The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-02-21 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Council Chambers February 21, 2012 6:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting. 1 February 21, 2012 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Call to Order Closed Session Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1.CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-EXISTING LITIGATION Subject: Schmidlin v. City of Palo Alto Sixth District Court of Appeal, Case No. H034169 Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a) Special Orders of the Day 2.Adolescent Counseling Services - Community Presention 3.Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Public Art Commission for Three Terms Ending on April 30, 2015. 4.Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Human Relations Commission for Three Terms Ending on March 31, 2015 5.Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Utilities Advisory Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on June 30, 2013 City Manager Comments Oral Communications Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. 2 February 21, 2012 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Consent Calendar Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members. 6.Approval for the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos to Purchase Public Safety Systems Technology, Including Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Police Records Management (RMS), and In-Vehicle Mobile and Reporting Applications for Police and Fire 7.Approval of a Utilities Enterprise Fund Contract with PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. in the Amount of $553,180 for Electric Pole Replacement at Locations Throughout the City (System Improvement: EL-98003) and a 4kV to 12kV Electric Capital Improvement Project Between Alma Street, West Charleston Road, El Camino Real and Del Medio Avenue (EL-09004) 8.Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Add the Amount of $47,878.71 to Contract No. C09127439 with All City Management Services, Inc. for a Total Contract Not to Exceed Value of $1,101,784.71 for Adult Crossing Guard Services Provided During the Period of September 1, 2011 – November 30, 2011 9.Approval of a Contract Agreement with Alta Planning & Design in the Amount of $400,000 to Develop a New Safe Routes to School Program 10.Adoption of a Resolution Donating Surplus Fire Equipment to Oaxaca, Mexico 11.Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds 12.Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011 13.Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept MGO’s Financial Statements and Letter 14.Adoption of a Resolution Expressing Appreciation to William Berry Upon Completion of His Term as a Utilities Advisory Commissioner 3 February 21, 2012 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and put up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS: Public comments or testimony on agenda items other than Oral Communications shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 15.Public Meeting for Presentation from U.S. Postal Service to Discuss Process for Disposition and Relocation of Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue 16.Update Regarding Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and Regional Housing Needs Methodology, Determination of Designations for Priority Development Areas, and Authorization for Letter Regarding One Bay Area Transportation Grant Criteria 17.Submittal of Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Monthly Construction Contract Report and Council Direction to Staff to Continue Construction Contract Monthly Reports Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the Public are entitled to directly address the City Council/Committee concerning any item that is described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the Council/Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council/Committee, but it is very helpful. 4 February 21, 2012 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Supplemental Information Standing Committee Meetings Regional Housing Mandate Committee Agenda Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report City Manager Council Retreat Follow-up Letter Public Letters to Council City of Palo Alto (ID # 2534) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 1 (ID # 2534) Summary Title: Adolescent Counseling Svc.-Community Presentation Title: Adolescent Counseling Services -Community Presention From:City Manager Lead Department: Community Services See attached. Attachments: ·Attachment A -Adolescent Counseling Services info sheet (PDF) Prepared By:Minka VanDerZwaag, Department Head:Greg Betts, Director, Community Services City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager ACS empowers teens and their families in our community to realize their emotional and social potential through counseling and preventive education 2011-2012 Began in 1980, providing free counseling to students and families at 9 campuses - all 5 sec- ondary schools in PAUSD, Menlo Atherton High, Redwood High, Sequoia Community Day, and La Entrada Middle Provides individual, group, and family counseling Bilingual counseling in Spanish and Mandarin • • • Designed to address problems before they come crisis through prevention and early intervention Each site has 1 licensed LMFT, LCSW, Ph.D., or Psy.D. who train and supervise graduate or post- graduate interns In 2010-2011, ACS provided assistance to over 1,100 clients through 6,500 sessions • • • Funding sources: 21% govern- ment, 16% schools, 20% founda- tion/corporation, 12% Spring Sounds, 29% individuals/commu- nity, 2% interest • On-Campus