Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-11-19 City Schools Liaison Committee Agenda PacketAMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA): Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. BIG CREEK ELEMENTARY Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) City of Palo Alto Todd Collins, President, Committee Chair Lydia Kou, Council Member Jennifer DiBrienza, Board Member Greg Tanaka, Council Member Staff Don Austin, PAUSD, Superintendent Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager 1.Oral Communications 2.Approval of the October 15, 2020 Meeting Minutes 3.Superintendent and City Manager Comments 4.Review of Recent City Council and PAUSD Board Meetings 5.COVID-19 Coordination Update 6.Update on After School Sports Programming 7.Updates on Ongoing Matters a.Cubberley Update b.Connecting Palo Alto (Grade Separation) Update 8.Future Meetings and Agendas 9.Adjournment Thursday, November 19, 2020 8:30 AM to 10:00 AM ***BY VIRTUAL TELECONFERENCE ONLY*** https://zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 739 622 589 Phone: 1-669-900-6833 Pursuant to the provisions of California Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, issued on March 17, 2020, to prevent the spread of Covid-19, this meeting will be held by virtual teleconference only, with no physical location. Members of the public who wish to participate by computer or phone can find the instructions at the end of this agenda. City/School Liaison Committee Special Meeting Agenda AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA): Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. Public Comment Instructions Members of the Public may provide public comments to virtual meetings via teleconference or by phone. 1. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Committee, 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. 2. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Committee, 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. 3. 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 Committee. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. https://zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 739 622 589 Phone No: 1-669-900-6833 Page 1 of 18 Special Meeting October 15, 2020 Chairperson Collins called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. on this date via virtual teleconference. Present: City of Palo Alto Representatives Greg Tanaka, Council Member Lydia Kou, Council Member Chantal Cotton Gaines, Assistant to the Manager, Staff Liaison Palo Alto Unified School District Representatives Jennifer DiBrienza, Board Member Todd Collins, Board President (Chair) Don Austin, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District Oral Communications None. Minutes Approval 2. Approval of the September 17, 2020 Meeting Minutes. MOTION: Board Member DiBrienza moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to approve the minutes as presented. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 3. Superintendent and City Manager Comments. Don Austin, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) noted the biggest news was kids were back in school. There were about 700 students back from grades TK-1, which included special education and PAUSD Plus students. Staff had received the numbers from the next phase, which included grades two and three, and totaled about 700 students. About 55 percent of parents were selecting the hybrid model. The School District City/School Liaison Committee Special Meeting Draft Minutes DRAFT MINUTES Page 2 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 did not have a preference of whether the students came back or not. The percentage for the different grade levels held about as consistent as a person was able to get; he was interested to know if that was going to continue on for grades four and five. In connection with that, 98 percent of families were going to stay in their home school, and the two percent that did not, were part of the distance learning option. The School District maintained small class sizes to keep students in the hybrid model. He was able to do this, largely due the funds from the Parcel Tax. Monique Ziesenhenne, Assistant City Manager relayed that Santa Clara County was in the Orange Tier. The City was continuing to work with local businesses to encourage people to shop, eat and visit Palo Alto. The new website shifted from Summer Streets to Uplift Local.org and was live; there was information on local businesses, including what was available. The City was slowly opening playgrounds, but the Magical Bridge Playground was still closed. The City was working with the Magical Bridge Foundation and Community Services Department (CSD) Staff to ensure Staff was making it a safe experience for the community. The Magical Bridge Playground was not really a neighborhood playground, it was more of a regional attraction. Staff wanted to ensure that the playground was opened safely and was managed in a way that was healthy for all participants. Council Member Kou commented that the Magical Bridge Playground, pre- COVID-19, attracted over 25,000 people a month. This was why the City was being cautious when opening and managing it, so it did not become an area that caused spread of the virus. Chair Collins inquired if the intent was to limit the number of kids that used the playground at one time. Ms. Ziesenhenne