quantified Objective: Aim to reduce fair housing complaints by educating approximately 20 tenants and landlords annually. H. Require a 90-day notice for a rent increase of 6% instead of the State’s 10% threshold for noticing. Time Frame: Begin implementation in December 2023. I. Promote Housing Choice Vouchers to support housing mobility by educating landlords about income discrimination (i.e. Cannot post “NO Section 8” on applications) Time Frame: Ongoing Quantified Objective: Assist 200 households annually or the number of vouchers allocated under the housing choice voucher program, including project-based vouchers. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 Program 6.9: Community Outreach Program Community outreach is a key component to developing a comprehensive and inclusive housing market in the city. It is critical to engage local community groups and stakeholders from all sectors of the community in order to educate and provide inclusive housing opportunities. The goal of this program is to provide underrepresented community groups, which are affected by 5.a Packet Pg. 261 restrictions to fair and equitable housing, greater opportunities for becoming informed and engaged in the City’s housing and overall planning process. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Partner with Human Services for community outreach with a focus on traditionally underrepresented groups. Meet with Human Services representatives bi-annually to formulate strategies aimed at engaging the City’s most vulnerable populations. Time Frame: Bi-annually; initiate first meeting by January 2024. Qualified Objective: Reach at least 20 households annually through work with Human Services. B. The City shall continue to facilitate opportunities for all residents and stakeholders to provide meaningful and effective input on proposed planning activities early on and continuously throughout plan development and the public review process. Outreach efforts to disadvantaged communities, and engagement materials in multiple languages will be a priority. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Increase public participation rates amongst City’s underrepresented groups by at least 20% by the end of the planning period. C. Create a website that provides relevant housing application and processing information to the home building community. Time Frame: Complete by January 15, 2024 and update annually. Qualified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 above-moderate households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 5.a Packet Pg. 262 Goals & Policies Goal 1.0 – Housing Preservation Policy 1.1 Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorating or substandard residential properties using sustainable and energy conserving approaches. (Existing Policy H1.1) Policy 1.2 Work with property owners and nonprofit housing providers to preserve assisted multi-family units at risk of conversion to market rents and extend the affordability covenants in perpetuity whenever feasible. Policy 1.3 Use existing and new funding sources to fund rehabilitation loan and grant programs to assist in the preservation of both deed-restricted and naturally occurring affordable housing units. Policy 1.4 Ensure the retention or replacement in kind of existing lower income units that are identified for potential redevelopment. Goal 2.0 – Affordable Housing Policy 2.1 Increase opportunities for affordable housing development through use of flexible development standards. (Adapted from existing Program Objective H3.1.5) Policy 2.2 Enhance incentives that expand development standard concessions and other inducements Preserve and improve or replace in kind the existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods. Preserve or replace in kind affordable housing units in the community to maintain adequate housing opportunities for all residents. Assist in the provision of safe, attainable, and sustainable housing, especially affordable housing, to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. 5.b Packet Pg. 263 offered as tools to facilitate the development of more affordable housing, with a mix of affordability levels within mixed-income housing. Policy 2.3 Achieve a diversity of rental and homeownership opportunities, including apartments, townhomes, condominiums, single-family houses, and accessory dwelling units, micro-units and alternative housing options to accommodate the housing needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community. Policy 2.4 Encourage property developers and owners to adopt sustainable and green practices housing programs that protect residents’ quality of life. Goal 3.0 – Housing Development Policy 3.1 Support the redevelopment of suitable lands for mixed uses containing housing to encourage , infill development. Optimize the use of existing urban services, and support transit use. (Existing Policy H2.2) Policy 3.2 Rezone sites citywide to pProvide adequate sites, zoned at the appropriate densities and development standards to facilitate both affordable and market rate housing production. Policy 3.3 Prioritize funding for the acquisition of housing sites near public transit and services, the acquisition and rehabilitation or replacement in kind of existing housing, and the provision for housing-related services for affordable housing. (Adapted from Existing Program H3.4.1) Support holistic and strategic housing development with a variety of housing types, prices, tenures, densities, and locations, to address the diverse needs of all current and future residents. 5.b Packet Pg. 264 Goal 4.0 – Governmental Barriers Policy 4.1 Exempt permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees adopted by the City. (Existing Program H3.3.2) Policy 4.2 Provide for streamlined, timely and coordinated processing of development projects and associated environmental clearances to minimize project-holding costs. Policy 4.3 Implement development standards, objective design standards, and architectural and green building standards that encourage new high-quality rental and ownership housing. Policy 4.4 Heighten community awareness and receive community input regarding the social, economic and environmental values of maintaining economic diversity in the City by providing affordable and mixed income higher density housing along transit corridors and at other appropriate locations. Goal 5.0 – Housing Diversity Policy 5.1 [NOTE: Policies 5.1 – 5.4 were consolidated into one policy] The City will support local agencies and organizations in the creation or preservation of housing and associated supportive services that serves the City’s population with special needs. Group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special needs, housing designed for seniors and persons with disabilities, emergency and transitional shelter for persons experiencing homelessness, are some examples of the types of needed housing. Provide for a government environment that facilitates housing development. Establish a variety of housing types and services to accommodate the diversity of persons and households with special needs. 5.b Packet Pg. 265 Support the development and preservation of group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special housing needs by assisting local agencies and nonprofit organizations in the construction or rehabilitation of facilities for this population. (Existing Program H3.3.4) Policy 5.2 Provide housing that addresses the needs of persons with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities), the mentally ill, persons with substance problems, persons with HIV/AIDS, veterans and other groups needing transitional and supportive housing. Policy 5.3 Support the provision of emergency shelter, transitional housing, and ancillary services to address homelessness. (Existing Policy H3.5) Policy 5.4 Support housing that incorporates facilities and services to meet the health care, transit, and social service needs of households with special needs, including seniors and persons with disabilities. (Existing Policy H4.2) Policy 5.25 Encourage universal design of housing products and environments, making them usable by a wide range of persons with different physical and mental abilities. Policy 5.36 Coordinate with regional agencies providing services to the homeless, for needs assessment and resource allocation. Goal 6.0 – Fair Housing Policy 6.1 Support programs and agencies that seek to eliminate housing discrimination. (Existing Policy H4.1) Policy 6.2 Conduct fair housing outreach and education for residents, property owners, and housing providers to ensure each understands their rights and responsibilities. Promote equal opportunity in all City housing types (ownership and rental, market rate and affordable) for all residents to have safe, decent and accessible housing. 5.b Packet Pg. 266 Policy 6.3 Identify mechanisms to increase production and access to housing. Policy 6.4 Enforce notification and relocation assistance requirements for lower income households displaced due to demolition, condominium conversion, and persons displaced due to code enforcement activities of illegally converted or substandard residential dwellings. Policy 6.5 Support and provide ways to empower community members to participate in community development. Programs & Implementing Objectives Program 1.1: Adequate Sites Program Through zoning and comprehensive plan designations, the City maintains a residential site inventory that is adequate to accommodate the City’s share of regional housing needs. The City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is 6,086 units (1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 units for above moderate income). With anticipated pipeline projects (785 units) and projected accessory dwelling unit production (512 units); a total of 1,297 units can be credited toward the City’s RHNA. Based on the City’s sites inventory capacity analysis (see Appendix ___), the remaining 4,789 can be achieved through various strategies to accommodate future housing needs. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Where necessaryAmend the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of , rezone property identified as needed to as meeting the City’s lower- income housing RHNA obligations. For sites identified as suitable for lower-income residential development, the designations shall allow future development requirement to achieve at least 30 units per acre and allow at least 16 units per site. B. Rezone ROLM and GM zoned properties to permit multi-family residential housing as an allowed use with a base density of 50 dwelling units per acre for those properties nearest Bayshore Freeway and generally bounded by East Charleston Road and Loma Verde Avenue. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2024 Programs that identify adequate sites, with appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate Palo Alto’s RHNA allocation for each income level: 5.b Packet Pg. 267 Quantified Objective: The City will amend the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation of 347 properties located in commercial, industrial or residential zoning districts that combined will generate a realistic yield for 4,789 housing units. C. Maintain an updated inventory of housing sites and actively promote sites available for lower- and moderate-income housing development to potential developers, private and non-profit organizations, and other interested persons. Post information on the City’s website and update as necessary to maintain accurate information. D. Maintain an updated list of residential housing projects that have been submitted, approved, and denied throughout the housing cycle. Time Frame: Post information on the City’s website by June 2023 and update annually, or more often if needed. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income households during the planning period. E. Provide technical assistance and information on parcels available for lower-income developments to private or non-profit housing developers. Technical assistance includes land development counseling by staff planners. Time Frame: Develop technical assistance program by June 2024 and set/publish regular hours for assistance on the City’s website. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 54 Policies: 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 4.4 Program 1.2: Site Inventory Monitoring Program In 2017, Senate Bill 166 (SB 166), otherwise known as “no net loss”, was passed to ensure that cities and counties “identify and make available” additional adequate sites if a housing project is approved at a lower density or with fewer units by income category than what is identified in the Housing Element. In conjunction with the Adequate Sites Program above, the City will further implement a monitoring program that evaluates the current capacity of housing sites for all income levels throughout the duration of the planning period. The City commits to tracking its available housing sites database to ensure that it remains in compliance with State law and provides sufficient housing sites at all income levels during the Sixth Cycle. Time Frame: Various (See Implementing Objectives) Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund 5.b Packet Pg. 268 Implementing Objectives: A. Develop a procedure to mMonitor the development of vacant and nonvacant sites properties identified in the sites inventory and ensure that adequate sites are available to meet the remaining RHNA by income category; amend the sites inventory list and rezone additional properties as needed. (Complete by December 31, 2023) Time Frame: Conduct review of sites inventory annually and report findings in housing element progress report; correct any deficiency within 180 days if identified. Qualified Objective: The City will maintain a sufficient number of reserve housing inventory sites to remain compliant with State law. In the event the City falls short of that requirement, it has committed to resolving the deficiency with 180 days. B. [NOTE: This program was merged with A above] On an annual and ongoing basis, review the sites inventory and amend sites as necessary to accurately address the City’s RHNA goals. (Ongoing and at least once annually) C. [NOTE: This program was merged with A above]Should an approval of development result in a shortfall of sites to accommodate the City’s remaining RHNA requirements (for lower-, moderate- or above moderate-income households), the City will identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall and ensure “no net loss” in capacity to accommodate the RHNA. (Within 180 days of an identified shortfall below RHNA target) Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3 Policy 3.2 Program 1.3: Sites Used in Previous Housing Cycle The Housing Element may count reuse available nonvacant sites included in one previous housing element inventory, and vacant sites included in two previous housing elements, and sites rezoned for RHNA after the statutory deadline, providing the sites are subject to a program that allows the project affordable housing by right if it includes 20% lower-income units. The City will amend its code to address these requirements. Some sites within this Housing Element were used in previous cycles and this program is included to address the by right approval requirement. Per Government Code Section 65583, the by right provision is limited to carryover sites used to meet lower-income RHNA where development includes at least 20% affordable units for lower income households. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Revise the Municipal Code to include the by right approval requirement of projects that propose 20% lower-income units on the XX 16 carry over sites included int the housing sites inventory. 5.b Packet Pg. 269 Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 Quantified Objective: Amend zoning standards for 16 properties (14 nonvacant and 2 vacant sites) to enable a projected realistic housing yield of 390 housing units. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 4 Policy 4.2 Program 1.4: City-Owned Land Lots The City owns a several surface parking lots that can be redeveloped to replace and add parking while creating new housing opportunities, including transitional affordable housing. This program seeks to identify suitable sites for redevelopment and to pursue partnerships for redevelopment. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Identify City-owned surface parking lots suitable for redevelopment that includes replacement public parking and prioritizes requires affordable housing units. Prepare a request for proposals to solicit interest in a public/private partnership for redevelopment of two one or more sites in the City’s University Avenue Downtown area. Time Frame: Complete by December 2024 Quantified Objective: Subject to available funding and following the RFP effort, the City will select a development partner to secure project approval for the construction of an affordable housing project. B. Review all City-owned parcels and identify sites based on availability, size, access to services and related metrics that would be appropriate for transitional housing. Once parcel(s) have been identified, pursue partnerships and funding opportunities to build transitional housing. Time Frame: Complete December 2024 subject to public/private partnership. Quantified Objective: Subject to identification of suitable sites and formation of public/private partnership; provide transitional housing opportunities for 75 or more beds during the planning cycle. C. Maintain an updated list of City owned parcels available for residential development and post on the City's website. Update annually to reflect residential housing projects that have been submitted, approved, and denied throughout the housing cycle. Time Frame: Post information on the City's website by June 2023 and update annually. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 above-moderate households during the planning period. 5.b Packet Pg. 270 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3 Policies: 2.3, 3.2 Program 1.5: Rezone ROLM and GM for Residential Use Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. [NOTE: This implementing objective was relocated to Program 1.1 B] Rezone ROLM and GM zoned properties to allow multi-family residential housing as a permitted use with a base density of 40 dwelling units per acre for those properties nearest Bayshore Freeway and generally bounded by East Charleston Road and Loma Verde Avenue. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.2, 4.4 [Note: This program was moved in its entirety from Program 6.2] Program 61.25: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Facilitation Program This program aims to annually monitor provisions made to ADU legislation and amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance as necessary to ensure compliance with State law. Furthermore, the City is committed to reducing barriers to alternative types of housing such as ADUs. In recent years, multiple bills have added requirements for local governments related to ADU ordinances. The 2016 and 2017 updates to State law included changes pertaining to the allowed size of ADUs, permitting ADUs by right in at least some areas of a jurisdiction, and parking requirements related to ADUs. More recent bills reduce the time to review and approve ADU applications to 60 days, remove lot size requirements and replacement parking space requirements and require local jurisdictions to permit junior ADUs. AB 68 allows an ADU and a junior ADU to be built on a single-family lot, if certain conditions are met. The State has also removed owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs, created a tiered fee structure that charges ADUs based on their size and location, prohibited fees on units of less than 750 square feet, and permitted ADUs at existing multi-family developments. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. [NOTE: This implementation objective is not necessary and invites confusion] Respond in a timely manner to update the City’s municipal code to integrate changes in State ADU housing law. B. Develop, Mmaintain and update a City Summary Guide to ADUs and JADUs to promote, educate, and assist homeowners with developing ADUs/JADUs. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 and maintain annually thereafter. 5.b Packet Pg. 271 Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of 512 ADUs over the planning period. C. Continue to monitor and publish information related to ADU production and application review timelines; meet with ADU stakeholders and review application processing performance to identify potential impediments and make adjustments as needed. Time Frame: Meet with ADU stakeholders at least once every two years starting in 2024; prepare information reports bi-annually. Quantified Objective: Prepare bi-annual reports documenting findings to assist in the facilitation of 512 ADUs over the planning period. D. Investigate a process that waives development impact fees for ADUs under certain conditions. Time Frame: Complete investigation by January 2024. Review process every two years to see if additional changes can be made. Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of XX ADUs over the planning period. E. Perform a review of ADU trends and commit to adjustments if assumptions are not met. Additional actions could include additional public outreach efforts, ADU incentives, and financial assistance. Time Frame: Review ADU trends every two years starting in 2024. Quantified Objective: Facilitate the development of XX ADUs over the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.3, 3.1, 4.3 Program 1.6: Stanford University Lands Stanford University owns a significant amount of land in Palo Alto, including the Research Park, Stanford Health Care and Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, the Stanford Shopping Center, 27 University Avenue (Transit Center) and other property. Half of the jobs generated in Palo Alto are located on Stanford University owned land. A number of sites suitable for housing have been identified by Stanford University or long term leaseholders. This program addresses these sites and also sets forth a longer view policy discussion that is intended to ensure additional sites can be identified for the next housing cycle (Seventh Cycle). Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. For the housing opportunity site located at the corner of Pasteur Drive and Sand Hill Road and the adjoining property at 1100 Welch Road, as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, amend zoning regulations to allow 5.b Packet Pg. 272 approximately 425 units with five residential stories over two levels of above grade parking and up to 85 feet in height; redevelopment of the Welch Road property shall include a plan to protect or mitigate tenant displacement. B. For the property located at 3000 El Camino Real (Palo Alto Square), amend the Planned Community ordinance that applies to the site to allow, in addition to the existing improvements on the property, a housing development up to 30 units per acre (approximately 450 units) with a transitional building height ranging from 50 feet nearest El Camino Real and up to 75 feet in height set back from the street to minimize a wall effect. C. For the housing opportunity site located at 3128 El Camino Real (McDonald’s), as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, amend zoning regulations to allow at least 144 housing units with a transitional building height ranging from 50 nearest El Camino Real and up to 75 feet in height set back from the street to minimize a wall effect; allow a minimum of 315 housing units if combined with an adjacent property. D. For the housing opportunity site located at 3300 El Camino Real, as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law, allow up to 200 housing units, up to a 1.4:1 floor area ratio (FAR) and approximately 65 feet in height with a 20% inclusionary housing requirement consistent with the City’s Planned Home Zoning process; commercial office approved or permitted on this property is in addition to the floor area allowed for the future housing project. E. Encourage primarily affordable housing development at 27 University Avenue (Palo Alto Transit Center) by amending the zoning code to establish affordable housing as a permitted land use with building heights up to 85 feet and a minimum of 270 housing units. Time Frame: Complete implementing objectives A-D by January 31, 2024. Quantified Objective: Rezoning these site specific parcels will enable a potential realistic housing yield of 839 housing units, including 126 affordable units and 713 above moderate-income units. Housing development on each site would accommodate fifteen to twenty percent (15% - 20%) of deed- restricted inclusionary housing units. City will establish a memorandum of understanding with Stanford that will ensure the development of these sites with housing that is not reserved for Stanford students. F. Engage Stanford University in a dialogue about future multi-family housing opportunities within the Stanford Research Park. Identify locations suitable for housing and mixed-use development and zoning modifications and housing incentives as appropriate for consideration in the Seventh Cycle Housing Element Update. G. Engage Stanford University and long-term leaseholder Simon Properties for possible residential redevelopment opportunities at the Stanford Shopping Center for consideration in the Seventh Cycle Housing Element Update. Time Frame: For implementing objectives E and F, initiate conversations with stakeholders prior to December 31, 2027 and strive to complete discussion prior to end of housing cycle. 5.b Packet Pg. 273 Quantified Objective: Establish a concept plan or memorandum of understanding with appropriate stakeholders that identify the location and amount of future housing at these locations by the end of the planning period. H. [NOTE: Staff recommends this program be deleted]. Prepare a massing study to analyze contextual height, massing and design considerations for properties located 3000-3300 El Camino Real area in order to review development on all the sites in a holistic manner. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Qualified Objective: Study shall be used to inform development standards to promote housing within this commercial corridor. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3 Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 Program 2.1: Affordable Housing Development Program The City is committed to increasing the supply of affordable housing. The City will continue to prioritize households at the extremely low-income level and seek new funding opportunities and partnerships to improve housing conditions for vulnerable and lower-income communities. The City will work with developers to facilitate affordable housing development by providing development incentives as provided for in Program 3.3 and gap financing as a local match to state, federal, and other public funding sources. Time Frame: Ongoing Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Use funds available through the City’s residential and commercial affordable housing fund to provide gap funding for qualifying affordable housing projects. Housing funds are derived from development impact fees, in-lieu inclusionary fees and, if adopted by voters in November 2022, through proceeds from a local business tax. Time Frame: Annually review fund balances an if sufficient funds warrant, prepare a Notice of Funding Availability. The fund balance will vary over time based on development activity and for the business tax, first collection is anticipated to start no sooner than January 2024. Qualified Objective: The City intends to dedicate approximately one-third of the business tax proceeds toward homelessness and affordable housing initiatives. Over the planning period, the City anticipates it would generate approximately twenty million dollars ($20 M) for use toward affordable housing and homelessness projects. Based on this projection, the City would expect to be able to support gap funding for the production of 55 affordable housing units during the planning cycle. Programs that assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households: 5.b Packet Pg. 274 B. [NOTE: This implementing objective was merged with A above.] If placed on the ballot and approved by voters, the City has identified investment in affordable housing as one of the priority funding strategies of future business tax proceeds. C.B. By December 2027, pPrepare an updated nexus and feasibility study and adjust the residential in-lieu fee, rental impact fee and commercial housing development impact fee, as appropriate. Time Frame: Initiate study prior to December 31, 2026 with estimated completion by June 30, 2028 (The City’s impact fees are currently up to date – this timeline aligns with the requirements of State law, AB 602). Qualified Objective: Use the study to adjust impact fees as necessary to support continued contribution to the City’s affordable housing fund without burdening housing production with excessive fees that cannot be supported by the City’s development standards. D.C. Partner with qualified housing developers to identify affordable housing development opportunities with emphasis on promoting housing choices that serve the needs of special needs populations, including seniors, homeless, female-headed households, large families, low-income, and/or persons with disabilities.Meet with affordable housing developers and religious institutions to answer their questions and provide technical assistance about developing their sites with affordable housing. Time Frame: By December 31, 2023 establish relationships and coordinate meetings with housing developers to discuss affordable housing opportunities; meeting annually throughout the housing cycle. Qualified Objective: Identify with partners at least three affordable housing opportunity sites and facilitate project approval and permitting to realize implementation. E.D. Research and identify additional State and federal funding opportunities for affordable housing projects. Disseminate information on funding opportunities on the City’s website and/or to potential developers during technical assistance meetings. Time Frame: Ongoing. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3, 5 Policies: 2.3, 3.3, 45.1 Program 2.2: Below Market Rate (BMR) Program The City is committed to providing more affordable housing opportunities through programs such as the City’s BMR program. The purpose of the program is to create and retain a stock of affordable housing in Palo Alto for people of low- and moderate-income. 5.b Packet Pg. 275 Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to require development of three or more net-new residential units to provide at least fifteen (15%) of those units as inclusionary units at below market rates for ownership housing or pay a fee toward the City’s affordable housing fund. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: 15% of the net new multi-family ownership housing stock will be deed-restricted to affordable housing (two-thirds at 100% AMI and one- third at 120% AMI), except in instances where an in-lieu payment may be accepted. The City will collect in-lieu payments for new multi-family rental housing based on project floor area times a dollar amount set by the City’s fee schedule, currently $24.52; payments will be used to support qualifying affordable housing projects. Some rental home builders may elect to provide inclusionary units to qualify for the State Density Bonus, in such instances no additional in-lieu payment will be received. B. Update the City’s feasibility study from 2020 and consider a tiered inclusionary housing requirement for ownership and rental housing where market conditions support a higher inclusionary rate; consider requirements for lower income units at a reduced inclusionary requirement. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2026. Qualified Objective: Prepare a study and present findings to the City Council with options to modify the City’s inclusionary requirements. If supported, enact municipal code changes to implement changes. Implementation of this objective may have the effect of modifying the quantified objective in A above. C. Amend the City’s BMR program to ensure continued affordability of income- restricted ownership units for the life of the project (exempting certain affordable projects taking advantage of tax credit financing). Once amended, conduct outreach with home builders and other stakeholders regarding amended program. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2028. Qualified Objective: Conduct outreach with home builders and other stakeholders and draft an ordinance to extend income restrictions in accordance with the implementing objective. D. Review the City's Below Market Rate rental procedures for households who exceed the maximum income limit during their tenancy. [Note: this can only apply to units in the City’s BMR program, 100% affordable projects may have other lender-dictated requirements.] Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Qualified Objective: Update rental procedures to ensure reasonable transition time for households whose incomes increase but end up disqualifying individual(s) from deed-restricted housing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 3 Policies: 2.3, 3.2 5.b Packet Pg. 276 Program 3.1: Fee Waivers and AdjustmentsFee Reductions Application and development impact fees support staff resources and off-set facility costs and support the use, expansion and maintenance of a variety of City services including parkland, libraries, and public safety facilities and other services. High fees can also impede housing production by increasing the per unit cost of development, impacting projected returns and potentially discourage new home building. This program seeks to identify, study and implement cost reduction strategies that promote housing and do not negatively impact City facilities or services. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Amend the City’s municipal fee schedule to waive City staff costs associated with the processing of an affordable housing planning application, except for directly related consultant supported costs. Time Frame: October 2023 Qualified Objective: Reduce application processing costs by approximately $20,000 per affordable housing application and processed for a planning entitlement. B. Prepare an economic feasibility study to analyze the impact development impact fees may have on housing production; adjust fees as appropriate to enable a reasonable return on investment and ensure sufficient fee collection to support City services. Time Frame: October 2025 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 3, 4 Policies: 3.1, 4.1 Program 3.2: Monitoring New Policy Initiatives for Constraints to Housing The Palo Alto Zoning Code is continuously updated to advance local policy initiatives and respond to State and Federal laws. The Constraints chapter of the Housing Element identifies several conditions and practices that act to constrain housing development. By addressing these conditions and practices, the City can streamline development processes, and promote future residential development. The City will continue to monitor its policies, standards, and regulations Programs that address constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing at all income levels and abilities: 5.b Packet Pg. 277 to ensure the City’s regulatory framework facilitates residential and balanced mixed-use development in the community. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to monitor new local policy initiatives for effectiveness in combatting identified constraints to housing development. A.B. When new land use regulations, impact fees or procedural changes are being considered by the Planning and Transportation and City Council, the City shall prepare an analysis in the accompanying staff report detailing how the regulation may impact housing production, if at all, and recommended solutions to address those impacts. B.C. Continue to monitor application of the Municipal Code standards for constraints to housing projects and recommend changes annually, as appropriate, to enhance the feasibility of affordable housing. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 4 Policies: 2.1, 2.3, 4.2 Program 3.3: Affordable Housing Development Incentives The Planning and Development Services Department, in its review of development applications, market conditions and through conversations with non-profit housing providers may recommend to the City Council waiving or modifying certain development standards or propose changes to the PAMC to encourage the development of low- and moderate-income housing. The City assists affordable housing production with flexible development standards, streamlined application review processes, direct financial assistance and other incentives to encourage affordable housing. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. [NOTE: This implementing objective was moved to Program 6.7 D]. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address AB 101 (Low Barrier Navigation Centers "by right"), AB 139 (emergency shelter requirements), AB 2162 (Supportive and Transitional Housing "by right") and Health and Safety Code 17021.8 (Farmworker Housing) requirements, as well as the Employee Housing Act (H&S Section 17021.5) and residential care facilities for seven or more persons. B. [NOTE: This implementing objective deleted because it introduced no new action – this is a current, active regulation]. Continue to allow the affordable housing overlay (incentive) for 100% affordable housing projects up to 120% of the area median income level to receive a floor area ratio of 2.4:1.0, up to 5.b Packet Pg. 278 50 feet in height and parking at .75 spaces per unit in the City’s CD, CS, CN and CC commercial/mixed use zoning districts. C. [NOTE: This implementing objective has already been implemented and is therefore recommended for deletion]. Amend the municipal code to eliminate the legislative review process for affordable housing overlay projects (described in B above), thereby removing the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council review from the project review process, in favor of typical review before the Architectural Review Board (ARB). For qualifying affordable housing overlay projects that also meet objective zoning standards, these applications shall be processed administratively with one courtesy review before the ARB. D. Amend the municipal code to extend the affordable housing overlay (incentive program) to apply to all housing opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element and zoned for commercial, industrial or multi-family residential; consider extending to religious institution sites located in the R1 district. E. Amend the affordable housing overlay (incentive program) regulations to allow housing projects to achieve a floor area ratio of 2.4:1.0 without requiring commercial floor area (except on University and California Avenue); allow compliance with State Density Bonus parking standards if more permissible than local requirements; and housing projects income restricted to 60% of the area medium income level or below, allow up to sixty (60) feet in height. Time Frame: Completed by December 31, 2024 Qualified Objective: Amend the zoning code and comprehensive plan as necessary to extend the provision of affordable housing incentive program to 347 additional properties and extend codify additional incentives described herein. F. Assess existing development review process to determine if an expedited permit process can be implemented for affordable housing projects. Time Frame: Initiate assessment by December 2023 with implementation of assessment option initiated by December 2024. Quantified Objective: The timeframes associated with permit processing can be viewed as a constraint to affordable development. The City aims to process planning entitlements for affordable housing projects exempt from environmental review with 90 days from application submittal. G. Research and identify additional State and federal funding opportunities for affordable housing projects. Disseminate information on funding opportunities on the City's website and/or to potential developers during technical assistance meetings. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.2, 4.2 5.b Packet Pg. 279 [NOTE: This program and implementing objectives were moved in its entirety to Program 6.3] Program 3.4: Mixed-Use Development Mixed-use projects are a more efficient use of land and can make housing development more profitable and therefore more likely to be constructed and are appropriate in certain areas. Mixed-use development downtown or near high quality transit and rail service can enhance the local economy and support small businesses. In addition, the City is cognizant of its jobs/housing balance and will continue to focus on proactive solutions that better align housing needs generated by new job growth and strive to reduce its existing jobs/housing imbalance. Palo Alto will consider and implement development standards that incentivize greater housing production and temper the strong market demand for commercial development. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to focus on proactive land use policies, such as commercial office growth restrictions to promote an improved jobs to housing balance. B. At strategic locations, amend the City’s municipal code to reduce commercial floor area allowances or other commercial incentives to shift the economic benefit of redevelopment toward home building. C. Review the City’s Workforce Housing Overlay regulations and consider amendments to better align the target housing population (120%+ to 140% AMI) with a housing typology that provides clear reduced rents compared to market rate rents for a comparable unit. D. Examine extending the University Ave In-Lieu Parking program for residential projects and consider an in-lieu parking program for the California Avenue area. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3 Policies: 3.1, 3.2 Program 3.54: Housing Incentive Program (HIP) The HIP was enacted in 2019 as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law and provides development incentives including no housing density restrictions, increased floor area ratios and increased lot coverage. This program seeks to expand the suite of development incentives and extend the program to residential districts. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund 5.b Packet Pg. 280 Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to allow HIP projects to benefit from relaxed development standards including, increased floor area ratios and waiver from lot coverage requirements. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Monitor development activity and document how many projects take advantage of the HIP as opposed to base district zoning standard or other State incentives, such as State Density Bonus law. B. HIP qualifying projects that also comply with City approved objective standards shall be administratively reviewed with one courtesy meeting before the Architectural Review Board but subject to appeal to the City Council. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Monitor projects for compliance with desired review schedule, track application processing timelines and number of applications appealed to Council; use data to inform future modifications to the HIP program. C. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, modify the local Housing Incentive Program to amend development standards that promote greater housing production; align the City’s parking requirements to be consistent with State Density Bonus law; allow for sites subject to the City’s retail preservation ordinance – except in the ground floor (GF) and retail (R) combining districts and strategic locations generally depicted in the draft South El Camino Real Design Guidelines – a reduction in the amount of retail replacement floor area needed for redevelopment and waive the retail preservation requirement for identified housing opportunity sites. D. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, extend and amend the local Housing Incentive Program to multi-family residential districts to amend development standards that promote greater housing production and to align the City’s parking requirements to be consistent with the State Density Bonus law. E. Based on the findings of a feasibility study, extend the local Housing Incentive Program to the ROLM and GM districts in northeast portion of the City nearest the Bayshore Freeway and generally bounded by East Charleston Road to the east and Loma Verde Avenue. The Housing Incentive Program development standards shall be amended to increase height and floor area allowances for housing projects; reduce parking requirements, including consideration of parking maximums that do not exceed provisions of the State Density Bonus Law, and adjustment to other development standards to enable greater housing production. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code and comprehensive plan to codify implementing objective; as with A and B above, monitor program and housing production generated from program – make adjustments as warranted. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 2, 3, 4 Policies: 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.2, 4.4 5.b Packet Pg. 281 Program 3.65: Expedited Project Review The City continues to explore opportunities to improve the efficiency of the development review process. As a response to a housing shortage in the State of California, Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) was passed to restrict local rules that limit housing production. SB 330 helps strengthen the Permit Streamlining Act, by creating a more efficient two-step application process. The City has already made improvements towards expediting the development process for housing in the City by developing objective standards. Additionally, in conformance with Government Code Section 65940.1 (SB 1483), the City has all schedule of fees, application forms, Zoning Ordinance/Municipal Code, and other relevant information publicly accessible on the City’s website. The City will continue to find ways to make the development process more efficient to uphold SB 330, by further streamlining the permit process and directly coordinating with developers to ensure a timely application and development process. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Identify opportunities to implement changes to reduce administrative burdens during permitting, such as automating processes, creating reference guides, and streamlining review processes. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: The City recently received a building permit audit with recommendations to improve application processing and streamlining; most of these improvements are anticipated to be completed by December 2024. Staff is exploring other document management and project tracking solutions, including software based solutions to ensure projects are being processed in a timely manner. B. Formalize a procedure to offer no-cost pre-application consultation services for new housing developments. Time Frame: Complete by January 31, 2023 Qualified Objective: Provide a no-cost pre-consultation meeting for up to 90 minutes for any multi-family housing project. C. For housing projects subject to the City’s Architectural Review Board, limit the number of hearings before the ARB to a maximum of two meetings. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024 Qualified Objective: Amend the zoning code to limit multi-family housing projects to two hearings before the City’s ARB unless additional review is agreed upon by the home builder and City; document the City’s performance. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 4 Policy: 4.2 5.b Packet Pg. 282 Program 4.1: Replacement Housing Development on nonvacant sites with existing residential units is subject to a replacement requirement pursuant to Government Code Section 65583. The City will amend its code to require the replacement of units affordable to the same or lower income level as a condition of approval for any development on a nonvacant RHNA site consistent with those requirements set forth in California Density Bonus Law. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Amend the City’s municipal code to require housing opportunity sites identified as meeting the lower income regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) allocation, and other applicable sites with existing affordable units, to require a one for one replacement of deed restricted units or units occupied by lower income tenants, when redeveloped. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2024. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code to achieve objective. B. Expand the SB330 requirements to require any commercial development to replace any demolished residential units as a part of any redevelopment. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2025. Qualified Objective: Amend the municipal code to achieve objective. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 1, 3 Policies: 1.2, 1.4, 3.3 Program 4.2: Housing and Neighborhood Preservation The City is committed to preserving its existing housing stock (or replace in kind) and neighborhoods. All residents deserve to live in safe and hazard free housing. Preserving the City’s neighborhoods helps sustain the City’s high quality of life. Preservation of its housing and neighborhoods is a continued priority for the City. Time Frame: Ongoing Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Annually communicate with renters through direct mailing to multi-family apartment buildings and through the City’s website, resources available to renters, including expectations for housing quality and steps to take for suspected substandard housing conditions. Programs that conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable- housing stock: 5.b Packet Pg. 283 Time Frame: Initiate in 2025 and annually thereafter. Qualified Objective: Prepare relevant information and post online, explore best outreach approaches to communicate with renters. B. In response to any complaint about substandard housing received by the City’s Code Enforcement Program, staff will provide information to the resident or homeowner about the City’s Rehabilitation Program. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Staff will respond to any complaints received, provide access to relevant information and when necessary, connect the complainant with mediation services offered by the City through contract provider. C. The City will conduct increased outreach to increase awareness of housing resources, fair housing workshops, and tenant protection. Specifically, the City will conduct at least one fair housing workshop annually for community-based organizations that serve residents and housing providers in areas of the City with the highest number of substandard housing complaints to Code Enforcement. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually, with first workshop to occur by December 2024. Quantified Objective: Disseminate information to the public to increase the awareness of support for home rehabilitation with the goal of reaching at least 5 new households annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1, 6 Policies: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 6.2 Program 4.3: Home Rehabilitation Program The City is committed to maintaining quality housing conditions throughout the City. The City will continue to implement the Residential Rehabilitation Program through the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which offers financial assistance through grants and identifies new funding opportunities for loans to qualified lower- and moderate-income households to repair and maintain their homes. Time Frame: Ongoing Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Implementing Objectives: A. Annually dedicate CDBG funds as available to support the City’s Rehabilitation Program; seek additional funding to supplement CDBG funding. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually. 5.b Packet Pg. 284 Qualified Objective: Participate and remain in good standing with the CDBG program; distribute funds in accordance with fund guidelines and requirements. B. [NOTE: merged with above implementation objective]. Seek additional funding sources to supplement CBDG funding. C. The City will conduct increased outreach to increase awareness of CDBG funds and availability of said funds. The City will conduct one fair housing workshop annually to disseminate information regarding program requirements and availability of funds. The City will also update their website annually with information on the program. Time Frame: Ongoing and annually, with first workshop to occur by December 2024. Qualified Objective: Disseminate information to the public to increase the use of available CDBG funds with the goal of reaching at least 5 new households annually. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1, 6 Policies: 1.1, 1.3, 6.2 Program 4.4: Seismic Retrofit Palo Alto was among the first jurisdictions to enact progressive seismic upgrade legislation and successfully established a program that required structure assessment reports and incentives to encourage seismic retrofits. Much more is known today about the effect earthquakes have on different building typologies and engineering solutions to make buildings safer. An analysis of the City’s housing stock finds there are multi-family housing units located in soft-story buildings that are vulnerable to a seismic event. In addition to addressing the safety concerns associated with seismically vulnerable buildings, structurally enhancing these buildings will reduce the potential for displacement and serve to make the City’s housing stock more resilient. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Amend the City’s seismic hazards identification program to strengthen regulations and require seismic upgrades of vulnerable housing stock through a combination mandatory provisions and voluntary incentives. Time Frame: Initiate effort in 2023, complete by 2026. Qualified Objective: Amend the City’s seismic regulations to advance implementation objective. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policy: 1.1 5.b Packet Pg. 285 Program 5.1: Preservation of At-Risk Housing The City will continue to support the preservation of affordable housing projects that could potentially convert to market-rate units during the planning period. The City will monitor all units and assist property owners in maintaining the affordability of these units and provide relocation resources to tenants if preservation is unsuccessful. Time Frame: Ongoing Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund / HOME Investment Partnership Program Implementing Objectives: A. Twice during the planning period (2024 & 2028), pProvide direct notification to property owners and tenants of lower- and moderate-income deed restricted housing units of the state requirement to notify affected households about the termination of the affordability restrictions at six and twelve months, and three years. Time Frame: Twice during the reporting period, once in 2024 and again in 2028. Qualified Objective: Mail requirements to qualifying property owners as specified. B. Engage the property owner of 4230 Terman Drive (Terman Apartments) with 72 affordable housing units at risk of conversion to market rate units during the housing cycle to explore opportunities for continued affordability. Time Frame: Initiate conversation in 2024. Qualified Objective: Hold meetings with property owner to explore opportunities to ensure the continued affordability of the rental units; implement additional protections, such as financial incentives, as able. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policies: 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 Program 5.2: Funding Partnerships Preserve and protect affordable, middle-income and at-risk housing through site acquisition or partnership opportunities, such as the California Community Housing Agency (CalCHA) or similar programs or agencies. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund / HOME Investment Partnership Program Implementing Objectives: A. Review CalCHA partnership requirements and present an option to decision- makers for inclusion to the program; identify existing housing sites meeting Programs that preserve assisted housing developments at-risk of conversion to market-rate: 5.b Packet Pg. 286 criteria for preservation, prepare and adopt necessary resolutions or agreements to operationalize program. Time Frame: Make decision to engage with CalCHA (or similar programs) by June 2025. B. Continue seeking funding sources, especially for extremely low income housing, including supporting the ongoing development of the Bay Area Housing Financing Authority (BAHFA). Time Frame: Annually and ongoing. Qualified Objective: Support the BAHFA to provide services to 50 extremely low-income households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 1 Policy: 1.3 [NOTE: Program 6.1 deleted; implementing objective A relocated to new Program 6.8]. Program 6.1: Housing Information Portal Provide information on the City’s website that clearly identifies the City’s housing production goals and performance tracking; application processing requirements and target review times; developer incentives; inclusionary requirements; supplemental information such as checklists, flowcharts, and other relevant material; access to housing resources and an affordable housing database for individuals seeking opportunities in Palo Alto; and, contact information to obtain additional information. Time Frame: December 31, 2023 Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Create a website that provides relevant housing application and processing information to the home building community. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 4 Policy: 4.5 [NOTE: This program was moved in its entirety to Program 1.5] Program 6.2: ADU Facilitation Program This program aims to annually monitor provisions made to ADU legislation and amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance as necessary to ensure compliance with State law. Furthermore, the City is committed to reducing barriers to alternative types of housing such as ADUs. Programs that promote equal housing opportunities, regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or ability: 5.b Packet Pg. 287 In recent years, multiple bills have added requirements for local governments related to ADU ordinances. The 2016 and 2017 updates to State law included changes pertaining to the allowed size of ADUs, permitting ADUs by right in at least some areas of a jurisdiction, and parking requirements related to ADUs. More recent bills reduce the time to review and approve ADU applications to 60 days, remove lot size requirements and replacement parking space requirements and require local jurisdictions to permit junior ADUs. AB 68 allows an ADU and a junior ADU to be built on a single-family lot, if certain conditions are met. The State has also removed owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs, created a tiered fee structure that charges ADUs based on their size and location, prohibited fees on units of less than 750 square feet, and permitted ADUs at existing multi-family developments. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Respond in a timely manner to update the City’s municipal code to integrate changes in State ADU housing law. B. Maintain and update a City Summary Guide to ADUs and JADU’s to promote, educate, and assist homeowners with developing ADUs. C. Continue to monitor and publish information related to ADU production and application review timelines. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 4 Policies: 2.3, 4.3 Program 6.31: Housing For Persons With Special Needs The City’s municipal code is periodically updated to address a wide range of issues and California and Federal law. The City will continue to monitor its policies, standards, and regulations to ensure that they comply with applicable law. The City will also facilitate the development of housing for persons with disabilities and other special needs through incentives for affordable housing development. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund, CBDG Implementing Objectives: A. For extremely low income housing units, update the City’s affordable housing guidelines to establish preferences for populations with special needs. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2024. B. On an ongoing basis, with annual review, cContract with and financially support non-profit services providers such as the Opportunity Center, that help meet the supportive services needs of the City’s diverse community, especially those with extremely low incomes. 5.b Packet Pg. 288 Time Frame: Ongoing and annually as funds are available. Qualified Objective: Support the Opportunity Center with the goal of providing services to 50 low-income households during the planning period. C. In order to assist in the housing needs for special needs populations, the City will: • Engage with housing stakeholders and housing providers, on the identification of needs and new solutions, • Encourage housing developers, through the City’s BMR requirements, to designate a portion of new affordable housing units for special needs populations, and • Partner with the County and other agencies to pursue funding sources designated for housing for special needs groups, including seniors and persons with intellectual and physical disabilities. Time Frame: Starting in 2023 and annually thereafter. Qualified Objective: Meet annually with housing service providers and the Santa Clara County representatives to identify opportunities to further support special needs populations. D. Work with Stanford and other higher education institutions to require that student, faculty, and staff housing be proactively addressed in master plans. Time Frame: Starting in 2023 and annually thereafter. Quantified Objective: Meet annually with housing service providers and the Santa Clara County representatives to identify opportunities to further support special needs populations. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.56.3 Program 6.42: Multi-Family Housing and Large Family Household Units Certain groups have greater difficulty finding decent, affordable housing due to special circumstances. Due to the high cost of housing and scarcity of land, housing units large enough to accommodate large families households are limited. Large households are defined as 5 or more persons living in the household. The City considers large families households as a vulnerable population within the City and is committed to exploring additional opportunities for multi-family housing developments. Furthermore, the City will continue to advocate and promote the production of housing units of all to accommodate all persons and family sizes. Large family household units have three or more bedroom units. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Explore incentives to encourage larger units, such as FAR exemptions for three or more bedroom units. 5.b Packet Pg. 289 B. Promote and encourage a mix of different bedroom units in each development. C. The City shall encourage housing designs that meet the needs of extended, multigenerational, and/or large families. Time Frame: Initiate in 2027 and conclude before December 31, 2029. Qualified Objective: Meet with housing stakeholders and conduct public hearings before the Planning and Transportation Commission to receive public and commissioner input on ways to achieve stated objective. Make recommendations to Council and follow up with an ordinance to effect a change in local zoning regulations as directed. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goals: 2, 5, 6 Policy: 2.3, 5.1, 6.3 Program 3.46.3: Mixed-Use Development Mixed-use projects are a more efficient use of land and can make housing development more profitable and therefore more likely to be constructed and are appropriate in certain areas. Mixed-use development downtown or near high quality transit and rail service can enhance the local economy and support small businesses. In addition, the City is cognizant of its jobs/housing balance and will continue to focus on proactive solutions that better align housing needs generated by new job growth and strive to reduce its existing jobs/housing imbalance. Palo Alto will consider and implement development standards that incentivize greater housing production and temper the strong market demand for commercial development. Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Continue to focus on proactive land use policies, such as commercial office growth restrictions to promote an improved jobs to housing balance. Time Frame: Ongoing B. At strategic locations, aAmend the City’s municipal code to reduce commercial floor area allowances or other commercial incentives at strategic locations to shift the economic benefit of redevelopment toward home building. Time Frame: December 31, 2025 C. Review the City’s Workforce Housing Overlay regulations and consider amendments to better align the target housing population (120%+ to 140% AMI) with a housing typology that provides clear reduced rents compared to market rate rents for a comparable unit. Engage with organizations, research case studies and identify successful tools used to facilitate missing middle housing opportunities; report findings to the City Council and implement through text amendments or policy changes, regulations to promote workforce housing opportunities. 5.b Packet Pg. 290 Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2026 D. Examine extending the University Ave In-Lieu Parking program for residential projects and consider an in-lieu parking program for the California Avenue area. Discuss with home builders and other stakeholders the feasibility of marketing different housing typologies without on-site parking (paid through in-lieu fee) and implications to City parking resources; present findings to the City Council with options on how to proceed. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 3, 6 Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 6.3 Program 6.54: Homelessness Program Santa Clara County adopted the Santa Clara Community Plan to End Homelessness, which is designed to address homelessness throughout Santa Clara County as a whole. The City’s Homeless Prevention Program was created as a result of the County’s Community Plan to End Homelessness. The Program is for Palo Alto households who are at risk of becoming homeless as defined by HUD and focuses on self-sufficiency and stabilization. And for those experiencing homelessness and waiting for more permanent housing, provide services that offer immediate support. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Expand geographic and service areas of the City’s Safe Parking Program. Geographically, cConsider using City park parking lots for the program. Expand program services to include case management and explore opportunities to provide supervised access to City facilities, such as the Cubberley Community Center facility locker rooms. Time Frame: Initiate by 2026, complete by December 2028. B. Create a social services directory and make it available to residents at public counters and on City website. Time Frame: Complete by June 2023. Expand the City’s homeless prevention program to include renter protections and financial assistance for rent, security deposits, and utilities. Identify funding sources to support households at risk of homelessness; engage with homelessness stakeholders, conduct hearings before the Planning and Transportation and City Council and make recommendations to support objective; implement based on available funding. Time Frame: Initiate in 2026 and complete by June 2028. 5.b Packet Pg. 291 C. [NOTE: This implementing objective was moved from Program 6.6 A]. Continue to pursue the Homekey (LATP) site for use as a temporary bridge housing facility to provide accommodations for individuals who are actively engaged in services leading to permanent housing. Engage with stakeholders, including the State Department of Housing and Community Development, LifeMoves, Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing, and the Santa Clara County Housing Authority to advance the project and to provide transitional housing and support services for 88 households. Time Frame: Complete by June 30, 2024. D. [NOTE: This implementing objective was moved from Program 6.6 B].Explore additional opportunities for Homekey funding or other similar funding sources to convert hotels to permanent or interim housing for persons experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. Work with stakeholders to identify additional funding opportunities and locations to support homelessness population and those at risk of homelessness. Time Frame: Ongoing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6, 6.3 [NOTE: This program is recommended for deletion in part because the referenced assembly bill sunsets after 2026 – the implementing objectives are retained and merged with Program 6.4]. Program 6.6: Transitional and Supportive Housing Transitional and Supportive Housing: Assembly Bill 2162 (AB 2162), which was passed in 2018, requires that supportive housing be a use by right in zones where multi-family and mixed-use are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses. Additionally, AB 2162 prohibits local governments from imposing any minimum parking requirements for units occupied by supportive housing residents if the development is located within ½ mile of a public transit stop. The City will amend its Zoning Ordinance to comply with the latest provisions under AB 2162 and will continue to seek new supportive housing opportunities through further analysis of the residential site inventory. The City is committed to expanding both supportive and transitional housing opportunities for vulnerable communities that rely on such services and will prioritize these housing developments near transit centers to provide easier access to City services for supportive and transitional housing residents. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objective: A. Continue to pursue the Homekey (LATP) site for use as a temporary bridge housing facility to provide accommodations for individuals who are actively engaged in services leading to permanent housing. 5.b Packet Pg. 292 B. Explore additional opportunities for Homekey funding or other similar funding sources to convert hotels to permanent or interim housing for persons experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5 Policies: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6 Program 6.7: Alternative Housing Under this program, the City will continue to support alternative types of housing, such as large household multifamily units, single-room occupancy units, and managed living units or “micro- units,” to accommodate extremely-low-income households. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Coordinate with HIP Housing or similar house sharing services to provide shared housing arrangements. Identify opportunities to extend home sharing services to Palo Alto and promote on the City’s website as appropriate. Time Frame: Initiate conversations in 2024. B. Encourage innovative housing structures, such as micro-unit housing and new shared and intergenerational housing models to help meet the housing needs of aging adults, students, and lower-income individuals citywide. Meet with housing stakeholders and conduct public hearings before the Planning and Transportation Commission to receive public and commissioner input on ways to achieve stated objective. Make recommendations to Council and follow up with an ordinance to effect a change in local zoning regulations as directed. Time Frame: Initiate in 2027 and conclude before December 31, 2029. C. Review and amend the Zoning Ordinance to addressreview and amend State legislation pertaining to the definitions and allowances of uses for the definition of family, Employee Housing, Residential care facilities, Group Homes and/or Boardinghouses to review regulations to be consistent with California Law for six or more residents. D. [NOTE: This implementing objective moved from Program 3.3 A]. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address AB 101 (Low Barrier Navigation Centers "by right"), AB 139 (emergency shelter requirements), AB 2162 (Supportive and Transitional Housing "by right") and Health and Safety Code 17021.8 (Farmworker Housing) requirements, as well as the Employee Housing Act (H&S Section 17021.5) and residential care facilities for seven or more persons. Time Frame: Complete by December 31, 2025. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 5, 6 Policies: 2.3, 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 6.3 5.b Packet Pg. 293 [NOTE: Programs 6.8, 6.9 and 6.11, and the corresponding implementing objectives were merged into one program (6.8) as they all relate to the same topic]. Program 6.8: Fair Housing Services The City of Palo Alto is committed to providing equitable opportunities to all residents of Palo Alto in order to expand access to housing and increase housing mobility. To achieve fair housing goals, the City will continue to partner and support Project Sentinel who provides a variety of fair housing services including but not limited to: tenant/landlord services, including mediation, information, investigation, counseling, and referral services. The City will take actions to overcome patterns of segregation, address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity, and foster inclusive communities. The action items listed below will assist the City in reducing barriers to housing, including but not limited to racial inequities, high housing costs, and public awareness of existing resources. AB 686 (2017) requires each city to administer its programs and activities related to housing in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. Palo Alto will take actions to overcome patterns of segregation, address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity, and foster inclusive communities. To address the requirements of AB 686, the City participates in the 2020- 2025 Santa Clara County Consolidated Plan (ConPlan). The County’s ConPlan identifies eight housing goals for the County and each of its participating jurisdictions including Palo Alto. Additionally, the ConPlan identifies regional and local barriers to fair housing around the region, with heavy emphasis on racial and economic disparity, land use and zoning, and lack of assistance and resources. Programs were identified to reduce barriers in the City including adjusting zoning amendments to expand affordable and alternative housing opportunities and increasing accessibility to information. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: Fair Housing Services A. Distribute educational materials to property owners, apartment managers, and tenants relative to fair housing requirements, regulations, and services via the City’s website, social media, community announcements and similar forums. Time Frame: Initiate by May 31, 2024 and update annually thereafter. B. On an ongoing basis, continue to pProvide multi-lingual fair housing information to the public regularly as needed via the public counters, message boards, City website, neighborhood watch, and in response to telephone inquiries. 5.b Packet Pg. 294 Time Frame: Ongoing, update material and information annually. C. Partner with Continue to provide referral to Project Sentinel to conduct random testing at least once per year during the planning period. Refer individuals to, State Fair Employment and Housing, HUD Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity division, and other legal services as appropriate. Time Frame: Ongoing. D. Allocate annual funding for fair housing services through the Action Plan process for the use of CDBG funds. Time Frame: Annually as part of the CBDG update. E. Work with Project Sentinel and renter organizations to conduct an annual workshop to educate tenants and landlords about fair housing requirements. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Aim to reduce fair housing complaints by educating approximately 20 tenants and landlords annually. Fair Housing Impediments F. Encourage mixed-income developments accessible to lower income residents citywide, especially in high opportunity and resource-rich areas through use of the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, Housing Trust Funds, development of city-owned properties, and use of grant funding for housing. Time Frame: Ongoing Quantified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, and 896 units for low-income households during the planning period. Tenant Protections G. Institute Tenant Protections to prevent anti-displacement including the following: relocation assistance; eviction reduction program; rental survey program; security deposit limit; fair chance ordinance; right to counsel. Time Frame: Begin implementation in December 2023. Quantified Objective: Aim to reduce fair housing complaints by educating approximately 20 tenants and landlords annually. H. Require a 90-day notice for a rent increase of 6% instead of the State’s 10% threshold for noticing. Time Frame: Begin implementation in December 2023. I. Promote Housing Choice Vouchers to support housing mobility by educating landlords about income discrimination (i.e. Cannot post “NO Section 8” on applications) Time Frame: Ongoing Quantified Objective: Assist 200 households annually or the number of vouchers allocated under the housing choice voucher program, including project-based vouchers. 5.b Packet Pg. 295 Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 [NOTE: Programs 6.8, 6.9 and 6.11, and the corresponding implementing objectives were merged into one program (6.8) as they all relate to the same topic]. Program 6.9: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing To address the requirements of AB 686, the City participates in the 2020-2025 Santa Clara County Consolidated Plan (ConPlan). The County’s ConPlan identifies eight housing goals for the County and each of its participating jurisdictions including Palo Alto. Additionally, the ConPlan identifies regional and local barriers to fair housing around the region, with heavy emphasis on racial and economic disparity, land use and zoning, and lack of assistance and resources. Methodologies were identified to reduce barriers in the City including adjusting zoning amendments to expand affordable and alternative housing opportunities and increasing accessibility to information. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Reduce barriers to housing, including but not limited to racial inequities, high housing costs, and public awareness of existing resources through use of the city’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Housing Trust Funds, development of city-owned properties, and use of grant funding for housing. B. Promote Housing Choice Vouchers to support housing mobility by educating landlords about income discrimination (i.e. Cannot post “NO Section 8” on applications) C. Institute Tenant Protections to prevent anti-displacement including the following: relocation assistance; eviction reduction program; rental survey program; security deposit limit; fair chance ordinance; right to counsel. D. Require a 90-day notice for a rent increase of 6% instead of the State’s 10% threshold for noticing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 Program 6.11: Fair Housing Program AB 686 (2017) requires each city to administer its programs and activities related to housing in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. Palo Alto will take actions to overcome patterns of segregation, address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity, and foster inclusive communities. 5.b Packet Pg. 296 Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Encourage mixed-income developments accessible to lower income residents citywide, especially in high opportunity and resource-rich areas through use of the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, Housing Trust Funds, development of city-owned properties, and use of grant funding for housing. B. Reduce barriers to housing, including but not limited to racial inequities, high housing costs, and public awareness of existing resources through use of the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, Housing Trust Funds, development of city-owned properties, and use of grant funding for housing. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 Program 6.129: Community Outreach Program Community outreach is a key component to developing a comprehensive and inclusive housing market in the city. It is critical to engage local community groups and stakeholders from all sectors of the community in order to educate and provide inclusive housing opportunities. The goal of this program is to provide underrepresented community groups, which are affected by restrictions to fair and equitable housing, greater opportunities for becoming informed and engaged in the City’s housing and overall planning process. Time Frame: PENDING Responsible Agency: Planning and Development Services Funding Sources(s): General Fund Implementing Objectives: A. Partner with Human Services for community outreach with a focus on traditionally underrepresented groups. Meet with Human Services representatives bi-annually to formulate strategies aimed at engaging the City’s most vulnerable populations. Time Frame: Bi-annually; initiate first meeting by January 2024. Qualified Objective: Reach at least 20 households annually through work with Human Services. B. The City shall continue to facilitate opportunities for all residents and stakeholders to provide meaningful and effective input on proposed planning activities early on and continuously throughout plan development and the public review process. Outreach efforts to disadvantaged communities, and engagement materials in multiple languages will be a priority. Time Frame: Ongoing. Qualified Objective: Increase public participation rates amongst City’s underrepresented groups by at least 20% by the end of the planning period. 