Counseling Program Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Program Fee for service program with scholarships available on a sliding scale Started in 1991, the program addresses the underlying issues that contribute to substance abuse, encouraging sobriety and reinforcing healthy lifestyles for adolescents and their families Follows national best practices in- cluding the 12-step model, family involvment, and psychotherapy • • • In 2010-2011, program served 205 clients through assessments and treatment and reach 1,500 individuals through education and outreach Funding sources: 41% program fees, 22% foundations/corpora- tions, 19% individuals/com- munity, 15% Spring Sounds, 3% interest • • Services include: Assessment to determine severity of abuse Treatment to help teens break cycle of addiction using drug testing and individual, family, and group therapy After-care/recovery to reinforce healthy lifestyles and provide support needed to prevent relapse Preventive education ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ This message appeared on a white board at Palo Alto High School on Dec 15, 2010 Adolescent Counseling Services After-School Counseling Program Started in September 2008 as a pilot project and became full program in July 2009 Mission is to provide affordable counseling, psychotherapy, and education to teens and families in need of counseling services who do not have access to the OCC Program, need family counseling, or longer-term therapy Services provided during the afternoon and evening hours • • • Fee for service program with scholarships available on a sliding scale In 2010-2011, the program served 86 clients (up 5% from previous year) through 743 sessions (an 83% increase over 2009-2010) Partnerships with Boys and Girls Clubs of the Peninsula, East Palo Alto Youth Court, and Building Futures Now • • • Support groups offered based on interest from clients and com- munity Funding sources: 51% program fees, 33% individuals/community, 12% foundations/corporations, 3% interest, 1% Spring Sounds • • About ACS | Page 1 Parent education is provided each year on topics such as developmental issues in ado- lescence, communication with teens, depression, school bully- ing, and substance abuse •In 2010-2011, ACS reached a to- tal of 5,308 individuals through community education. This figure doesn’t even factor in the thousands of views our Teen Talk blog gets each year In 2010-2011, ACS hosted two Breaking the Stigma forums on bullying and teen stress and co- sponsored a talk on depression with author Julie Hersh • • Breaking the Stigma forums for 2010-2012 are as follows: 11/10/11 Teen Substance Abuse 2/9/12 Self-Image and Esteem 5/10/12 Leaving the Nest ACS’ Teen Talk blog can be found at http://acsteens.wordpress. com and is updated 2-3 times per week • ◊ ◊ ◊ • Community Education Most Common Issues On-Campus Counseling Program Communication with parents Academic stress Peer relationships Depression Anxiety • • • • • Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Program Substance abuse Depression Communication with parents Physical or sexual abuse Sexual or gender identity • • • • • After-School Counseling Program Communication with parents Academic stress Peer relationships Cross-cultural issues Divorce/Single parent • • • • • Adolescent Counseling Services 1717 Embarcadero Road, Suite 4000 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650-424-0852 www.acs-teens.org CLIENT DEMOGRAPHICS in 2010-2011... ACS provided direct services to a total of 1,465 clients ACS provided community education to 5,308 individuals 40% of clients were male, 60% were female 40% White, 33% Hispanic, 14% Asian, 8% Afri- can-American, 3% Pacific Islander, 2% Other • • • • Be Enchanted Adolescent Counseling Services invites you to be transport- ed to the Mediterranean for an evening that will tantalize all of your senses! Proceeds benefit ACS’ critical programs. Spring Sounds 2012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 6:30-11:30pm Club Illusions | 260 S. California Ave., Palo Alto Cocktail Attire (with Mediterranean flair encouraged or purchase flair in our bazaar) Hosted Bar 6:30-9:00 Individual Ticket $180 each Band of Nomads (8 or more people) $165 each (Before February 29, $200 after Feb. 29) www.springsoundsevent.org About ACS | Page 2 Each year, ACS ends up with a list of over 40 issues that teens and families come to us for help with. Here are the top 5 issues by program from the 2010-2011 school year. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Public Art Commission for Three Terms Ending on April 30, 2015. Enclosed are six applications submitted for three terms, ending on April 30, 2015 on the Public Art Commission. At the Council Meeting on February 21, 2012, the City Council will select the candidates to be interviewed for the Public Art Commission, with the interview date to be determined. Council may move to interview all applicants, only specific applicants, or reopen the recruitment. Copies of all applications are attached. The applicants are as follows: 1.Richard Ambrose 2.Arlena Campagna 3.Harvey Citrin 4.Hemla Makan-Dullab 5.Vikki Tobak 6.Patricia Walsh REPORT PREPARED BY:Ronna Jojola Gonsalves, Deputy City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: ·Ambrose Application (PDF) ·Campagna Application (PDF) ·Citrin Application (PDF) Updated: 2/15/2012 8:10 AM by Ronna Gonsalves Page 2 ·Makan-Dullabh Application (PDF) ·Tobak Application (PDF) ·Walsh Application (PDF) Department Head:Donna Grider, City Clerk CI T.'l°tPALO"AlTO Ck ell Y CL£R h'S OFP{et 12 JAN 26 PI' 5: 2l PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. All fonns must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. NAME: Ambrose Richard HOME PHONE: Last First RESIDENCE 2716"Del Monte Ave ADDRESS: ~~ __________________________ ~ __ ___ Street EI Cerrito CA 94530 City State Zip Education: BFA, University of Oregon, Studio Art, minor in Art History 1979 MFA, Colorado State University, Studio Art 1981 ------- WORK PHONE: 650-321-3891 CELL PHONE: 304-767-4836 EMAIL: _8xocu_tiv_ed_I,_octo_r@-,-p_ac_lflca_rt_I"_Q_U8_.org_ List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: 27 Years of curatorial experience in collections management and acquisitions (through purchases and donations); exhibition and maintenance of public art collections in Colorado, West Virginia, and California. 