said yes, the purpose was to limit its use. There was signage that followed the State and Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines but Staff was looking at ways to gate the entrance to ensure there were not too many people in that area at one time. Chair Collins commented that it was a high class problem when the City had the most popular regional playground. He noted that by design, the playground was completely fenced. Council Member Tanaka inquired of the limiting factor in terms of re-opening the playground. DRAFT MINUTES Page 3 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Ms. Ziesenhenne answered they were looking at available Staff or Staff to oversee volunteers. There was outreach to people who were interested in helping, knowing volunteers needed some screening. Manpower was the primary setback for opening, secondarily, the right cleaning products needed to be in place. Council Member Tanaka wondered if some of the Crossing Guard Budget could be used for something like this. Ms. Ziesenhenne answered that Staff looked into that. The crossing points still needed to be staffed even though students were not wholly in school. Staff was looking at a few other contracts as a possibility for staffing the playground. Council Member Tanaka wondered what the estimated time was. Ms. Ziesenhenne said the Magical Bridge Foundation was more comfortable having Palo Alto wait and added there was most likely going to be a Magical Bridge Playground opening in Redwood City in November 2020. Palo Alto wanted to have the playground open sooner. 4. Review of Recent City Council and PAUSD Board Meetings. Council Member Kou mentioned the lawsuit filed by the ACLU in connection to Foothill Nature Preserve. This was discussed in a Closed Session and there was another Closed Session planned for Monday to discuss it again. The title was “Gasque vs. City of Palo Alto.” Council Member Tanaka heard from a lot of parents regarding bandwidth concerns. A big concern was Fiber to the Premise so high speed internet was available to people working from home. Another topic was loosening up some of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) rules to allow for another work- from-home location. Chair Collins commented that reopening plans dominated the Agenda’s for the School Board. There were several meetings regarding the Safety Plan and the plan for delivering instruction. There was a Re-opening Plan approved in early October 2020, which was implemented on October 12, 2020 with the Transitional Kindergarten through first grade returning to all elementary campuses. There was also a Budget Update and at this time, it was not a clear what the year was going to bring. There were a number of indications concluding there was downward pressure on Property Taxes; it DRAFT MINUTES Page 4 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 was useful for the City and the School District to stay in touch on that and to align efforts as much as possible. Another recent topic was the School Board received one-time monies for the first time and the School Board received an accounting for that money, which was approximately $6 million. About $1.7 million was spent on Chrome Books, about $400,000 on room ventilation and air filtration, filtration in classrooms with mechanical HV systems, and many other things. This money needed to be spent by the end of the year and there was $1.2 million remaining. Lastly, PAUSD signed a contract with Stanford Health to provide COVID-19 testing for all Staff members at a District location. Don Austin, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District commented the testing was going to start at Jane Lathrop Stanford Middle School (JLS) and later the testing was able to expand. Chair Collins said most School Districts were referring people to County sites or to the individual’s own provider for COVID-19 testing. To provide better service to Staff and to get the level of participation they wanted, PAUSD contracted with someone to come to the schools. Stanford Health entered into that business recently; they were searching for institutional clients or other government agencies. Stanford Health was extremely professional and very committed to serving the community. Lastly, the School Board met in person on Tuesday last week, it was a hybrid model in the Board Room: there were three members in person, two dialed in via Zoom and two student volunteers. There were seven Staff members in the room and there was community participation via Zoom. It was a first time effort but overall, it went well. They showcased the air filtration recently purchased at the meeting; someone brought in a room-sized HEPA filter that was going to be used in the classroom to be used at their Board Meeting. It was a pilot Board Meeting that was going to be continued as a normal practice. Board Member DiBrienza emphasized there were kids back at school and it was going well. All of the elementary sites were open; the first day was good with some bumps but there were less bumps as the week continued. There was still some anxiety about safety, but the School Board felt the Safety Plans were solid and strong. They were hoping Staff started to feel more comfortable. Council Member Kou inquired about the air filtration and asked if it was a device purchased that was not connected to the ventilation system. DRAFT MINUTES Page 5 