5.b Packet Pg. 297 C. [NOTE: Moved from Program 6.1]. Create a website that provides relevant housing application and processing information to the home building community. Time Frame: Complete by January 15, 2024 and update annually. Qualified Objective: Support the development of 1,556 units for very-low income, 896 units for low income, 1,013 units for moderate income, and 2,621 above-moderate households during the planning period. Primary Associated Goals and Policies: Goal: 6 Policies: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 5.b Packet Pg. 298 Middlefield Road Cowper Street Waverley Street Alma Street El C a m in o R e al Louis Road H y 101 S outh Ross Road H y 101 N orth Webster Street Bryant Street Channing Avenue Page Mill Road East Bayshore R oad Sand Hill Road Hamilton Avenue Oregon Expressway Lincoln Avenue San Antonio Road University Avenue Newell Road Seale Avenue South Court High Street C h arle sto n R oa d Park Boulevard E ast M ea d o w D riv e Stanford Avenue W est B ayshore R oad C olora d o A v e n ue Hanover Street Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway A l e x is D r i v e Fabian Way Homer Avenue Greer Road Ramona Street Arastradero Road Edgewood Drive L o m a V erde A venue Everett Avenue Churchill Avenue Matadero Avenue Lowell Avenue Center Drive Tennyson Avenue Los Robles Avenue California Avenue Barron Avenue H i l l v i e w A v e n u e P alo A lt o A v e n u e Welch Road Kingsley Avenue Maybell Avenue Hansen Way Wilkie Way Coleridge Avenue Byron Street E ly P la c e Manuela Avenue Oregon Avenue A marillo Avenue Marion Avenue North California Avenue Emerson Street Pitman Avenue Laguna Avenue Grove Avenue Ferne Avenue Nelson Drive Porter Drive Castilleja Avenue Chimalus Drive Hale Street College Avenue Amherst Street Seneca Street Lane 66 Bowdoin Street Stockton Place Harker Avenue Deer Creek Road E m barcadero Road Ames Avenue El Dorado Avenue La Para Avenue Clark W ay Grant Avenue Birch Street Hawthorne Avenue Harriet Street C o yot e H il l R o a d Columbia Street Clara Drive G e o rg ia Av e n u e Rhodes Drive San Antonio Avenue Cambridge Avenue El Verano Avenue Olive Avenue La Donna Street Laurel Glen Drive E l C a m i n o W a y Parkinson Avenue Kipling Street Kellogg Avenue Pasteur Drive Heather Lane A lg er D riv e Florales Drive Oxford Avenue Forest Avenue 101 O regon-E m barca dero R a m p N orth Greenwood Avenue Monroe Drive Cornell Street Sherman Avenue Boyce Avenue Amaranta Avenue Oberlin Street West Charleston Road Donald Drive Urban Lane Harvard Street Hopkins Avenue Wilton Avenue Dana Avenue Sutherland Drive Fife Avenue Iris Way Fulton Street Lambert Avenue Vineyard Lane Marshall Drive Josina Avenue 101 O regon-E m barcadero R a m p South Williams Street David Avenue (none) Old Ad obe Ro ad El Carmelo Avenue G e n g R o a d Orme Street Montros e Avenue Parkside Drive Princeton Street Walnut Drive Maddux Drive Sheridan Avenue Curtner Avenue Jacaranda Lane Wildwood Lane Elsinore Drive M orris Drive Mariposa Avenue Fernando Avenue Stanley Way Miller Avenue Leland Avenue Moreno Avenue Barbara Drive Creekside Drive Sutter Avenue Margarita Avenue Edlee Avenue Ventura Avenue Arbutus Avenue Chaucer Street Shopping Center Way Embarcadero Way Nathan Way Walter Hays Drive Jackson Drive Willmar Drive Kenneth Drive Carolina Lane Martin Avenue Patricia Lane W hitclem Drive Cereza Drive Paul Avenue Transport Street Guinda Street Towle Way O ld T rac e R oa d Tennessee Lane Orinda Street Ilima Way Santa Ana Street Encina Grande Drive Commercial Street Briarw ood W ay Bru c e D rive L o s P alo s A v e n u e Lane 21 F a b er Plac e Ruthven Avenue M ira m o nte A ven ue Lois Lane West Meadow Drive G aile n A v e n u e Laguna Way Whitsell Street Northampton Drive Southampton Drive Scripps Avenue Pomona Avenue Janice Way B i b b its D ri v e M adrono A venue Warren Way Yale Street Evergreen Drive Stelling Drive Rorke Way Ivy Lane New Mayfield Lane A shton A venue Military Way M c K ellar L a n e Robb Road Jefferson Drive Arboretum Road Dake Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Addison Avenue Saint Claire Drive Las Trampas Valley Road Rinconada Avenue Second Street M osher W ay E n c i n a A v e n u e S e m i n o le W a y Alester Avenue Silva AvenueKelly W a y Indian Drive Quarry Road Glenbrook Drive Manuela Court Garland Drive Hubbartt Drive Christine Drive Lane 39 Kings Lane B ryso n A v e n ue Talisman Drive Bandera D r ive Campana Drive Oak Hill Avenue Fabian Street Vista Hill Road Murdoch Drive Deodar Street Terman Drive Nevada Avenue Madison Way S e q u oia A v e n u e South w ood Drive Industrial Avenue Crescent Drive Colonial Lane East M eado w CircleRichardson Court Lane 33 James Road Vista Avenue Lupine Avenue Campesino Avenue H ilbar Lane Park Avenue Poe Street S u za n n e D riv e La Calle Cypress Lane (Private) Chestnut Avenue Oak Creek Drive R o b l e R i d g e ( P r i v a t e ) Kendall Avenue Mumford Place S y c a m ore D riv e Thain Way Vernon Terrace Celia Drive Washington Avenue Dennis Drive R o o s evelt Ci rc le Solana Drive Manzana Lane O rt eg a C o u r t Ash Street De Soto Drive Rambow Drive Portage Avenue Bryant Court R uthelma Avenue Elwell Court Torreya Court Paradise Way Cork Oak Way Manuela Way Carlson Circle Clemo Avenue Coastland Drive Wellsbury Way Fairmede Avenue Stern Avenue Mitchell Lane Fallen Leaf Street Everett Court Maclane Pepper Avenue Community Lane Verdosa Drive T ho m as Drive Abel Avenue W e l l s A v e n u e Fielding Drive T u li p L a n e Lane 7 East Acacia Avenue Ross Court M a c k a y D ri v e B erryessa Street Ilima Court Tasso Street Mesa Avenue Stone Lane Lane B East Coulombe Drive Lytton Avenue Lane D East Lane 8 West M esa C o urt Lane 7 West M ir a n d a G r e e n D urand W ay Mark Twain Street Lane A West El Cerrito Road Maple Street W hitman Court Lane B West L a u r a L a n e Dinah's Court Lane D West Gaspar Court Primrose Way Tanland Drive Lane 59 East Irven Court Agnes Way S w ain W ay Baker Avenue M orto n Street May Court Driftwood Drive Melville Avenue Silva Court Pear Lane Greenmeadow Way C o r i n a W a y Palm Street Lane 30 Blair Court C esano C ourt Gilman Street Paloma Drive (Private) Wellesley Street T horn w ood D rive Country Club Court Holly Oak Drive C errito W ay El Cajon Way Wright Place Pistache Place W e st C r e s c e n t D ri v e D u nc a n Pla ce Moana Court Elbridge Way Sandra Place M c G r e g o r W a y Miller Court Florence Street Peral Lane Ben Lomond Drive Shasta Drive E n sig n W a y Dartmouth Street Bret Harte Street Erstwild Court Cass Way Arcadia Place Varian W ay Saint Francis Drive Ramos Way (Private) Layne Court Flowers Lane Timlott Lane Drake Way L i n d e r o D r i v e Sim kins Court Wintergreen W ay Marlowe Street Shauna Lane Lane 5 East Dixon Place C orporation W ay Maybell Way Altaire Walk Sedro Lane Midtown Court Sierra C o urt Avalon Court Lane 12 West C o w per Court Chabot Terrace Ashby Drive El C a pita n P la c e none Keats Court M aureen A venue Talisman Court La Mata Way Staunton Court Blake Wilbur Drive Scott Street Higgins Place Aztec Way Ellsworth Place (Private) Plum Lane L a w rence L a n e Federation Way Sharon Court R yan Lane (Private) Ju nip er L a n e ( P riv ate) Randers Court Mackall Way Centennial Walk Paulsen Lane Manchester Court Rosewood Drive Bautista Court Magnolia Drive South Cherry Oaks Place Ynigo Way A d o b e P l a c e London Plane Way Anton Court San Carlos Court (Private) Pratt Lane (Private) Amherst Way L undy Lane Allen Court Louisa Court W a t s o n C o u r t East Greenwich Place Bellview Drive Kent Place Villa Vera (Private) Saint Michael Court Pena Court Columbia Place Tevis Place N e l s o n C o u rt La Jennifer Way Island Drive Davenport Way Leghorn Street Hamilton Court Newell Place Piers Court Regent Place Gary Court Driscoll Place (Private) Elmdale Place C h arle st o n C o u rt Green Manor Forest Court Old Page Mill Road Lane 56 (Private) Frandon Court Nogal Lane B oron d a L a ne Somerset Place Wallis Court Barclay Court Fairfield Court David Court Ferne Court Dymond Court (Private) Fulton Street W ilkie W a y Sheridan Avenue Kellogg Avenue Saint Francis Drive Santa Rita Avenue South Court Byron Street M ira n d a A v e n u e Community Lane Kipling Street (none) Ramona Street College Avenue Fulton Street Quarry Road Tasso Street North California Avenue San Antonio Road Page Mill Road Dartmouth Street Ash Street Byron Street Emerson Street Ash Street C olorad o A ve n u e Wellesley Street Oregon Avenue Guinda Street High Street F o o t h ill E x p r e s s w a y Bryant Street S utter A ve n u e A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d Dana Avenue Page Mill Road Santa Rita Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Ramona Street Washington Avenue Moreno Avenue Moreno Avenue H y 1 0 1 N o rth Ramona Street Kingsley Avenue Tasso Street Emerson Street South Court Melville Avenue Tasso Street Byron Street Tasso Street Byron Street Addison Avenue Hamilton Avenue Park Boulevard Georgia Avenue Webster Street Emerson Street Park Boulevard West Bayshore Road Oregon Avenue Kipling Street Syca m ore D riv e Ramona Street Fulton Street Byron Street Emerson Street High Street Lytton Avenue Stanford Los Altos Los Altos Hills Stanford University Menlo Park East Palo Alto Atherton Mountain View Portola Valley Redwood City This map is a product of City of Palo Alto GIS [ 0 0.45 0.90.225 Miles Housing Element Sites & Housing Incentive Program Parcels Legend Housing Incentive Program Parcels - Existing Housing Incentive Program Parcels - Proposed Housing Inventory Sites 8/11/2022 R-1 Zoning Rev: August 11, 2022 5.c Packet Pg. 299 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14617) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Information Reports City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Contracts Awarded by the City Manager and Chief Procurement Officer From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation This is an information report, no action is required. Discussion Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 2.30.710 requires the City Manager to provide a biannual report to Council consisting of contracts awarded by the City Manager, Procurement Officer or other designated employees for: 1) Goods contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year (Attachment A), and 2) Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year (Attachment B). The contracts in Attachment A consist of nine (9) distinct awards for goods, and the contracts in Attachment B consist of 81 distinct awards for a wide range of services. These awards are a core element of the efficient and effective provision of services by the City to our community and reflect extensive coordination and prudent decision-making among operating departments, the Administrative Services Department, the City Attorney's Office, and City Clerk's Office. For informational purposes, Attachment C provides excerpts from the PAMC that set forth the authority designated by Council to the Procurement Officer to award and sign contracts (PAMC 2.30.200), City Manager to award and sign contracts (PAMC 2.30.210 ), and exemptions from competitive solicitation (PAMC 2.30.360 and 2.30.900), as noted for certain contracts listed in Attachments A and B. . Attachments: • Attachment6.a: Attachment A: Goods Contracts Awarded $85,000 through $250,000 per year • Attachment6.b: Attachment B: Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year • Attachment6.c: Attachment C: Excerpts from the Palo Alto Municipal Code 6 Packet Pg. 300 Contract Award To Award Date Award Amount Bidding Exemption or Number of Bids Sent/Received Description ANIXTER INC 06/06/2022 $105,956.02 428/4 69kV Air Switches 1200 amp switches COMPUDIRECT 3000 INC 06/08/2022 $98,539.88 2.30.360 (j)Portege X30L‐K Notebooks DOBLE ENGINEERING COMPANY 06/22/2022 $86,601.60 2.30.360(d)MTS‐5100 Relay Tester FIRE TRAINING STRUCTURES LLC 02/03/2022 $94,724.61 2.30.360(b2)Training Trailer for Fire department JOHN DEERE COMPANY 02/09/2022 $96,680.78 2.30.360 (j)John Deere Utility Tractor NATIONAL AUTO FLEET GROUP 04/18/2022 $97,840.46 2.30.360(j)2022 Ford Interceptor for Police R&B COMPANY 04/20/2022 $93,300.00 2.30.360(d)Pipes, Valves & Fittings STRYKER SALES LLC 01/13/2022 $167,914.55 23/3 LIFEPAK CR2 AEDs TURF STAR INC 03/03/2022 $119,352.35 2.30.360(j)Toro Turf Mower ATTACHMENT A Goods Contracts Awarded $85,000 through $250,000 per year January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022 Page 1 of 1 6.a Packet Pg. 301 Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount Bidding Exemption or Number of Bids Sent/Received Description 3‐GIS LLC 06/27/2022 $58,357.40 763/1 Fiber Management Software‐RFP ADVANCE DESIGN CONSULTANTS INC 05/16/2022 $39,325.00 2.30.360(i)Design Services BARTEL ASSOCIATES, LLC 02/10/2022 $65,000.00 2.30.360(b2)Actuarial Valuation OPEB & CalPERS BAYSPORT PREVENTIVE MEDICAL GROUP 01/21/2022 $30,905.00 2.30.360(d)MOE Physicals & EMS PPD BAYSPORT PREVENTIVE MEDICAL GROUP 01/25/2022 $31,095.00 2.30.360(d)Fire Department Physicals‐ Confirming PO BLACK & VEATCH CORPORATION 02/08/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Spill Containment Study BURNS & MCDONNELL ENGINEERING 04/20/2022 $49,500.00 2.30.360(i)Professional Risk Analysis CALIFORNIA CONSULTING INC 03/28/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Grant Writing Services CDW GOVERNMENT 05/18/2022 $37,530.00 2.30.360 (j)Armorblox: Inbound email protection software CITY OF SAN JOSE 06/23/2022 $30,000.00 2.30.360(i)Minimum Wage Ordinance Compliance Services CODE FOR FUN 05/25/2022 $36,000.00 2.30.360(a)Coding Instructor Services COLUMBIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO 05/25/2022 $28,208.25 2.30.360(h)Wireless Consultant Services; applicant mgmt process COLUMBIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO 05/25/2022 $31,342.50 2.30.360(h)Wireless Consultant Services; applicant mgmt process COMMERCIAL PUMP SERVICE INC 06/15/2022 $185,979.20 893/1 Pump Replacement COOPER PREUIT ENGINEERS INC 06/17/2022 $39,875.00 2.30.360(i)Eng. and Design Services for Cubberley Fields Restroom DASHER TECHNOLOGIES 01/05/2022 $122,129.90 2.30.360(J)HP60 2‐port array and Adapters DAVID J POWERS & ASSOCIATES IN 05/25/2022 $95,428.50 2.30.360(h)Study for 123 Sherman Ave‐ Cost Recover Contract DUKE'S ROOT CONTROL, INC.05/12/2022 $70,000.00 1235/2 Root Foaming Services ECOLOGY ACTION OF SANTA CRUZ 02/14/2022 $43,812.00 2.30.360(i)Pedestrian Safety Education EDGAR AND ASSOCIATES INC 06/28/2022 $35,000.00 2.30.360(i)Research Services EMPOWERMENT INSTITUTE 06/28/2022 $33,625.00 2.30.360(i)Community Engagement for Cool Block Program EOA, INC.06/27/2022 $49,750.00 2.30.360(i)Trash Reduction Consultant EPC SERVICES COMPANY 02/23/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Commissioning Services EPS INC.04/20/2022 $85,000.00 2/1122 Interim Sewer Lateral Replacement FLEX ADVANTAGE 06/28/2022 $40,740.00 2.30.360(i)Retiree Medical Reimbursement FLYNN RESOURCE CONSULTANTS INC 06/22/2022 $85,000.00 1471/5 Electric Power Interconnect Support FUKUJI ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNI 06/27/2022 $49,900.00 2.30.360(i)Feasibility Study for California Avenue GAIL L REEDER 05/03/2022 $38,500.00 2.30.360(i)SRTS Administrative Assistant GE DIGITAL LLC 01/10/2022 $56,069.76 2.30.900 Historianv9.1 Standard 5000 Pt GE DIGITAL LLC 01/06/2022 $27,464.33 2.30.900 iClient v6.5 Thick Runtime IT Services ATTACHMENT B Service Contracts Awarded Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022 Page 1 of 3 6.b Packet Pg. 302 Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount Bidding Exemption or Number of Bids Sent/Received Description ATTACHMENT B Service Contracts Awarded Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022 GEORGE M HILLS COMPANY INC 03/03/2022 $40,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional Legal Services GOLDER ASSOCIATES USA INC 05/02/2022 $61,893.33 1984/4 Year 1 ‐ Landfill Groundwater HANG HUYNH 04/19/2022 $25,001.00 2.30.360(i)CDBG Consultant ‐ Hang Huynh HIREVUE INC 05/03/2022 $37,000.00 2.30.360(t)Hirevue Software for video interviewing and recruitment HITACHI ENERGY USA INC 05/06/2022 $45,636.07 3/3 Purchase of Transformers HSI WORKPLACE COMPLIANCE SOLUT 03/28/2022 $28,750.00 2.30.360(d)Online Safety Training‐ Yr. 3 IVY PLANNING GROUP LLC 01/31/2022 $85,000.00 5/5 DEI Services JARVIS FAY LLP 01/27/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional Legal Services JARVIS FAY LLP 02/14/2022 $25,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional legal services JARVIS FAY LLP 04/06/2022 $60,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional Legal Services JB HUNT TRANSPORT, INC.04/20/2022 $36,000.00 3/3 Transportation or Material JEFFREY B FROKE PhD 06/21/2022 $32,230.00 2.30.360(i)Golf Course Mitigation‐Year 1 JOHNSON CONTROLS US HOLDINGS 04/08/2022 $28,866.99 2.30.360(i)Installation of 7 card readers at MSC‐C KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES 02/23/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(h)Real Estate and Financial Consulting Services ‐340 Portage KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES 05/25/2022 $32,520.00 2.30.360(h)Economic Dev. & On Call Services‐ Cost Recovery Revenue Contract LAW OFFICE OF ALAN SELTZER 06/28/2022 $25,000.00 2.30.360(i)Admin Appeals Hearing Officer LEGION CONTRACTORS INC 04/13/2022 $201,600.00 3/393 Cubberly CC Tennis Resurfacing LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 02/25/2022 $35,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional Legal Services MACIAS GINI & O'CONNELL, LLP 06/01/2022 $39,950.00 2.30360(i)Consulting Services for Assessment Review Program MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP 02/06/2022 $36,000.00 2.30.360(i)Fire Prevention Study MCCAMPBELL ANALYTICAL INC 04/26/2022 $74,000.00 641/3 Lab Analysis Services MICROSOFT CORPORATION 06/15/2022 $74,435.00 2.30.360(j)Microsoft Unified Support ‐ IT Services MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP LLC 05/03/2022 $30,139.28 2.30.360(i)CAO Evaluation Services ORACLE AMERICA, INC.03/16/2022 $34,649.33 4/3 Oracle Support Renewal OSMOSE UTILITIES SERVICES INC 04/11/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Pole Replacement Design and Estimating Services OSMOSE UTILITIES SERVICES INC 06/20/2022 $85,000.00 847/1 Wood Pole Inspection Services PAGE & TURNBULL 06/15/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Consultant for Historical Resources Reconnaissance Survey PRO‐CAL LIGHTING INC 03/09/2022 $181,445.00 1164/12 Tennis/Pickleball Courts Lighting Upgrades PRODIGIQ INC 06/23/2022 $45,000.00 772/3 Aviation Account Software PRODIGY PRESS 06/01/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Graphic Art, Print and Mailing Page 2 of 3 6.b Packet Pg. 303 Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount Bidding Exemption or Number of Bids Sent/Received Description ATTACHMENT B Service Contracts Awarded Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022 PRODIGY PRESS 03/11/2022 $25,739.77 2.30.360(i)Utilities at a Glance Brochures QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEERING 02/10/2022 $85,000.00 1896/6 On Call Soils & Materials Testing Rankin Stock Heaberlin O'Neal 01/26/2022 $30,000.00 2.30.360(g)Professional Legal Services RAYMOND CHRISTOPHER ORTIZ III 02/11/2022 $30,000.00 2.30.360(i)Artist Services RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.04/19/2022 $35,070.05 2.30.360(h)Study Mitigated Negative Declaration ‐ Cost Recovery Contract ROMIG ENGINEERS, INC.04/05/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Geotechnical Services‐ Year 1 RON PARIS CONSTRUCTION CO., IN 06/28/2022 $238,326.00 1142/3 Seating Replacement for Childrens Theatre RUCKUS MARKETING LLC 06/21/2022 $80,000.00 2/3 Advertising Services for JMZ SEDARU INC 05/31/2022 $34,440.00 2.30.360(d)Sedaru Software Subscription SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 03/08/2022 $50,304.00 2.30.360 (j)Code42 Software SLOAN SAKAI YEUNG & WONG LLP 06/28/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Labor Negotiation Services SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC SAFE 02/08/2022 $49,000.00 2.30.360(i)Training Academy for Fire Fighters SPENCON CONSTRUCTION INC 03/02/2022 $32,612.80 4/4 Substation Driveway Repair STATEWIDE TRAFFIC SAFETY AND S 01/19/2022 $85,000.00 1350/3 Traffic Control Services for WGW STRATEGIC ENERGY INNOVATIONS 03/30/2022 $59,992.00 2.30.360(b2)Two Climate Action Fellows TERI BLACK & COMPANY LLC 01/14/2022 $200,002.00 2.30.360(i)CMO Recruitments THE GALECIA GROUP 06/27/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)Consulting Services for AMH THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP,06/21/2022 $25,000.00 2.30.360(i)Pre‐employment Services‐Year 1 TRANSFORMER CONSULTING 03/30/2022 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)On‐Call Consulting Services TRISTAR ICS INC 06/28/2022 $48,000.00 2.30.360(i)Leave Absence Management Services VOX NETWORK SOLUTIONS 02/15/2022 $35,987.97 2.30.360 (i)911 Monthly Recurring Charges‐ 911 Secure Software Page 3 of 3 6.b Packet Pg. 304 ATTACHMENT C Excerpts from the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.30 – Contracts and Purchasing Procedures 6.c Packet Pg. 305 2.30.200 Procurement officer contract award authority. The Procurement Officer may award and sign the following contracts: (a)Public Works Contracts. Public works contracts, where the term does not exceed three years, and the contract priceand any price contingency established for change orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (b)Contracts for Goods. Contracts to purchase goods, where the term does not exceed three years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00 in the first year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (c)General Services Contracts. General services contracts, where the term does not exceed three years, and the contract priceand any price contingency established for change orders or additional services, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (d)Professional Services Contracts. Professional services contracts, where the term does not exceed three years, and the contract price, and any price contingency established for additional services, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (e)Software and Hardware Purchase, Licensing, Maintenance and Support Contracts. Notwithstanding Subsection 2.30.200(c), the Procurement Officer may award and sign contracts other than general services agreements, including, without limitation, vendor-based standard