1984-2011. Board Member, Pueblo Arts Council (CO),1985-1988. Board Member, Fresno Arts Council (CA), 1990-1993 Vice President, Arts Advocacy, West Virginia 1995-2007, Secured state funding for public art and capital improvements for state·wide arts organizations. Chair, Outdoor Public Art Committee for a 1 million dollar sculpture commission, Clay Center for the Arts and Sciences, Charleston West Virginia, 2006-07. Rocky Mountain Conservatory, Denver CO, Materials Conservation Certificate, 1989. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the tenn applied for? -• California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Jfyou answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney be/ore filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-. 2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT Present or last employer Pacific Art League Name of Company: Occupation: D D [{J D D [lJ D Executive Director f . I ( ) ~ (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signatu<e of Applicant' .~O(, . ~ 'NY ~ Date: _9_-_2_1_-_1_1 _____ _ *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions-702-23 9/13/2011 Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Richard Ambrose Date: September 21, 2011 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes No • Public Art Commission D (Date: _____ ---..1. [ZJ 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? The Daily Post: D Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D website:DfYeS, Please Identify: ______________ _ Email from City Clerk: D Library Bulletin Board: D Other, Please Specify: Conversation with Ally Richter FlyerlBOOkmark:D 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: As Director of the Pacific Art League for the past 22 months, I have worked with a diverse group of artists, educators, art students, art enthusiasts, donors, and businesses. I am a practicing artist and have works in numerous private and public collections. One of the oldest arts organizations in the bay area, the Pacific Art League has represented excellence in arts education and provided art experiences to people of all ages, cultural interests and artistic skill levels. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities,experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? The Public Art Commission and its collecting programs represents the cultural vision of the community and symbolizes public support for artistic creativity and enrichment. I have served on numerous committees in three states that were responsible for granting funds to artists, and arts organizations. I have also provided leadership in the acquisition of public collections, and development of related educational programs at three museums. I understand the critical role of stewardship and the public trust in maintaining the community's cultural assets. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? Ifit were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? 1) engage the entire community to assess their interest in public art and to promote the role of public art throughout the community; 2) ensure that aU policies and decision-making processes are transparent, adhered to and reflect accountability; 3) adopt best aesthetic practices in selecting art that reflects community roots, identity, and cultural enrichment; 4) be proactive in promoting ongoing support for the arts in the community; and, 5) develop a long term strategic plan for the stewardship of the current collection and for future acquisitions. I would view my role as serving at the pleasure of the Public Art Commission and will be responsive to any change or new direction relevant to that role. 6. What are the current issues facing the Public Art Commission? 1) awareness of the Commission's value to the community and its role in engaging and educating the citizens about the city's cultural assets and accessibility; 2) update its mission and list it on the web site. 3) develop a long term strategic plan that defines the Commission's educational goals and objectives, develops a cohesive collection maintenance and conservation plan, and identifies potential sites to display works of art both on a temporarily and/or permanent basis and, 4) create an overall collection conservation plan, that addresses ongoing maintenance issues that includes a list of objects that need immediate conservation and secure adequate funds to implement the conservation process. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? I am familiar with the permanent art installations around the community. However I cannot cannot comment on the bulk of the city's collection that is in storage. The 300 plus collection, that are not site specific, are generally not as accessible to the community and many may not have been exhibited for an extensive period.. The permanent works run the gamut of public art reflecting multiple styles, subject matter and representing unique opportunities to integrate art with the architectural or landscape surroundings. My suggestions are: , 1) make the collection more available and accessible to all possible segments of the community; 2) inventory and document the entire collection and have the visual and supporting information on the Commission's web site; 3) partner with local arts organizations, community centers and businesses in the Silicon Valley to showcase the collection; 4) develop a long term acquisition plan based on the strengths and weaknesses of the current collection and 5) determine which works of the eXisting collection should be recommended for de-accessing based on condition, redundancy and/or not renecting the overall quality of the collection. ' 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? 1) develop a short and long term strategiC plan to improve the Commission's stewardship of current and future collections, 2) outline future actions to engage artists in creating art at, or for these potential sites; 3) update its collecting policies to ensure adequate funding for acquisitions, exhibition, and care of the collection; 4) conduct an analysis of the existing collection identifying its strengths and weaknesses; 5) create an acquisition/deaccession plan to strengthen the.coliection; 6) based on available resources become more prudent in collecting art, and 7) make the collection more accessible and have the entire collection on its web site with supporting information. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 I ' City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: [l] I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR D I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address Phone Date J. *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 Gonsalves, Ronna From: Gonsalves, Ronna Sent: Friday, January 20,20123:22 PM To: 'Richard Ambrose' Cc: Gon~~~,Ron~ Subject: RE: Public Art Commission Recruitment Attachments: Ambrose Application DO NOT USE IN PACKET.pdf Hello, l. y Page 1 of2 You are serving in an "unexpired" term. In other words, the commissioner before you resigned before his term was over and you are finishing his term which expires in April. Yes, we can resubmit your application from last year. I will attach your application in case you want to review it. If you are selected to serve again, your term would then be three years beginning on May 1. Thanks for the email and please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves 650-329-2267 From: Richard Ambrose [mailto:executivedirector@pacificartleague.org] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 11:55 AM To: Gonsalves, Ronna Cc: DeMarzo, Elise Subject: Re: Public Art Commission Recruitment Hi Ronna, Please clarify my term as Commissioner of the Palo Alto Arts Commission. I thought I was elected to a first three year term this past November. If! was elected to fill a a vacant position that will expire this year, can I resubmit my original application? Thanks, Ric On Thu, Jan 19,2012 at 5:10 PM, Gonsalves, Ronna <Ronna. Gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: . Terry, Richard, and Michael, As you are probably aware, your term on the Public Art Commission expires on April 30, 2012. During the next few weeks, we will be advertising and accepting applications for term ending on April 30, 2015. The deadline for receipt of applications for incumbents is 5:30 p.m. on February 9, 112312012 2012. l } Page 2'0£2 \ ) If you wish to apply for the new term, please complete the attached application form so that the Council has up-to-date information or call and request that your current application be reactivated. I need to hear from you prior to the deadline of February 9, 2012. Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves Deputy City Clerk I City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2267 I ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org I www.cityofpaloalto.org\clerk 1123/2012 €iHY 6F PALO Alf:~M~A SfTY CLERK'S ~FFleE f 2 fEB 14 PH I: 0 I PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. All forms must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. Atyped signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. NAME: Campagna Alena HOME PHONE: RESIDENCE ADDRESS: Education: WORK. PHONE: CELL PHONE: .EMAIL: Masters of Architecture (M. Arch); University of Califomia at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA -December 1995. Bachelor of Science In Art and Design, specializing in architectural design, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA -June 1991. Spent a semester studying architecture, sculpture, and Italian, Syracuse University's Study Abroad Program, Florence, Italy -Spring 1990 List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses. or professional registration: California State Licensed Architect since 1999. Practicing in Palo Alto since 1996 . . LEED Green Associate since 2010. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 .' Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board imd commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, Ii company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-. 2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT· Present or last employer Stoecker & Northway Architects Name of Company: Occupation: D D D .0 D Project Architect· (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant* ---~I:Iifoooo4-';';' :..