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Chair Collins answered there was a three-pronged approach. Prong one was the doors and windows were opened in the classrooms, which was the most highly recommended approach. Most classrooms had windows and doors on both sides of the room, which created a favorable ventilation system. Prong two was there was a mechanical heating and ventilation system in many, but not all the classrooms. Those were turned on, along with the dampers so outside air was coming in. Prong three was there was an upgrade to Merv 13 air filters, which had a magnitude of 10 times the standard Merv 8 filters that were in most commercial buildings. This captured most, but not all of the viral material, along with other particles that were not good to inhale. Airflow was tested in the classrooms and those that did not meet the standard that was adopted, PAUSD brought in the room-sized Hepa filter. Board Member DiBrienza said the Hepa filters looked like a big portable air conditioner (AC). Chair Collins described the Hepa filter and said it sucked in air and blew it out through a Hepa filter. Every classroom had a ventilation check on the door that showed which of the three tiers applied to the room, it indicated if it passed the filtration test and if it had either the Merv 13 filter or the Hepa filter. If the room did not pass the inspection, then the room was not to be used. Council Member Kou was asking in terms of keeping in-door air quality high. Chair Collins remarked that PAUSD had done a lot of research and offered to educate the City with any information they had. Council Member Kou mentioned that winter was coming and opening the doors and windows was something that needed to be considered then. 5. COVID-19 Coordination Update. Monique Ziesenhenne, Assistant City Manager commented on testing and said there was a County sponsored pop-up testing last Friday and there were 720 people that came. People were able to check the COVID-19 updates from the City and appointments were now allowed seven days in advance. Some people did not have an appointment but were still served. The City was continuing to provide all services virtually, but in-person services were available by appointment, Zoom, Teams or other venues. The City was also looking at filtration systems to ensure that those systems were in place as employees came back to work. DRAFT MINUTES Page 6 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager thought the summary was good. Rachel Tanner, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services agreed and thought Council Member Kou’s idea on sharing notes on ventilation was good. Council Member Tanaka spoke with some childcare providers as they were struggling to stay open and commented that parents with older kids had an easier time working from home, but it was tougher working from home with smaller kids. The childcare providers were having a tough time and parents with younger kids were having a tough time; he opened the subject up for comments on how to solve that problem. Kristen O’Kane, Director of Community Services Department (CSD) replied that the Human Services Office, which was part of CSD, met regularly with childcare providers to understand their concerns and constraints. Both sides expressed a difficulty. There were some childcare providers at Cubberley Community Center (CCC) that either went out of business or were at risk of going out of business. At the same time, there were some parents that needed childcare. There was not a solution at this time, but the City Manager attended the last meeting to try to gain more insight as to the needs both parties might have. Council Member Kou inquired of the need for after school childcare. Ms. O’Kane said yes and wanted confirmation that the afterschool childcare that was typically provided was continuing. Don Austin, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District said yes. Ms. O’Kane repeated that there was afterschool childcare at the elementary schools that was continuing. Council Member Kou inquired if that was through the City. Ms. O’Kane said the agreement was complicated but there was some funding through the School District and the State. Chair Collins knew the City and the School District coordinated at many levels and not all levels were visible. He urged all to leverage one another’s DRAFT MINUTES Page 7 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 resources on this topic. For example, the School District put a lot of emphasis on ventilation; if anyone was able to leverage that information, he wanted to see it put to use. 6. North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) Update. Rachel Tanner, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services said she was going to summarize for the City School Liaison Committee (Committee) where the City stood with regard to the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP.) Last February 2020, the NVCAP was putting on a Community Workshop to present three draft alternatives that were prepared. Since then, the workshop happened and there was a subsequent online questionnaire for people that were not able to attend the workshop. The summer was spent switching to virtual meetings and working through a specific group of questions that the Working Group wanted to see, such as open space, housing, what type of office and what type of