form hardware and software purchase and licensing contracts, for the purchase of hardware and software, the licensing of software, and the maintenance and support of hardware and software, where the term of licensing or maintenance and support services does not exceed five years and the contract price, excluding sales tax or use tax, does not exceed $85,000.00 per year in the first contract year and does not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. The contracts referred to herein may include contracts for data storage services, which shall be subject to the city's information security policies, terms, conditions and other requirements established by the chief information officer with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney. (Ord. 5494 § 9, 2020: Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004) 6.c Packet Pg. 306 2.30.210 City Manager contract award authority. The City Manager may award and sign the following contracts: (a)Public Works Contracts. Public works contracts, where the term does not exceed three years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $250,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed the sum of $250,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (b)Contracts for Goods. Contracts to purchase goods, where the term does not exceed three years and the contract price and any contingency established for change orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $250,000.00 in the first contact year, and do not exceed the sum of $250,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (c)General Services Contracts. Contracts for services associated with the leasing or licensing of personal property other than hardware or software, where the term does not exceed seven years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 plus any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year. (d)Contracts for Studies and Services Related to Private Development. Professional services contracts for: (1) the preparation of environmental assessments or other studies deemed necessary by the director of planning and development services for the processing of applications for private development projects, or (2) inspection and plan review services deemed necessary by the director of planning and development services to evaluate conformity of private development projects with applicable building codes, regardless of the cost or term thereof, provided the applicant for the private development project agrees, in writing, to bear responsibility for the entire contract cost, and the contract does not require the expenditure of city funds in any amount. (e)Rewards. The City Manager may offer and pay rewards where the amount of the reward does not exceed $25,000.00, in accordance with the procedures of Section 2.30.800. (f)Emergency Contracts. The City Manager is authorized to expend city funds for emergency contracts, as defined in Section 2.30.160, without limitation on the contract cost or amount and without following the contract solicitation and award procedures otherwise required by this chapter, provided that any procurement of goods and services obtained during an emergency declared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall comply with applicable FEMA Public Assistance Program's procurement orders, rules, regulations, guidelines and control procedures for cost reimbursement purposes. Expenditures made during an emergency must be reported to the Council at the next regular meeting if approval for such expenditures would otherwise have been made by the Council. The City Manager may issue a verbal report to the Council before a written report is delivered. (g)Contracts to Rent, Lease, License, Acquire, Transfer or Purchase Interests in Real Property from Other Parties. Contracts for the rental, leasing, licensing, or purchase by installment interests in real property from other parties for a term of seven years or less, where the contract price does not exceed $85,000.00 per year, or to encumber or transfer any interest in real property from other parties for any term of years. The City Manager may enter into and sign a contract to acquire or purchase an interest in real property, where the contract price does not exceed $85,000.00. (h)Contracts to Rent, Lease, or License City Real Property to Other Parties. The authority granted under this Section is distinct from the authority of the director of community services to grant individuals and groups permits for the exclusive temporary use of buildings and facilities located in, and the areas of, city parks and open spaces, as described in Chapter 22.04 of this municipal code or in the park and open space regulations. The City Manager may award and sign contracts to rent, 6.c Packet Pg. 307 lease or license city real property to other parties regardless of the price for a term not exceeding three years. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the City Manager may enter into and sign contracts for the rental, lease or licensing of real property at the Cubberley Community Center for terms of up to five years. (i)Contracts to Provide Municipal Services to other Public Entities or Utilities. A contract to provide municipal services and functions to any other public agency, public utility or other public entity in any amount for a term not exceeding three years, provided the contract is in compliance with all Council- adopted policies covering such contracts. The authority granted herein does not include the authority of the City Manager to add permanent employee positions. (j)Contracts Providing for Indemnity or Risk of Loss. The City Manager, with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney and the insurance risk manager, may enter into and sign contracts, otherwise within the limits of his or her authority under Section 2.08.140 of this municipal code, that provide for the city or its officers or employees to defend, indemnify, or assume the risk of damage, loss, or liability for, or subrogate to any other contracting party respecting claims, demands, actions, losses or liabilities arising from the city's performance or non-performance under the contract. (k)Wholesale Utility Commodities and Services Contracts. Wholesale utility commodities and services contracts, where the term does not exceed five years and the contract price does not exceed $250,000.00 in any contract year. (l)Software and Hardware Purchase, Licensing, Maintenance and Support Contracts. Notwithstanding Subsection 2.30.210(c), the City Manager may award and sign contracts other than general services agreements, including, without limitation, vendor-based standard form hardware and software purchase and licensing contracts, for the purchase of hardware and software, the licensing of software, and the maintenance and support of hardware and software, where the term of licensing or maintenance and support services does not exceed seven years and the contract price, excluding sales tax or use tax, does not exceed $85,000.00 per year in the first contract or fiscal year and does not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior fiscal year, in any subsequent contract or fiscal year. The contracts referred to herein may include contracts for data storage services, which shall be subject to the city's information security policies, terms, conditions and other requirements established by the chief information officer with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney. (m)Other Contracts. All other types of contracts for which the contract term does not exceed three years and the total expenditure by the city does not exceed $85,000.00 in the first contract or fiscal year, and does not exceed the sum of $85,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior fiscal year, in any subsequent contract or fiscal year. (Ord. 5494 §§ 3, 10, 2020: Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004) 6.c Packet Pg. 308 2.30.360 Exemptions from competitive solicitation requirements. The following are exemptions from the informal and formal competitive solicitation requirements of this chapter, except as otherwise provided. These exemptions will be narrowly interpreted and applied. The department requesting an exemption shall provide all relevant information supporting the application of the exemption to the Procurement Officer. Based upon this information, the Procurement Officer shall make a recommendation to the City Manager and the City Manager shall determine whether an exemption from the competitive solicitation requirements applies. Nothing herein is intended to preclude the use of competitive solicitations, as practicable. (a)Emergency Contracts, provided that any procurement of goods and services obtained during an emergency declared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall comply with applicable FEMA Public Assistance Program's orders, rules, regulations, guidelines and control procedures for cost reimbursement purposes. (b)Whenever solicitations of bids or proposals would for any reason be impracticable, unavailing or impossible, provided that in the case of a public works project, the project is not otherwise required by the charter to be formally bid. These situations are those where solicitations of bids or proposals would not be useful or produce any operational or financial advantage for the city. Situations where solicitations of bids or proposals would be impracticable, unavailing or impossible, include, without limitation, the following: (1)Contract specifications cannot be drawn in a way that would enable more than one vendor, consultant or contractor to meet them; (2)Due to circumstances beyond the control of the city, the time necessary to use the competitive solicitation process, procedures and requirements would result in a substantial economic loss to the city or the substantial interference with a required city operation; (3)Special conditions attached to a grant, donation or gift requires the use of particular goods and/or services. All requests for exemptions under this subsection shall be supported by written documentation (facsimile or electronic mail may be used), approved by the department head and the Procurement Officer. (c)Where competitive bids or requests for proposals have been solicited and no bid or proposal has been received, or where no bid or proposal meeting the requirements of the invitation to bid or request for proposals has been received, provided that, in the case of a public works project, the project is not otherwise required by the charter to be formally bid. (d)Contracts for goods, wholesale commodities and services, general services or professional services available from only one source, where the Procurement Officer has determined, in writing, there is no adequate substitute or equivalent provider. Examples of acceptable sole source acquisitions or purchases may include, without limitation: equipment or services for equipment, for which there is no comparable competitive product or service except that provided by the equipment manufacturer, distributor or dealer; proprietary products sold directly by the manufacturer; a component or replacement part, for which there is no commercially available substitute and which can be obtained only from the manufacturer; goods where there is only one authorized distributor in the area; and goods where compatibility with goods in use by the city is an overriding consideration. All requests for sole source acquisitions or purchases shall be supported by written documentation (facsimile or electronic mail may be used), approved by the office or department head, and forwarded to the Procurement Officer. (e)Contracts for goods where, pursuant to Section 2.30.900, the City Manager has determined that standardization of the supplies, materials or equipment is permissible. (f)Placement of insurance coverage and surety bonds. 6.c Packet Pg. 309 (g)Legal services contracts, including, without limitation, the services of outside counsel, consultants and other experts needed for litigation, administrative or other legal proceedings. (h)Professional services contracts for private development related studies and services whenever the services are funded wholly by private developers. (i)Professional services contracts, where the estimated total expenditure by the city, regardless of term, does not exceed $50,000.00. (j)Cooperative purchases, with one or more other public agencies or through a cooperative purchasing agency, provided: (i) the services are solicited using methods substantially similar to those required by this chapter, as determined by the Procurement Officer; and (ii) the contract is consistent with the requirements specified in this municipal code. (k)The use of another governmental or public agency's contract or substantially the same contract terms provided: (i) the agency uses a solicitation method substantially similar to the method required by this chapter; (ii) the contract is consistent with the requirements specified in this municipal code; and (iii) the Procurement Officer determines that the city will realize overall value to utilizing the other agency's contract or contract terms compared to the city performing its own solicitation. (l)Contracts with, or solicited on the city's behalf by, Northern California Power Agency, Transmission Agency of Northern California, and Western Area Power Administration to procure wholesale utility commodities and services that meet the requirements of Section 2.30.340(d) or 2.30.360(k). (m)Contracts with Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the California Independent System Operator Corporation for energy transmission services to the extent necessary and expedient to provide for the general health, safety and welfare of the city's utility customers. (n)Contracts with any public agency or governmental body to construct a public work, where the Procurement Officer determines the public agency or governmental body has used methods similar to those required by this chapter to contract for the public work. (o)Contracts with any public utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity or any entity holding a cable service or video service franchise pursuant to chapter 2.10 of this municipal code to construct a public works, where such works involves property of such public utility or cable service or video service franchisee and is otherwise of direct concern to both the city and such public utility or cable service or video service franchisee, provided that the project is not otherwise required by the charter to be formally bid. (p)Contracts with private developers to construct public improvements in connection with their development projects, even if the city contributes funds to the improvement project, provided that the projects are not otherwise required by the charter to be formally bid. (q)Projects, where the public work is performed by the city with its own employees. (r)Contracts, where the estimated total expenditure by the city does not exceed $10,000.00. (s)Contracts with entities to procure at wholesale prices utility commodities and services under a city "feed-in tariff" energy program that meets the requirements of Section 2.30.340(c). (t)Professional services contracts in relation to personnel matters for: recruitment consultants, workplace investigations, threat assessments, conflict intervention, and industrial safety. (Ord. 5494 § 21, 2020: Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 5148 § 2, 2012: Ord. 5081 § 1, 2010: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004) 6.c Packet Pg. 310 PART 10 – STANDARDIZATION 2.30.900 Standardization. Where the City Manager has determined that it is required by the health, safety or welfare of the people or employees of the city, or that significant costs savings have been demonstrated, the standardization of supplies, materials or equipment, including, without limitation, information technology property, for purchase or to be used in a public works project is permitted and the supplies, materials or equipment specifications may specify a single brand or trade name. The City Manager may consider the following factors in determining to standardize on a single brand or trade name: (a)Repair and maintenance costs would be minimized; (b)User personnel training would be facilitated thereby; (c)Supplies or spare parts would be minimized; (d)Modifications to existing equipment would not be necessary; (e)Training of repair and maintenance personnel would be minimized; and (f)Matching existing supplies, materials or equipment is required for proper operation of a function or program. (Ord. 5494 § 40, 2020: Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004) 6.c Packet Pg. 311 8/11/2022 Schedule of Meetings Published August 11, 2022 This is a courtesy notice only. Meeting dates, times, and locations are subject to change. Almost all Palo Alto Council and some Standing Committee meetings are cablecast live on Channel 26. If there happens to be concurrent meetings, one meeting will be broadcast on Channel 29. Meetings are held in-person and by virtual teleconference. THURSDAY, August 11 Historic Resources Board Meeting, Cancelled Stormwater Management Oversight Committee, 1:00 p.m. Human Relations Commission, 6:00 p.m. MONDAY, August 15 Sp. City Council Meeting, 5:00 p.m. TUESDAY, August 16 Finance Committee Meeting, Cancelled THURSDAY, August 18 City/School Liaison Committee Meeting, 8:30 a.m. Architectural Review Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m. Public Art Commission Meeting, 7:00 p.m. MONDAY, August 22 Sp. City Council Meeting, 5:00 p.m. TUESDAY, August 23 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting, 7:00 p.m. THURSDAY, August 25 Historic Resources Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m. TUESDAY, August 30 Sp. City Council Meeting, 6:00 p.m. WEDNESDAY, August 31 Planning and Transportation Commission, 6:00 p.m. THURSDAY, September 1 Architectural Review Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m. TUESDAY, September 6 Finance Committee Meeting, 5:30 p.m. THURSDAY, September 8 Historic Resources Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m. Human Relations Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities or programs, or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact: ADA Coordinator, City of Palo Alto, 650-329-2550 (voice) or 329-1199 (TDD), ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Listening assistive devices are available in the Council Chambers. Sign language interpreters will be provided upon request with 72 hours advance notice. Please advise the City Clerk's Office (650-329-2571) of meetings or changes by 3:00 p.m. on Wednesdays for inclusion in the following week’s schedule. a Packet Pg. 312 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14638) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Repeal of a Resolution Adopted on August 8, 2022 and Adoption of a Revised Resolution Establishing Advisory Spending Guidelines for Business Tax Proceeds From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution at Attachment A which repeals Resolution 11063 adopted by the Council on August 8, 2022, and establishes revised advisory spending guidelines regarding proceeds of a business tax, if approved by voters at the General Election on November 8, 2022. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION On August 10, 2022, the Palo Alto City Council adopted a Resolution to place a business tax on the November 2022 general election ballot. The business tax is a general tax. The attached resolution (Attachment A) informs residents and community stakeholders of Council’s intended use for proceeds generated by the business tax, if approved by voters. The resolution outlines use equally among three areas: public safety services, train crossing safety, and affordable housing/unhoused services. The City Council adopted a substantially similar resolution establishing advisory spending guidelines on August 8, 2022 (CMR 14639). Subsequently, an ad hoc committee of Councilmembers, meeting with representatives of the City’s business community, determined that the advisory spending guidelines should be amended to add additional commitments to enhance transparency and accountability, in the form of annual reporting of business tax proceeds and expenditures. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution, which repeals Resolution 11063 adopted by Council on August 8th and readopts the advisory spending guidelines with additional annual reporting commitments in Section 4 of the Resolution. This is in alignment with the direction from the City Council to staff on August 10, 2022. TIMELINE The attached advisory spending guidelines are effective upon adoption and will apply to business tax proceeds generated in 2023 (to be collected no sooner than 2024) and thereafter, Packet Pg. 313 AA1 City of Palo Alto Page 2 if approved by the voters at the General Election on November 8, 2022. Allocation of business tax proceeds will occur each year as part of the City Council’s annual budget process. RESOURCE IMPACT Adoption of the attached Resolution will not, by itself, have a resource impact on the Ci ty. Discussion of the potential resource impact of the business tax can be found at CMR 14540, packet page 92. The business tax structure adopted by the Council on August 10 is estimated to generate $9.6 million in business tax revenue, annually. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The attached Resolution reflects discussions with rep resentatives of the business community as well as feedback from community members and stakeholders in the form of an online and mail- in communitywide survey (433 respondents), six focus group sessions, a community listening session, city newsletter and blog posts, utility bill inserts, and three voter surveys. A landing page on the City’s website titled, Fiscal Sustainability: A Community Conversation, was also developed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This activity is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as defined in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378, because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the e nvironment. Attachments: •AttachmentA: Attachment A: Revised Resolution Regarding Business Tax Advisory Spending Guidelines Packet Pg. 314 AA1 ATTACHMENT A NOT YET ADOPTED Resolution No. ______ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting Advisory Spending Guidelines for Proceeds of a Business Tax to be Submitted to the Voters for Approval in November 2022 R E C I T A L S A. The City of Palo Alto is a well-run municipality, with a Triple-A bond rating and a reputation for pro-active fiscal management, strong ongoing investments in public infrastructure, and conservative financial planning. However, the impacts of COVID-19, the subsequent economic downturn, and legal challenges to longstanding historic revenue sources have contributed to a projected budget gap in the City of Palo Alto’s general fund. B. Unlike most communities in California, the City of Palo Alto does not require local businesses to contribute to city projects and services through a local business tax. As Palo Alto looks to the future, City leaders have determined that the time has come to seek voter approval to tax mid-sized and large businesses operating in the City as neighboring communities do. Diversifying revenues with contributions from business will ensure that businesses pay a fair share and contribute to services used by residents, visitors and workers in the community. C. If a business tax is approved by voters, its proceeds will be placed in the City’s general fund for use on general government services. Council Members elected by the voters will determine the uses of those proceeds that best serve the public interest. D. With this Resolution, the City Council informs voters of its intentions regarding the public services and programs that would be supported by business tax revenues. Accordingly the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. This Resolution No. _____ updates and supersedes Resolution No. 10063, which is hereby repealed and shall be of no force or effect. SECTION 2. Council hereby adopts the above Recitals as findings of the Council. SECTION 3. It is the Council’s intention to use proceeds of a business tax—a general tax for general government uses—to fund services and programs that support safety and quality of life. The Council approves the following advisory spending guidelines: One-Third for Transportation and Safe Train Crossings. In the coming years, Palo Alto will need to need to invest substantial local funds in the improvement and safety of train crossings. CalTrain is electrifying and trains are increasing in number. To maintain traffic flow, bicycle and pedestrian mobility, and safety, the City’s four at-grade road crossings must be modified and separated from the train right-of-way. It is estimated that an average investment of $250 million will be needed for the improvements needed at each crossing. City funds will be used as matching funds to secure additional county, state, and federal funds for these investments in transportation infrastructure. A Packet Pg. 315 AA1 ATTACHMENT A NOT YET ADOPTED The Council plans to spend one-third of business tax proceeds on safe and efficient crossings for vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. One-Third for Housing Affordability and Services for the Unhoused. A balanced and healthy community welcomes families and individuals from all walks of life. In Palo Alto, significant investments are needed to bring housing costs into reach for m any moderate earners who work in the City, such as teachers, public safety employees, and workers in the trades and service industries. With few affordable local housing options, these workers must travel long distances between home and work, contributing to green-house gas emissions and traffic congestion. In addition, longtime residents—especially those who rent—are at risk of losing housing and being forced to relocate to other communities or become unhoused. Those who are already living in the City without housing need financial support to transition to stable, safe and clean housing. Substantial funding is needed to advance these goals. The Council plans to spend one-third of business tax proceeds on affordable housing and unhoused services. One-Third for Public Safety. Rising costs and constrained revenues have limited the City’s ability to provide public safety services—including police, fire, 911, and emergency services—at the level desired by the community. Stable long-term revenues from a business tax will put these highly- valued City services on sound footing into the future. The Council plans to spend one-third of business tax proceeds on public safety. SECTION 4. During its regular annual fiscal reporting, the City will separately report receipts from the business tax and that year’s spending from business tax proceeds on transportation and safe train crossings, housing affordability and services for the unhoused, and public safety. SECTION 5. The Council finds that adoption of this Resolution is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: __________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: A Packet Pg. 316 AA1 ATTACHMENT A NOT YET ADOPTED __________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager A Packet Pg. 317 AA1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14696) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Consent Calendar City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Approval of the City Position for the 2022 Cal Cities Annual Conference Resolution From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City’s voting delegate to vote on the one resolution up for consideration at the annual League of California Cities conference in Long Beach from September 7-9, 2022 and approve the recommended position provided below. Background Each year, the League of California Cities accepts resolutions from member cities and elected officials for approval at its annual conference. These resolutions affect the policy, direction, and/or work of the League of California Cities. This year, only one resolution has been introduced and will be voted on during the Business Meeting held during the annual conference. The League of California Cities provides instruction to member cities regarding voting: “in order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, your city council must designate a voting delegate. Your city may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote in the event that the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity.” Discussion This action authorizes Vice Mayor Lydia Kou to act as voting delegate for the resolution noted below. Additionally, as the resolution is subject to change, Vice Mayor Kou is authorized to vote on any amendments in the manner she deems to be in the best interest of the City. Attached for review is the 2022 League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolution Packet. The packet contains the resolution in its current form along with background information justifying the action requested. Below for your convenience is a table containing the resolution title, the recommended City position, relevant guidance, and the impact to the City if passed. Packet Pg. 318 AA2 City of Palo Alto Page 2 Resolution Title Resolution Relating To Amendments To The Cal Cities Bylaws Recommended vote Yes Relevant Council or City guidance 2022 Legislative Priorities, Foundational principle 3: Protect and increase local government discretion. Oppose items that preempt or reduce the authority or ability of local government to determine how to effectively operate local programs, services, and activities. This resolution aligns with the City's Legislative Foundational Principle of local control and also aligns with the following Legislative Guideline: To support government action that allows the City to support the collaborative work of regional partners, trade associations, other local governments and organizations, and Joint Powers Authorities Potential City impact(s) This resolution, if adopted would adopt structural changes to specific committees, replace the term “Board Members” with “Directors”, and modify the appointment process of certain committees to implement the League of California Cities Strategic Growth Plan adopted in 2017 and enhance Cal Cities’ governance as recommended in the findings and recommendations from the Governance Report. This action will have no direct impact on the City of Palo Alto but will improve governance of the Cal Cities organization, of which the City of Palo Alto is a member. Resource Impact There is no resource impact associated with this action, in that the action requires no financing, no modifications in operations, and no policy adjustment. Environmental Review The Council’s adoption of this item is not a project requiring California Environmental Quality Act review, because it is an administrative governmental activity which will not cause a direct or indirect physical change in the environment. Attachments: •Attachmenta: 2022-General-Assembly-Resolutions-Packet Packet Pg. 319 AA2 2022 Annual Conference and Expo PROPOSED BYLAWS AMENDMENTS General Assembly September 9, 2022 If you have any questions regarding these materials, please contact Norman Coppinger at ncoppinger@calcities.org or by phone at 916.658.8277. a Packet Pg. 320 AA2 2021-2022 CAL CITIES OFFICERS President Cindy Silva Mayor Pro Tem, Walnut Creek First Vice President Ali Taj Council Member, Artesia Second Vice President Daniel Parra Council Member, Fowler Immediate Past President Cheryl Viegas Walker Council Member, El Centro Executive Director and CEO Carolyn M. Coleman 1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org August 2022 To: Cal Cities General Assembly From: Cindy Silva, President Carolyn Coleman, Executive Director and CEO Re: Proposed Cal Cities Bylaws Amendments On July 15, 2022, the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Board of Directors (Board) voted to present proposed bylaws amendments to the General Assembly at the 2022 Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. This memorandum outlines the history of the proposed amendments, summarizes the amendments, and provides an explanation of the process for adopting amendments to the bylaws. Background Beginning in 2017, the Board directed Cal Cities to undertake a strategic planning process that resulted in the adoption of the “Powering Up for California Cities Strategic Grown Plan 2018-2021” (Strategic Growth Plan). The Strategic Growth Plan set forth goals to enhance Cal Cities’ governance to: (a) achieve even higher levels of engagement and effectiveness; (b) ensure optimal engagement by members and effectiveness in supporting fulfillment of the Cal Cities’ mission; and (c) ensure the pathway to leadership is transparent and inclusive. In furtherance of its governance goals, the Board engaged an association governance consultant (Consultant) to evaluate the Cal Cities governance system and make recommendations for enhancing Cal Cities’ governance. The Consultant gathered and considered input from more than 350 Cal Cities members through advisory groups, roundtable discussions, interviews, and surveys. On July 8, 2021, the Consultant produced a report (Governance Report) detailing 49 recommendations to the Board to deepen the engagement of Cal Cities Member Cities and ensure Cal Cities’ governance is operating at peak performance. The Governance Report included findings indicating that Cal Cities is a strong organization, with a high level of member engagement, but also highlighted opportunities for Cal Cities to enhance its governance. The opportunities for enhancement included: (a) improving the clarity, ease, and consistency in how the governance system works; (b) clarifying the guidelines for position qualifications and performance expectations; (c) identifying ways to deepen member engagement and enhance the quality of the experience of involvement; and (d) ensuring Cal Cities has an intentional, consistent organizational culture at all levels of the governance system. 1 a Packet Pg. 321 AA2 The findings and recommendations from the Governance Report were presented to the Board during the July 2021 Board meeting. Following a robust exchange of ideas and input, the Board decided to move forward with many of the recommendations, referred other recommendations to a “to be established” board subcommittee for further study, and deferred consideration of the remaining recommendations. Following Board approval, in September 2021 during the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, the General Assembly voted to approve the following bylaws amendments: 1. Adjust the composition of the Board to achieve a higher impact and be more representative by adding Director seats to the Board for each of the five Diversity Caucuses, and transitioning members of the National League of Cities Board from Cal Cities Directors to one non-voting advisor to the Cal Cities Board. 2.Recognize the Cal Cities Diversity Caucuses in the Cal Cities bylaws to reflect the full contribution the caucuses make to Cal Cities’ mission and vision. Those amendments became effective on Nov. 24, 2021. Among the recommendations the Board decided was a priority to move forward was the establishment of a standing Governance Committee to assist the Board in fulfilling its governance function. At its February 2022 meeting, the Board voted to approve Board policy establishing the Governance Committee with the task of regularly reviewing the governance structures, policies, and practices of Cal Cities and reporting its findings and recommendations to the Board. The Board also approved a one-year work plan for the Governance Committee that established priority governance issues to focus on in its first year. Following the Board meeting, President Cindy Silva appointed the following Board members to serve on the Governance Committee: • Cheryl Viegas Walker, Immediate Past President and Council Member, El Centro, Chair • Walt Allen, Council Member, Covina •Jan Arbuckle, Vice Mayor, Grass Valley •LaTanya Bellow, Deputy City Manager, Berkeley • Pippin Dew, Council Member, Vallejo • Lynne Kennedy, Mayor Pro Tem, Rancho Cucamonga • Karen Goh, Mayor, Bakersfield •Jim Lewis, City Manager, Pismo Beach • Lisa Middleton, Mayor, Palm Springs • John Minto, Mayor, Santee • David Pollock, Council Member, Moorpark 2 a Packet Pg. 322 AA2 The Governance Committee met in April 2022, and following engaging and productive discussions, brought forward to the Board at its May 2022 meeting several recommendations to further enhance Cal Cities’ governance. Among the recommendations approved by the Board during that meeting are two that require bylaws amendments: 1.Formalize oversight of the Resolutions Committee by establishing the Second Vice President as the chair of the committee, while retaining the President’s authority to appoint the vice chair of the committee. 2.To ensure a more inclusive Nominating Committee, add one committee member appointed from among the Caucus Directors and one additional committee member appointed from among the At-Large Directors for a total of 13 committee members.1 In addition to those recommendations identified by the Governance Committee and approved by the Board, Cal Cities staff identified various non-substantive revisions to the Cal Cities bylaws: 1. Clarify that, unless the Board establishes otherwise, the Cal Cities President appoints the chair of Board-established committees. 2. To avoid confusion and clarify organizational responsibilities, remove “Treasurer” from the title of the Second Vice President.2 3. To promote consistency, replace the term “Board member(s)” with “Director(s).”3 On July 15, 2022, the Board voted to present these proposed bylaws amendments to the General Assembly at the 2022 Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. While the work to enhance Cal Cities’ governance is a process being implemented in phases over several years, the Board believes these proposed amendments constitute important next steps toward ensuring Cal Cities’ governance is operating at peak performance. 1 Under the current bylaws, the Nominating Committee is comprised of 11 Directors. Two committee members are appointed from among At-Large Directors and one from a Department. Divisions participate on a rotation, with Directors residing within eight of the Divisions appointed in even-numbered years and Directors from the other eight appointed in odd-numbered years. 2 Under the current bylaws, the Second Vice President is referred to as “Second Vice President/Treasurer.” However, in practice the Second Vice President does not serve as treasurer of Cal Cities. Rather, that function is performed by the Chief Financial Officer designated in Article VIII, section 5, subdivision b(2), of the Cal Cities bylaws. 3 The current bylaws primarily refer to members of the Cal Cities Board of Directors as “Directors.” However, there are instances in which they are referred to as “Board members.” 3 a Packet Pg. 323 AA2 Procedure for Amending the Cal Cities Bylaws Amendments to the Cal Cities bylaws may be proposed by the Cal Cities Board and may be adopted: (a) by vote of the Cal Cities General Assembly, or (b) by mail ballot to Member Cities.4 In this case, the amendments will be considered by the General Assembly. Bylaws amendments need to be approved by 2/3 of those voting,5 and the number that constitutes 2/3 of those voting (a) cannot be less than a majority of the voting delegates present if there is a quorum at the time the vote is taken;6 or (b) cannot be less than a majority of a quorum if the meeting started with a quorum but a quorum is not present when the vote is taken.7 If approved by the General Assembly, the amendments to the bylaws will go into effect after the expiration of a 60-day protest period.8 If, within 60 days after the adoption of the amendments, one-third or more of Member Cities submit a written protest against such amendments, the amendments are automatically suspended until the next Annual Conference and Expo, when they may be taken up again for reconsideration and vote.9 If the amendments are approved by the General Assembly and no protest is lodged, the effective date of the bylaws amendments will be Nov. 9, 2022. 4 Article XVII, Section 1. 5 Article XVII, Section 2. 6 Cal. Corp. Code 7512, subd. (a). 7 Cal. Corp. Code 7512, subd. (d). 8 Article XVII, section 6. 9 Article XVII, section 7. 