=== __ '_'_._ .. ,_.,_-_____ _ Date: 2-14-2012 *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton' Avenue Palo Alto, CA94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Alena Campagna Date: 2-14-2012 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, ifnecessary, to complete your answers. . Yes No 1: Have you attended the following meeting? • Public Art Commission I t/ I (Date: 2-13-2012 D 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? The Daily Post: D Connnunity Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D website:DfYeS, Please Identify: __ . _____________ _ . Email from City Clerk: 0 Library Bulletin Board: D FlyerlBookmark: D Other, Please Specify: ________ --'-________________ _ 3. Describe your involvement in connnunity activities, volunteer and civic organizations: This would be my first foray into community involvement. I am at a point in my life where I have a little more time, and I would like to not only teach my child the importance of participating and giving back to your community, but show him, since actions speak louder than words. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? I have always loved art in all forms, taken art classes every year in school through grad school and I am always very pleased when it can be incorporated into one of the buildings I am working on. Being a part of the process that brings art to Palo Alto's public spaces would be an honor. As an architect, I understand space and how to create it. I understand what type of art would be appropriate in a space, how the art itself can create space and how to better protect a piece from vandals or curious hands, if required, by the way you install it. I also understand how the elements can affect different materials over time and the importance of a continual upkeep of the material's finish. . Bds/Commissions -702~23 9/13/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? My role would be to provide thoroughly flushed out advice to the Council, presenting the all pros and cons of a policy or action, and to advise the Council what has been successful or unsuccessful with the board or previous policies. I am a consensus builder by nature. I would work with the Council, and if applicable, neighborhood groups, artists, other City departments, etc. to first define the issues and then determine the extent of changes needed. 6. What'arethe current issues facing the Public Art Commission? Prioritizing the maintenance needs of the existing collection and getting the work in contract before the maintenance funds expire in May/June. Digital DNA: The sponsorship of refurbishing it, it's continued maintenance needs, repairing it vs. brand new one, and if it.residing outside is intelligent in the long run. Main Library Art Center Art Project -ongoing progress and community meetings to develop the sculptures' details. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? . The collection seems quite varied. I am especially fond of Patrick Dougherty's work Double Take and Greg Brown's many murals. I am a big fan of interactive art, which is well s,uited for a public space. I am looking forward to the new Main Library sculptures; Perhaps expand the 1 % for art concept to include private building projects in key districts like Downtown, Midtown and California Avenue. Either have the money pay into a fund for a larger installation in that district, or allow each business to incorporate something smaller into their own project. Maybe a temporary art exhibition that inv()lves local artists and local businesses teaming together where an artist displays a piece in a local business's window for three weeks, both get exposure from a brochure/map and a percentage of any art sales goes to a public art fund. Could also involve local high school students teaming up with an artist and displaying something they made as well from the process. 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? Ensuring new art pieces are durable and do not fall prey to the same maintenance issues 'or mistakes of others in the existing collection. Ensuring that knowledge base is . preserved, passed on, updated and continually shared between the City entities that commission the art piece and those that maintain it. . Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto,CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consentform will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: D I give permisSion for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto. City Clerk. OR I II' I I Alena Campagna request that the· City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. clol Stoecker & Northway Architects Inc., 1000 Elwell Ct., Suite 150A, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Address (650) 965-3500 Phone· alena@stoeckerandnorthway.com Email , ~1I 2/14/2012 Signature* Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO en X OF PALO ALTO. GoA ell ( CLERK'S OFFICE f 2 fEB -8 APi ,: 5 , BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. All forms must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. NAME: Citrin Harvey HOME PHONE: 650 327 0829 Last First RESIDENCE 1530 Hamilton Ave ADDRESS:~ __________________ ~ ____________ _ Street Palo Alto CA City State Education: J.D., 1976, Fordham M.E.E., 1965, City University of New York B.M.E.IB.E.E., 1956, City College of New York 94303 Zip WORKPHONE: ____________ __ CELL PHONE: 650 208 8844 EMAIL: citrin@igc.org List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Professional Engineer, 1956 -New York State Bar, 1956 -Federal Bar, 1956 California State Bar, 1988 Pacific Art League -American Society for the Advancement of Chinese Art (Chinese Brush Painting) Palo Alto Cultural Center -Palo Alto Jazz Alliance -HaShirim Chorale Stanford University: English in Action -Jewish Coalition for Literacy -Congregation Beth Am Jewish Community Center -Asian Art Museum -Hiller Aviation Museum DeYoung Museum of Fine Arts -Contemporary Jewish Museum -Neighbors Abroad West Bay Opera Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their fmancial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you 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 ofthe board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-.2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT D [Z] D D o [Z] o Present or last employer Name of Company: Self Occupation: Mediator, Arbitrator, Attorney (Ifretired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant* Date: *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL OUESTIONNAIRE Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 Name: _----=.W-l-b(l,..l,,-LL---"-{..........,~~['_'_'l i=-.lDr~L-,--~ h::.......