retail the group wanted to see in the NVCAP. The NVCAP included approximately 60 acres of area bounded by Page Mill Road, Lambert, El Camino Real and Park Boulevard. There was a 14 member Working Group selected by the City Council which began meeting in the fall of 2018. There was a meeting on October 8, 2020 to share three new Draft Alternative with the Working Group, which incorporated a variety of ideas and suggestions from the Working Group, for which they tried to address. During the summer there was a lot of discussion regarding housing, open space and transportation; while they did not come to a consensus, Staff did have three alternatives that reflected the different polls of the group. Now, Staff was preparing more information and planned on taking some of the feedback to the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC) in December 2020. Staff wanted the PTC to make a recommendation to the Council. The PTC was most likely going to make adjustments and Staff anticipated the NVCAP was to go to Council early 2021 with the PTC’s recommendations. Following taking this item to the City Council, Staff was going to do more work on the alternatives, which included traffic studies and other more specific studies for whichever preferred alternative was chosen. The presentations were available at the NVCAP website. Alternative 1 maintained the Cannery Building because it was a historic resource. Under this alternative, the building was intended for a mix of retail and office use or housing and it was suggested to have the taller development on the El Camino and Page Mill sides of the complex. There was a suggested bonus program for affordable housing in regard to height limit to accommodate more affordable units. Staff wanted to take advantage of the parking lot areas and turn those into housing. A key goal was to retain the creak as an asset. There were similar items repeated between Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, but a big difference in Alternative 2 DRAFT MINUTES Page 8 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 was the development on El Camino Real, which included the bonus program. The height limit in Alternative 2 were more consistent with the 50 foot height limit and Staff was trying to envision redevelopment to accommodate more housing units. Lastly, Alternative 3 was similar to Alternative 2 but the difference was the allowance of more office square footage in an effort to realize the housing gains. Staff was going to seek more park space from the private developers to be park land for the City. She had an opportunity to speak with Staff at the School District about how the City was to understand the student yield from these developments. Alternative 1 was to have a realistic yield of about 500 housing units, Alternative 2 was about 1,100 housing units and Alternative 3 was close to 1,500 housing units. Once the City had the preferred alternative, they wanted to work with the School District to understand what the different housing types might be and how the City was able to plan for schools near the housing site. There were some brainstorming ideas on how and where those sites could be with School District Staff. Chair Collins was interested in the number of housing units and thanked Staff. He corrected that the School District did not work with any demographer, but they did have a forecasting firm; historically the forecasting firm was incorrect more than they were correct, and School District Staff did not rely heavily on their forecasts. He urged City Staff to do the same. That being said, the numbers Ms. Tanner mentioned referred to full school sized numbers or more. Town house projects, like Alta Real, yielded almost one student per unit, which was the same as single family housing. He did not know how many of the units were town houses verses apartments, or one bedroom verses three bedrooms, but if there were 1,100 units, that was enough for a school. He was disappointed that there was no explicit mention of schools in the plans, which was something they had asked for, including a seat at the table of the committee. He noted that parks were called out, which were essential, but not schools; this was disappointing because schools seemed like an afterthought. What was being discussed was the construction of new neighborhood and his fears were realized, with regard to the inclusion of schools in the plans. Additionally, his understanding was the property owner was not interested in the plans and he wanted to know the practical impact of whatever their position was now. Ms. Tanner answered that the owner of the property was participating in the working group and were actively involved in the discussion of the plans. The owner preferred Alternative 1, where the building was retained and having it be used for a mix of office and retail. A future owner was able to turn the building into housing or demolish it. DRAFT MINUTES Page 9 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Chair Collins inquired if Alternative 1 included building on the parking lot. Ms. Tanner said yes, near the creek. Depending on the size of the building and how it was shaped, it was possibly 50 units. Parking was going to need to be on another part of the property or underground. Chair Collins inquired if the owner could say they did not want anything built on their lot. Ms. Tanner said yes but they did