4 a Packet Pg. 324 AA2 RESOLUTION RELATING TO AMENDMENTS TO THE CAL CITIES BYLAWS (2/3 vote at General Assembly required to approve) Source: League of California Cities Board of Directors WHEREAS, the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) is a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation under California law and, as such, is governed by corporate bylaws; and WHEREAS, the Cal Cities Board of Directors (Board) periodically reviews the Cal Cities bylaws for issues of clarity, practicality, compliance with current laws, and responsiveness to membership needs and interests; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2017, the Board directed Cal Cities to undertake a strategic planning process that resulted in the adoption of the “Powering Up for California Cities Strategic Growth Plan 2018-2021” (Strategic Growth Plan); and WHEREAS, the Strategic Growth Plan set forth goals to enhance Cal Cities’ governance to: (a) achieve even higher levels of engagement and effectiveness; (b) ensure optimal engagement by members and effectiveness in supporting fulfillment of the Cal Cities’ mission; and (c) ensure the pathway to leadership is transparent and inclusive; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of its governance goals, the Board engaged an expert in association governance who gathered and considered input from more than 350 Cal Cities members through advisory groups, roundtable discussions, interviews, and surveys to evaluate the Cal Cities governance system and make recommendations for enhancing Cal Cities’ governance; and WHEREAS, in July 2021 the Board decided to move forward with certain recommendations made as a result of that governance evaluation, including a recommendation to establish a standing Governance Committee of the Board to assist the Board in fulfilling its governance function; and WHEREAS, in February 2022 the Board approved Board policy establishing the Governance Committee and charging it with regularly reviewing the governance structures, policies, and practices of Cal Cities, and reporting its findings and making recommendations to the Board; and WHEREAS, in 2022 the Governance Committee recommended, and the Board, approved certain changes to the bylaws that: (1) formalize the oversight of the Resolutions Committee; (2) ensure a more inclusive Nominating Committee by adding one committee member appointed from among Caucus Directors and one additional committee member appointed from among At- Large Directors; (3) clarify that, unless the board establishes otherwise, the Cal Cities President appoints the chair of board-established committees; and (4) make various non-substantive revisions; and 5 a Packet Pg. 325 AA2 WHEREAS, the Cal Cities Board offers the following proposed amendments and additions to the bylaws, as set forth in the attached redlined version of the bylaws specified below, which is hereby incorporated by reference: 1.Amend Article VI, section 3(c) to designate the Second Vice-President as the Resolutions Committee chair, while retaining the President’s authority to appoint the vice chair of the Resolutions Committee; 2.Amend Article VII, section 5(b) to adjust the composition of the Nominating Committee by adding one At-Large Director and one Caucus Director for a total of 13 Nominating Committee members; 3. Amend Article VII, Section 10(d) to provide that, unless the Board establishes otherwise, the Cal Cities President appoints the chair of board-established committees; 4.Replace the title “Second Vice-President/Treasurer” with “Second Vice President” in Article VII, sections 2(a), 5(e), and 10(b); and Article VIII, sections 1, 2(c), and 4; 5.Replace the term “board member(s)” with “Director(s)” in Article VII, sections 5(b), 5(e), and 8; Article XII, section 5(c); and Article XV, section 4; and now therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities assembled during the Annual Conference in Long Beach on September 9, 2022, that the proposed bylaws amendments are hereby approved and Cal Cities shall make the specified amendments to the Cal Cities bylaws set forth in the attached redlined version of the bylaws. See ATTACHMENT 1 for redline of proposed changes to the bylaws. 6 a Packet Pg. 326 AA2 ATTACHMENT 1 Redline of Proposed Changes to Bylaws 7 a Packet Pg. 327 AA2 Bylaws for the League of California Cities … Article VI. Resolutions … Section 3: Resolutions Committee for Annual Conference Resolutions. (a)Resolutions Committee Composition. The Cal Cities President establishes a Resolutions Committee sixty days prior to each Annual Conference, which committee shall consist of: (i)One elected official from each regional division, appointed by the regional division; (ii)One elected official from each policy committee, appointed by the policy committee; (iii)One member from each functional department, appointed by the department; (iv)One elected official from each caucus, appointed by the caucus; and (v)Up to ten additional members (at least five of whom are elected officials) as the Cal Cities President deems necessary to achieve geographic and population balance, as well as recognize the multiplicity of city functions not represented by the other appointments, including, but not limited to, the perspectives of board and commission members as well as professional staff. (b)Presidential Appointments. In the event a regional division, policy committee, functional department, or caucus does not make its appointment to the Resolutions Committee, the Cal Cities President may make the appointment on the regional division’s, policy committee’s, functional department’s, or caucus’s behalf. (c)Chair. The Cal Cities President shall also appoint to the Resolutions Committee a committee chair and vice chairSecond Vice-President shall serve as committee chair. The Cal Cities President shall also appoint to the Resolutions Committee a vice chair. (d)Minimum Committee Size and Composition. In the event the full committee is not in attendance at the Annual Conference, the Cal Cities President shall appoint a sufficient number of city officials in attendance to achieve a total of thirty. No less than two-thirds of the members of the Resolutions Committee shall be elected officials. 8 a Packet Pg. 328 AA2 (e)Committee Consideration of Proposed Resolutions. Except for resolutions of courtesy, commendation, appreciation or condolence, no resolution expressing the opinion or policy of Cal Cities on any question may be considered or discussed by Cal Cities’ General Assembly, unless it has been first submitted to, and reported on, by the Resolutions Committee. … Article VII: Board of Directors … Section 2: Composition. The Cal Cities Board is composed of the following: (a)A President, First Vice-President and Second Vice-President/Treasurer, who each serve a term of one year; (b)The Immediate Past President who serves for a term of one year, immediately succeeding his or her term as President; (c)Twelve Directors-at-Large, (i)Who serve staggered two-year terms, and (ii)At least one of whom is a representative of a small city with a population of 10,000 or less; (d)One Director to be elected from each of the regional divisions, functional departments, and caucuses of Cal Cities, each of whom serves for a term of two years; and (e)Ten Directors that may be designated by the mayors of each of the ten largest cities in California to serve two-year terms. (f)For purposes of this section, the population of each city is the most current population as determined by the California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, or its successor agency or unit. If no successor agency or unit is named, the most current population used to determine these dues shall be used to determine future dues until such time as these bylaws are amended to designate a new source for determining city population. (g)Directors hold office until their successors are elected and qualified. … 9 a Packet Pg. 329 AA2 Section 5: Nomination Process. (a)Timing. The Cal Cities President, with the concurrence of the Cal Cities Board, shall establish a nominating committee at the first Board meeting of the calendar year in which the election is to occur. (b)Composition. The nominating committee shall be comprised of eleven thirteen Board membersDirectors. ThreeTwo nominating committee members shall be At-Large Directors, and one shall represent a functional department, and one shall represent a caucus. Regional divisions shall be represented on the nominating committee on the following rotating basis: (i)Even-Numbered Years: In even-numbered years, the Central Valley, Imperial County, Monterey Bay, North Bay, Orange County, Redwood Empire, Sacramento Valley and San Diego County Regional Divisions shall be represented on the nominating committee. (ii)Odd-Numbered Years: In odd-numbered years, the Channel Counties, Inland Empire, Desert-Mountain, East Bay, Los Angeles County, Peninsula, Riverside County, and South San Joaquin Regional Divisions shall be represented on the nominating committee. (c)Nominating Committee Chair. The Cal Cities President shall appoint the chair of the nominating committee. (d)Candidates for Positions Ineligible. Candidates for officer and at-large positions on the Cal Cities Board are not eligible to serve on the nominating committee. In the event a regional division representative on the nominating committee wishes to be a candidate for an officer or at-large position, the Cal Cities President will appoint a substitute nominating committee member from the same regional division, if available. If one is not available, the President shall appoint a substitute from a nearby regional division. (e)Duties. The duties of the nominating committee are to: (i)Member Outreach. Publicize the qualifications for the offices of Second Vice Vice-President/Treasurer and the at-large members of the Cal Cities Board to Cal Cities’ Member Cities; (ii)At-Large and Second Vice-President Recommendations. Make recommendations to the Cal Cities Board on the following year’s Cal Cities officers and at-large board membersDirectors; and (iii)President and First Vice President Recommendation. Recommend whether the previous year’s First Vice President 10 a Packet Pg. 330 AA2 becomes President and the previous year’s Second Vice- President/Treasurer becomes First Vice President. (f)Notice to Members. An explanation of the nomination process and relevant deadlines for submitting nominations to the nominating committee shall be publicized in Cal Cities publications and communications throughout the year, along with the identity of nominating committee members once such members are appointed. In addition, the nominating committee shall inform the membership of the opening of the nominations for the following year when it makes its report to the general membership as provided in Article VI, Section 5(g) below. (g)Decision and Report. The nominating committee’s recommendations shall be communicated to the Cal Cities Board not later than 30 days prior to the date of Cal Cities’ Annual Conference and again at the Annual Conference. In addition, the nominating committee shall make its report to the membership at the opening general session of the Annual Conference. (h)Election. The election of Cal Cities Board officers and Directors-at-Large shall occur at a Cal Cities Board meeting at the Annual Conference as provided in Article VII, Section 4(c) and Article VII, section 3. … Section 8: Meetings and Meeting Notice. (a)Regularly Scheduled Board Meetings. The Cal Cities Board shall meet no fewer than four times a year. Notice of regularly scheduled Board meetings shall be mailed to each Director at least 14 days before any such meeting. (b)Emergency Board Meetings. A good faith effort shall be made to provide notice of any emergency board meetings (for example, by first-class mail, personal or telephone notification, including a voice messaging system or other system or technology designed to record and communicate messages, telegraph, facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means). (c)Telephonic or Electronic Participation. Members of the Cal Cities Board may participate in any meeting through the use of conference telephone or similar communications equipment, so long as all members participating in such meeting can hear one another. Participation in a meeting by this means constitutes presence in person at such meeting. (d)Notice Content. All meeting notices shall include the meeting date, place, time, and, as applicable, the means by which a Cal Cities Board memberDirector may participate electronically. … 11 a Packet Pg. 331 AA2 Section 10: Committees. (a)General. The Cal Cities Board may establish committees to study city problems, advise on Cal Cities educational efforts, make recommendations with respect to Cal Cities advocacy efforts, or to engage in other appropriate Cal Cities service. (b)Executive Committee. (i)Composition. The Executive Committee of the Cal Cities Board consists of the following: the Cal Cities President, First Vice- President, Second Vice-President/Treasurer, Immediate Past President and Executive Director. (ii)Authority. The Executive Committee has authority to act for the Cal Cities Board between Board meetings, provided that no action of the Executive Committee is binding on the Cal Cities Board unless authorized or approved by the Board. (c)Standing Policy Committees. (i)Charge. Cal Cities shall have a series of standing policy committees, whose charge shall be to make recommendations to the Cal Cities Board on matters within the committees’ jurisdiction, as well as fulfill other duties specified in these bylaws (see, for example, Article VI, section 4(b)). (ii)Membership. Each Cal Cities Policy Committee shall be comprised of the following: •Two members appointed by each regional division president; •One member appointed by each functional department president; •One member appointed by each caucus president; •No more than 16 members appointed by the Cal Cities President, to provide population and geographic balance, as well as expertise; and •Such representatives of affiliate organizations in the capacity authorized by the Cal Cities Board. (iii)Feedback. Policy committees shall receive information on actions taken on committee recommendations and the reasons for those actions. 12 a Packet Pg. 332 AA2 (d)Committee Chairs and Vice Chairs. Unless the Cal Cities Board establishes otherwise, Tthe Cal Cities President appoints the chair of all Cal- Cities-wide committees. The term of such appointments coincides with the Cal Cities President’s term. The Cal Cities President may appoint vice chairs for such committees, as the Cal Cities President deems necessary. … Article VIII: Officers Section 1: Identity. The officers of Cal Cities are a President, a First Vice-President, a Second Vice- President/Treasurer, an Immediate Past President, and an Executive Director. Section 2: Duties of Cal Cities Officers. (a)President. The President presides at all Cal Cities Board meetings and all General Assemblies. The President has such other powers and duties as may be prescribed by these bylaws or the Cal Cities Board. (b)First Vice-President. The First Vice-President carries on the duties of the President in the President’s temporary absence or incapacity. The First Vice- President has such other powers and duties as may be prescribed by these bylaws or the Cal Cities Board. (c)Second Vice-President/Treasurer. The Second Vice-President/Treasurer carries on the duties of the President in the President’s and First Vice- President’s temporary absence or incapacity. The Second Vice- President/Treasurer has such other powers and duties as may be prescribed by these bylaws or the Cal Cities Board. … Section 4: Vacancies. A vacancy in the office of President is filled by the Immediate Past President who shall serve for the unexpired term of office and, upon election of a new President at the next Annual Conference, shall subsequently serve a full term as Immediate Past President. In the event the Immediate Past President is not available to fill the vacancy in the office of the President, or declines in writing, it shall be filled by the succession of the First Vice-President to that office. A vacancy in the office of First Vice-President, or Second Vice-President/Treasurer, is filled for the un-expired term by appointment by the Cal Cities Board of a member of the Cal Cities Board. A vacancy in the office of the Immediate Past President is filled for the un-expired term by the last Past President continuing to hold a city office. … 13 a Packet Pg. 333 AA2 Article XII: Voting … Section 5: Mail Balloting. In addition to voting at Cal Cities meetings, Cal Cities may solicit member input by mail ballot. (a)Mailing.10 The question(s) to be voted upon, along with explanatory materials and a ballot, shall be mailed by first class mail to each Member City for consideration and action. (b)Time Frame for Action. Member Cities shall have at least 45 days to cast their vote. Ballots shall be cast by returning the Member City’s ballot to Cal Cities’ principal office in Sacramento. (c)Ballot Tabulation and Results Announcement. The Cal Cities President will appoint a counting committee of three board membersDirectors to count the votes cast by mail ballot. The counting committee will submit its count to the Cal Cities Board, which shall canvass the vote and announce the results. (d) Functional Departments, Regional Divisions, and Caucuses. Departments, divisions, and caucuses may also use mail balloting under procedures specified in their respective bylaws. … Article XV: Prohibited Transactions … Section 4: Ethical Considerations. These restrictions, of course, represent the floor, not the ceiling, for ethical conduct as a Cal Cities board memberDirector or policy committee member. If a board memberDirector or policy committee member believes that there are circumstances under which Cal Cities’ members might reasonably question the board member’sDirector’s or policy committee member’s ability to act solely in the best interests of Cal Cities and its member cities, the prudent course is to abstain. As an example, typically Cal Cities board membersDirectors have abstained from participating in decisions on legislation that would affect organizations for which they work. Another example is legislation that would uniquely benefit a board member’sDirector’s city. Policy committee members should also consider abstaining in similar circumstances. 10 The Administrative Services Committee recommends Cal Cities also include notice of the upcoming ballot in a variety of Cal Cities communications to alert Member Cities to make inquiry in the event a city’s ballot is lost in the mail. 14 a Packet Pg. 334 AA2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14695) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 8/22/2022 Report Type: Action Items City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: City Auditor Vacancy: Council Direction on Next Steps From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk RECOMMENDATION Provide direction on next steps regarding the City Auditor function. BACKGROUND The Palo Alto Charter provides that the City Council appoint an Auditor who serves at the Council’s will. The Charter describes the Auditor’s key duties. (See Charter, Art. IV, sections 1 and 12.) In February 2020, the Council directed the Council Appointed Officers (CAO) Committee to conduct a solicitation for outsourced internal auditing services. After an extensive procurement process, including public input, the CAO Committee recommended finalists to for Coun cil consideration. On September 28, 2020, the Council appointed Kyle O’Rourke, MPA, CAI, CGAP, CRMA, Senior Consulting Manager with Baker Tilly US, LLP, as Palo Alto’s City Auditor. The Council executed a contract with Baker Tilly for the services of Mr. O’Rourke and other supporting personnel, effective October 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022, for a not -to-exceed amount of $1,300,000. On May 9, 2022, the CAO Committee recommended and the Council approved an amendment to the contract to extend the term to June 30, 20225, revise the project scope, and increase the contract amount by $2,126,250 to a not-to-exceed amount of $3,426,250 over five years. Background materials, including the City’s original contract with Baker Tilly and Amendment 1, and additional information about the procurement process, can be found at Item 7 of the Council’s May 9, 2022 agenda. On August 17, 2022, the City received the attached letter from Baker Tilly Managing Partner Vicki Hellenbrand informing the City that Mr. O’Rourke resigned from Baker Tilly on August 15, 2022, and will no longer serve as Palo Alto’s City Auditor. TIMELINE Packet Pg. 335 AA3 City of Palo Alto Page 2 The term of the City’s contract with Baker Tilly is through June 30, 2025. The City, at its discretion, may terminate the contract with ten (10) days written notice. The contract provides for Baker Tilly to designate a temporary replacement for 90 days if the office of Auditor becomes vacant without sufficient time for the Council to appointment a replacement. RESOURCE IMPACT The City’s contract allocates $708,750 per year for audit services. Council approved funding for the audit function in its FY 2023 budget. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This activity is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as defined in CEQA Guidelines, section 15378, because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment Attachments: •Attachmenta: Palo Alto City Auditor Resignation 8-15-2022 Packet Pg. 336 AA2AA3 Baker Tilly US, LLP, trading as Baker Tilly, is a member of the global network of Baker Tilly International Ltd., the members of which are separate and independent legal entities. © 2022 Baker Tilly US, LLP Baker Tilly US, LLP 4807 Innovate Lane, PO Box 7398 Madison, WI, 53707-7398 United States of America T: +1 (608) 249 6622 F: +1 (608) 249 8532 bakertilly.com August 17, 2022 Via email and certified mail Lesley Milton Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Madame Clerk, This correspondence provides the City of Palo Alto formal notice that Kyle O’Rourke resigned from Baker Tilly US LLP on August 15, 2022 and will no longer serve as the City Auditor. We are prepared to provide the City ongoing assistance in fulfilling the City Auditor functions, including, but not limited to, assisting in identifying a successor City Auditor. Regards, BAKER TILLY US, LLP Vicki Hellenbrand, CPA Managing Partner, Public Sector cc: Ed Shikada, City of Palo Alto Jodi Dobson, Baker Tilly US, LLP a Packet Pg. 337 AA2AA3