<--)· Yl---,- Date: ___ --=2-.~(-=:::S=---.:..l_1-___ _ Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? • Public Art Commission Yes D (Date: _____ ---.J.) No [{J 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? The Daily Post: D Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D website:Dyes, Please Identify: _______________ _ Email from City Clerk: [l] Library Bulletin Board: D FlyerlBOOkmark:D Other, Please Specify: ___________________________ _ 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Pacific Art League American Society for the Advancement of Chinese Art (Chinese Brush Painting) Palo Alto Cultural Center -Palo Alto Jazz Alliance -HaShirim Chorale Adolescent Counseling Service Stanford University: English in Action -Jewish Coalition for Literacy Congregation Beth Am Jewish Community Center -Asian Art Museum -Hiller Aviation Museum DeYoung Museum of Fine Arts -Contemporary Jewish Museum Neighbors Abroad West Bay Opera 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? Improving the match of art to the aesthetics of the populace. A refined sense of composition, structure, form and color Bds/Comrnissions -702-23 9/13/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? Maintain a Negotiation relationship. Consultation and negotiation. 6. What are the current issues facing the Public Art Commission? There is a sense of lack of respect and resentment about choices made and lack of response to public comment. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? The most successful and intriguing works are the murals by Greg Brown and the glass bottle house in front of City Hall. Much is advant garde but needs more caution in order to maintain general public appeal. Some tastes are more sophisticated and the Commission must remain sensitive to this. 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? Add more color and grace to public art, Make it more approachable, less static and allow for more human interaction via touch, exploration and reflection. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone numl;>er of any elected or appOinted official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: o I Harve Citrin give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR D I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address Phone Email (fI~ ~_£-_-R_i3!_2-__ Signature* Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO \ ;' Oli.' Y ~1 eli:' "'.'. I n "'·ll'O. (' .. 11 .. • \ii, -'1. .... v l""l" I ';'i'\ 511 Y CLEHK'S OFFICE BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office ofthe City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. All forms must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. NAME: Makan-Dullabh Last RESIDENCE 3974 Duncan Place ADDRESS: Street Palo Alto CA City State Education: Hernia First 94306 Zip HOMrnPHONE: 6505613888 WORK PHONE: NI A ------- CELL PHONE: 6507984168 EMAIL: hemlamd@hotmail.com BA fine arts-University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa-1993 BA (HONS) ceramics, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa-1994 HDE,University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa-1996 List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: 1. Art Educator-Gr1 to Gr12 over a 10 yeCir period. I have taught in Johannesburg, and Pietermaritzburg in South Africa and in Beijing, China. -1996 to 2005 2. Advisor-at the Tatham Art Gallery, Pi.etermaritzburg, South Africa.-1996-1997 3.Art educator at the Northdale Technical Colledge, Pietermartizburg, South Africa-1995 4. Involved in a project to empower women -Shamiana Mughal Tapestry project, Victoria and Albert Museum, London.-1997-1998 4.Taught private lessons in art to Adults and children.1997-2009 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their [mancial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-.2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT D [lJ D D D [ZJ D Present or last employer Self-7 Rays Healing Center Name of Company: Occupation: Art Advisor! Alternative Therapist (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant* Date: 2/1/2012 *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Hernia Makan-Dullabh Date: February 1 2012 Please print or type your auswers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes No • Public Art Commission D (Date: ______ -.1.) [l] 2. How did you Learn about the vacaucy on the Public Art Commission? The Daily Post: D Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D website:DlfYeS, Please IdentifY: ________________ _ FlyerlBookmark: D Email from City Clerk: D Library Bulletin Board: D Other, Please SpecifY: Trish Collins ----------------------------------------------------- 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer aud civic organizations: We have recently moved to Palo Alto from Johannesburg, South Africa. I am currently involved in volunteering at both my childrens schools. Previously I was involved in many community based activities. 1. An international tapestry project that exhibited at the Victoria and Albert museum, London and then around the world. It is currently on permanent exhibition at the Natal Museum, Pietermartizburg, South Africa. 