say they were open to including housing on the lot. There was some uncertainty on the market at this time. They did have some preliminary designs as to what was able to fit there, which was hopeful. Council Member Tanaka commented that the reaction of the property owner was an important consideration. He agreed with the Chair about considering the schools in development of the project. If the schools were not able to support a build, the situation did not work; the School District and the City needed to be good partners. Whatever the City needed to do to help facilitate that they needed to do. Board Member DiBrienza inquired of the different levels of housing, such as low-income or market rate housing. Ms. Tanner said the City wanted to maintain the 15 percent inclusionary housing. An additional idea was a Bonus Program for 100 percent affordable housing. If an Alta Housing site was able to build more affordable units, that was good. Many thought the set height limit was good but also, if a taller building was able to yield more housing, that was a good idea. A Study Staff was going to take on before the NVCAP went to the PTC was to understand whether, at this height, if it was possible to have more than 15 percent affordable housing and did Staff think the rental units were able to be on- site affordable units as well. Often times, renters paid a fee, which was good, but Staff wanted to see a path for building on-site rental units that were affordable. Staff was hopeful that there would be this kind of a yield from a financial feasibility perspective; this was part of a possible policy that the PTC and the City Council were able to consider. Board Member DiBrienza recalled there was a map of traffic flow and there was one part that hit a dead end; she wanted to know of that was south of this project. DRAFT MINUTES Page 10 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Ms. Tanner answered yes. Board Member DiBrienza asked about the places of improvement. Ms. Tanner said the circles on the map were places that needed improvement, but part of that decision dealt with the housing development that was set in that site and what they thought the traffic flow was going to be. Staff did hire a Traffic Consultant to help with what was most appropriate given the volume at the end of it. There were some intersections, such as at Ash and Page Mill that Staff wanted to get pedestrians safely across, but the County was not in favor of having a traffic light at that intersection, so Staff was brainstorming other possibilities. Board Member DiBrienza commented that navigation around the new neighborhood was going to be really important. She did not think the development should not happen because of school considerations but she thought it was important to be realistic about how many students it was going to bring, which tended to be elementary students. Then the question was where they were going to go and if it involved crossing over many busy roads. Ms. Tanner appreciated the feedback. Chair Collins commented regarding the enrollment forecasting, and said the underlying reality was the developments were different, demographics were different, and it was very site and type dependent. Council Member Kou asked about planning for a school in an adjacent area and inquired what the adjacency looked like. Ms. Tanner answered the discussion was what were some other sites there could be, especially with regard to there being busy streets, such as the side of the development or something south. Staff was looking at other sites that were available for schools that were within the planned area or a short bike ride away from the planned area. Council Member Kou confirmed Staff was not looking at sections that crossed Page Mill, Oregon or even El Camino. Many of the Ventura kids went to Baron Park, which had narrow and often one-lane roads, so if that was going to happen, Baron Park and the School District needed to be included in the discussion. DRAFT MINUTES Page 11 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Ms. Tanner wanted to look at locations that were easy to walk and bike to, in connection to the Safe Routes to School Program. Chair Collins wondered why planners were looking adjacent to the planned area and not in the planned area. Ms. Tanner clarified that it was not that Staff was not looking in the planned area, but they were looking at all possibilities. Chair Collins hoped potential schools were going to be inside the planned area. He gave the example of Nixon School; it was a planned community built by Stanford in the 1960’s and the school was placed in the center of the community. That worked out great and was ideally done; that planned community was made in conjunction with the school planning. 7. Safe Routes to School Annual Presentation. Sylvia Star-Lack, Manager of Transportation oversaw the Safe Routes to Schools Program and introduced the Safe Routes to School Coordinator. This Report was going to cover last school year and the first part of this school year. COUNCIL MEMBER TANAKA LEFT THE MEETING AT 9:30 A.M. Rosie Mesterhazy, Safe Routes to School Coordinator said the mission was to grow the partnership, reduce risk, provide healthy active and sustainable commuting options and grow community support for the program. There were record bike counts for 2019 with high schools exceeding 50 percent biking for the first time, infrastructure projects were generating increased bike ridership and Staff were effectively moderating speeds on the newly finished Bike Boulevard Corridors. There was an uptick in youth involvement. Staff expanded the community outreach to include partnering real kids to create a successful Cargo Bike Event and Film Festival, including many other events. The program experienced never before difficulties, which included budget cuts, inexperienced road riders and the loss of the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) Transportation Safety Committee Co-Chair. Motor vehicle traffic reductions were leading to increases in walking and biking. This translated to developing into more accommodating infrastructure, which by default, intensified the City’s relationship with PAUSD. The pandemic response strategy allowed the program to pivot in many directions to support online and distance learning education, including new school infrastructure and renewed the City’s commitment to accommodating low- DRAFT MINUTES Page 12 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 income families and families from under-represented communities. The City provided PAUSD with hundreds of hours of “in-time” Staff support to ensure active transportation options were a priority. Over a few weeks, Staff overhauled the fifth and eighth grade Safe Routes to School curriculum to support distance learning. Staff worked with partners to roll out a Lego- based program for fourth and seventh grade students and developed a customized digital download in English and Spanish regarding pedestrian safety. The one-on-one Bike Safety consultations involved a contact with about 50 families. The 2019-2020 activities that were yet to be included involved implementing the sixth grade Back-to-School Bike Safety Education and determining how to support physically distanced third grade Bike Rodeo options for students in 2021. Alongside education were the challenges in supporting inclusive transportation infrastructure so families were not equating cars with Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Staff worked closely with PAUSD staff Mike Jacobs, Teri Curtis and with the School Re-opening Subcommittee to develop presentations and to conduct school site visits to enhance physical distancing accommodations along school routes. In one example, Staff recommended bike racks be moved at a location to support students entering designated K-1 entry points. Maps were created for those recommendations and were shared with the School District. Developing physically distant education and engineering treatments were two of the biggest challenges. A third challenge included supporting PAUSD to create inclusive transportation guidelines to ensure that the more than 58 percent of students that walked and biked had proper guidance on transportation related procedures to support safe physical distancing. Some examples were meal pick-ups and provided guidance for walkers and bikers. To accommodate, Staff collaborated with regional partners to enhance active transportation and school re-opening guidance at the County level. Palo Alto led the charge in developing these guidelines which were then adopted by PAUSD. Staff had since seen reinvigorated active transportation guidance and had seen reinvigorated support for socially distant walk/bike encouragement events. Regarding engagement, the Palo Alto Police Department worked with the crossing guard provider to fill all the Crossing Guard positions. Staff wanted to make sure all students had access to low stress active transportation school commutes. Staff was in continued discussion with the Office of Transportation (OOT) as well as the School Engagement Specialist to set up a Pilot Program to set up school and pedestrian commutes by providing access to bike accessories, repair and volunteer chaperones to support students. Her hope was that the efforts would inspire parent confidence and support early back to school bike and safety strategies. Staff’s assistance was to continue through January 2021. Staff planned on continuing to work at the school level with the transportation representatives to ensure PAUSD staff was aware of PAUSD’s stated guidelines in relevant outreach and communication materials. Upon DRAFT MINUTES Page 13 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 completion of these activities, Staff was going to pivot to rolling out the modified spring education school programing and re-shift their focus to support the completion of the Safe Routes to School Transportation Equity Plan. Rebuilding the Safe Routes to School Program was difficult but Staff hoped their efforts helped to prevent transportation related injuries while supporting healthy and sustainable environments. Board Member DiBrienza thanked Staff and said Safe Routes to School looked very different this year; it was good to know there was still a partnership to make sure all the things that were supposed to happen were still happening. She observed, as a parent, that kids can be nervous at times, which was also true for riding and crossing; this was an area she was really concerned with. Chair Collins inquired if the budget was cut this year. Ms. Star-Lack replied yes. The OOT Operating Budget was cut, most noticeably with regard to the free shuttle, which supported student commute. Chair Collins inquired if the Safe Routes to School Budget was cut. Ms. Star-Lack said yes but there was a grant associated with it that was not cut. Ms. Mesterhazy noted that with distance learning, it caused Staff to not need the contracts they had before, so Staff was able to offset those costs. Chair Collins remarked that just like the rest of the school experience, students were not getting the learning they wanted either. There was a deficit that needed to be made up because kids were going to have to learn the things that would have been taught them when they missed in-school instruction. He seriously felt that the School District needed to consider contributing money to Safe Routes to School this year and understood there was not a Budget for that. He saw a name for a Safe Routes Coordinator on the School District side, but he did not think it was a full time position. This was a partnership that had been in place for a long time but for whatever reason, it became a one-sided partnership and the School District did not actively fund the partnership. He felt that what everyone was going through was like a Great Reset and he wished to set these partnerships on a path where they were able to sustain themselves going forward. He felt strained in this partnership too because the City did a lot of the work, but the School DRAFT MINUTES Page 14 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 District was the beneficiary and they relied on it. Financially, the School District has played defense with regard to their budget, but as the City and the School District went through difficult financial times, it was a good time to revisit the partnership and make sure it was sustainable going forward. Ms. Star-Lack remarked that the City considered appointing a teacher on a special assignment to work with the City on the Safe Routes to School Initiative because it was beneficial having insight on the school side. In addition, a City objective was to work with PAUSD on adopting their own Safe Routes to School Policy. Staff began that policy work but did not push it very hard, mainly due to the pandemic. Ms. Mesterhazy reiterated that the Program had to be rebuilt and some amazing partners came out of the woodwork to recognize the importance of transportation and safety. Many families were out riding and walking, and because they did not receive the education this year, there was a warrant for Staff to figure out how to get this information out. This was about prevention and wellness; she suggested brining the School Board into the conversation. She wanted to make sure the information went out to all students throughout the District. Chair Collins said there were two things he wanted to mention, and one was the reduction of public transportation, which covered the shuttle and the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). It was not only the reduction in capacity but fear in ridership. When secondary school commenced there was going to be the heaviest potential impact because there were a lot of students that took the bus. The second thing he wanted to mention was the school start time changed with distance learning and the expectation was when in-person learning came back, the 9:00 A.M. start time was to continue. Getting students to school while parents had to get ready for work was a carefully engineered process and changing the start time was probably going to cause some rethinking. Ms. Star-Lack mentioned, regarding the high school start times, it was not really known what was going to happen once kids went back to school and if/when parents went back to work. Telecommuting was possibly going to change these commute dynamics. Staff was going to be following this and adjusting things as needed. Staff had been constantly optimizing their school routes for bike commutes and Staff has been adjusting the roads to allow for larger and larger volumes of traffic; if more students commuted the City was ready for that problem. There were temporary treatments that might be needed on the public rights of way, in order to accommodate larger groups of students. Regarding school traffic flow, the City had a traffic tool kit to DRAFT MINUTES Page 15 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 adopt, but it was going to require working with the school principals and the Parent Teacher Association’s (PTA) to understand, for example, where the City needed to temporarily restrict parking. Regarding transit regionally, the transit agencies were getting together to understand how they were going to make use safer during COVID-19 and safer for re-opening. She wanted to mention that because there were ways to make transit safe and they were working on that. Ms. Mesterhazy mentioned that Staff was in assessment mode and just yesterday the School District released a Parent Survey, so Staff was able to assess travel patterns relative to last year. The Survey included things like what parents intended to do, how they could make vehicles safe and if they would be willing to participate in activities such as Park and Walk. Fewer vehicles on the road did not necessarily make things safer; safety in numbers made the students more visible. If there were staggered times, Staff wanted to know about that because it was to lead to smaller numbers and make students less visible. She questioned what could be done to recruit volunteers, set up socially distance walking school busses or travel patterns that helped support the school start time and to ensure students had options. Staff was coming up with ways to conduct this outreach and one was the Mobile Information Kiosk E-Bike (MIKE). This was a cargo bike that they were working to outfit with an umbrella and an information table; it was intended to be a Safe Routes to School Mobile. People were able to stop and ask questions about traffic and safety and possibly even conduct minor bike repairs. Having the bicycles on the streets was a means of emergency preparedness. It showed people that alternate transit was a great option, also, fewer people were driving and there was greater access for bicyclists and pedestrians. Ms. Star-Lack noted that if people went back to work or school and decided that their car was PPE then the streets were not equipped to handle that. People needed to give support to community members that were walking and biking. Ms. Mesterhazy added that wellness was a factor. Ms. Star-Lack agreed about exercise. Joslyn Leve thanked the Chair about bringing up secondary school. It was important, as kids were getting to their campuses, to think about programming that familiarized students with getting to and from their campus. Students were scheduled to come back when there was going to be DRAFT MINUTES Page 16 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 colder and rainier weather. Some students were going to have an earlier or later start time, so any sort of test run was going to be important. She supported group rides to acclimate the kids before they came back. Council Member Kou thanked Staff on how they were able to pivot when the pandemic took place and thanked Chair Collins for his comment about collaborating more with the City. She inquired if the Safe Routes to School Program included private schools as well. Ms. Mesterhazy answered that formally, it was ideal to institutionalize private and Charter School participation with the presence of those school communities; some expressed interest in joining the partnership. Informally, the City continued to be mobile concierges for the entire community. Whenever private schools made inquiries, Staff did their best to direct them to the resources. It was a priority for Staff to make sure every family had access to the information. She saw this as a growth/expansion area and as more resources became available, she wanted to bring more private schools into the partnership. Ms. Star-Lack added that all the resources were public and available to everyone. As a side note, often times private schools had different transportation demands to follow as conditions of their operations, so they were often doing their own kind of Safe Routes to School and often called the City for resources. Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager added that the City Manager asked Staff to reach out to the private schools, as they were thinking of re- opening. Council Member Kou thought that was good because in the end, an outbreak was here in the City. Transportation had different prongs, so there needed to be a plan in coordination with the regional efforts. Even with the commuters, their plan needed to be coordinated. 8. Updates on Ongoing Matters. a. Cubberley Update b. Connecting Palo Alto (Grade Separation) Update Kristen O’Kane, Director of Community Services commented that a lot of the tenants were back at Cubberley and a lot of the preschools were operating; there was a lot of in-door and out-door programming. DRAFT MINUTES Page 17 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 Don Austin, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District relayed that some of the buildings were in worse shape than they anticipated. Every time something was fixed, staff found 10 more problems. Chair Collins noted that was not a reflection on the City, the school was just old. Mr. Austin agreed. Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager said the Expanded Community Advisory Panel (XCAP) was still deliberating. Their next meeting was scheduled for October 28, 2020. They were working to finalize their Report and recommendations and were looking to go to the Council in December 2020. Chair Collins anticipated this was going to need to be communicated to the school community as they had many other things on their mind. He wanted to think about how to make sure the community was engaged and was heard. Future Meetings and Agendas Council Member Kou wanted a Report on the Sports Programs. There were a lot of parents that were thankful for the After-School Sports Programs. She wondered if there might be more collaboration between the schools and the City, especially with regard to the uses of facilities. Monique Ziesenhenne, Assistant City Manager said she will include that in the updates. Council Member Kou remarked about the next year and wanted to explore adding private schools on this City School Liaison Committee (Committee). Chair Collins thought that was a great topic for the next version of this Committee since the current member’s terms were ending. Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager reminded the Committee that the Project Safety New was scheduled. Ms. Ziesenhenne added Alcove was also scheduled to be agendized. DRAFT MINUTES Page 18 of 18 Sp. City School Liaison Committee Meeting Draft Minutes: 10/15/2020 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:09 A.M.