2.Sunlit Gardens Orphanage-taught art in 1996. 3. CAP (community arts project), taught women sustainable crafts to support themselves and their families financially. My family and I are enjoying Palo Alto and look forward to becoming more involved in the community. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience aud expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? I admire the works of local artists here in California. Palo Alto has such diverse and beautiful public art. As a newcomer,one of the first things that struck me about this city is the richness in available art to educate children with and to appreciate. I would like to be involved in identifying and adding value to the art of Palo Alto. I have been travelling the world since I was 14years old. I have lived in other countries and have experienced art in each of those countries. I believe I would bring in an acculturated perspective on art based on my experiences. \ 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? I would discuss the agenda with the appropriate members concerned, to make a decision based on the members consensus. I believe that open, honest discussion would allow for all members to voice their opinions. With regards to the second half of the question, my motto is "change is good for me". Change is something I am extremely familiar with, having lived in 3 countries each with such diverse cultures and in many cities within them. I would approach change as a new way of learning and seeing life. 6. What are the current issues facing the Public Art Commission? As a newcomer I am still learning about the issues facing the Art commission but from what I have observed: a) Creating greater awareness and involving the public more deeply in the arts of the city. b) Making sure that all cultural groups with art to offer are represented ,so that people can identify with and appreciate art. c) Sourcing more funding for art and art installation in parks, outside libraries and on city streets. d) Upkeep and maintenance of already acquired art. e) Art that encourages more exploration and that is more sensory for both impaired people and young people to appreciate. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? Palo Alto seems to have a great collection of sculptures,murals and paintings. I, especially see children exploring sculptures in the parks, which leads me to question, why are there not more of them? I would encourage artists to create more tactile, sensory sculptures, painting, murals and other art works so that chlldrens interests are piqued. If we can involve children at an early age, then we create a generation of people that appreciate and create more art. What a wonderful way to feed the soul? My suggestion, would also be to hold more public displays of art, ie; art in the park, sculpture gardens, ceramic exhibitions so that the community can be a part of art appreciation. In this way the city could also gage what kinds of art appeal to their audience and add these to their collection. 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? 1. Create! source more venues to display art at. 2. Have goals in place on funding various sizes of art collections. 3. Encourage a variety of artworks, from as many different artists and diverse backgrounds as possible. 4. Send out flyers and questionnaires in the local papers asking peoples opinions on the kind of artwork they want to see and then implementing this into the arts acquisitions budget 5. Exploring art venues aimed specifically for children. City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appOinted official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I ./-1 I HernIa give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR D I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address Phone Sig at'tif'e* ?.-(I /20 I ~> D~td *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. _~ . __ . ____ ~1 ___ . ___ _ O+l'f OF PALO A erry CLERK'S J 2 FEB I 4 AM to: II PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. All forms must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application wiU not be accepted. NAME: Tabak Vikki HOME PHONE: RESIDENCE ADDRESS: Education: Last First WORK PHONE: CELL PHONE: EMAIL: B.A., Politics and Cultural Affairs, New York University, 1998. Graduated Magna Cum Laude. Member of University Honors Society. . Fellow at Center for War, Peace, and the News Media (New York and Moscow) and the New York City Commission to the United Nations. List relevant training and experience, certificates of training. licenses, or professional registration: My professional background is that of an arts journalist. I have covered a range of art and culture-related topics for new outlets including CNN, Bloomberg, CBS, TechTV and Paper Magazine. I currently run an art and design website for kids called Kldulu. The site serves as a gallery and museum guide for art-minded parents as well as covering the latest in artist-designed products, books and fun objects to raise awareness of art and design in kids. As an avid art collector, I collect several artists who have local roots in the Bay Area including Ala Ebtekar (who is also an Arts Professor at Stanford and has his studio on Galifornia Avenue in Palo Alto), Hilary Pecis, and Brigid McCabe. . As both a joumalist and a collector, I have worked closely with art dealers, galleries, art consultants and other art industry leaders. I covered local politics as a political journalist in New Hampshire and am very familiar with the workings of local government as well as its relationship to organizations such as the Public Art Commission. I have also previously worked as a tech journalist and am confident In rnaking inroads with the tech companies of Palo Alto to ensure that art is seen in a variety of venues by the public -The companies of Palo Alto are some of the biggest patrons in the country and are a key factor In advancing art in Palo Alto. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Jfyou answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-.2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT Present or last employer Kidulu .com Name of Company: _____________ _ Occupation: ~. ----; -:-kflt-· -_ Signature of Applicant* __ ---'~IL-__ -'--_V_'\J__'_ _______ _ D D [Z] D D [lJ o CEO / Journalist (If retired, indicate former occupation) *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 Please Return to: Office ofthe City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 9430 I 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Vikki Tobak Date: 2/12/2012 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes No • Public Art Commission D (Date: ______ --..L [Z] 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D The Daily Post: D website:DlfYeS, Please Identify: ________________ _ Email from City Clerk: D Library Bulletin Board: D FlyerlBookmark: D Other, Please Specify: Amanda Ross is a member and recommended that I apply 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I believe public art can make a community think, children ask questions, and calm a hurried life. It enhances the quality of life by encouraging a heightened sense of place and by introducing people to works of art that can touch them and generations to come. My volunteer work has mostly focused on the art program at my children's school, The Phillips Brooks School in Menlo Park. I have also worked with a non-profit arts organization RxArt which brings modern art to children's hospitals around the country. Every year, the organization puts out a charity coloring book to raise funds and awareness for their cause and, through Kidulu, I have worked to help them promote their cause. Palo Alto is such a unique community -indeed one of the most vibrant cities in California because of the people, the ideas, the businesses, the energy of University Avenue and Stanford. I truly believe Palo Alto can be one of the foremost places for public art in the country. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? The creative community in and around Palo A~o as well as its residents has a wonderful sense of identity, diversity and values. I believe Palo Alto's public art should serve as a reflection of this. I am very excited about potentially contributing to Palo Alto's art spaces and promoting a diverse and stimulating cultural environment for the City's reSidents, visitors and employees. I believe my passion for art. organization skills and openness to ideas will greatly benefrt the Public Art Commission. I believe my background as a joumallst will serve to increase awareness about public art in the city, using my public relations knowledge and journalism skills. A city wHh public art is a city that thinks and feels. PubDc art helps green space thrive, enhances roadSides, pedestrian corridors, and community gateways; it demonstrates unquestionable civic and corporate and affirms an educational environment. Specifically I am very excHed about the soon-to-be debuted public art at Mitchell Park Ubrary and Community Center and the piece being created by artist Bruce Beasley. I believe there are so many opportunities to bring art to the public. I regula~y travel to art fairs and events Including Art Basel, Pulse Art Fair and Art MRKT and am always lOOking for new, exciting artists. I hope this passion and enthusiasm will serve the Palo AKa Public Art Commission as well as the citizens of Palo Alto. I also loved the recent public participation in helping create the "Lawn Bowls· installation by artist Judith Selby Lang. The project is a great example of using art to challenge and empower the community while raising awareness for the environment. Furthermore, I am open to new ideas and very easy to work with. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? I believe strongly in working as a team and being open to all ideas. I am confident that I will take direction from the city's visual, urban design, and planning frameworks, all while having' a great working relationship with the Council. . As mentioned, I was a political reporter for several years and am very comfortable discussing policy and respectfully working with protocols and recommendation. If it were necessary to change current roles, I would do my best to make the transition easy for everyone and do whatever needed to better serve the community. I am a person without ego and am applying for a role on the Commission simply to help Palo Alto have the best public art possible. 6. What are the current issues facing the Public Art Commission? Beyond its enriching personal benefits, public art is a true symbol of a city's maturity. I believe The Public Art Commission has done a great job in producing innovative, thought-provoking projects. The continuing teamwork and discovery of exciting artists and projects is something I would truly enjoy and work hard at. I am well aware of the current issues facing the Commission from maintaining the current collection to the Artist In Residence Program, and the Youth Art Awards to name a few. Palo Alto .is about to embark on the largest public works project to take place in the city in 50 years. This is such an exciting time to be part of the Public Art Commission and to turn these challenges into opportunities. Budget issues are something every city faces but I believe the potential contribution of private interest and support from local companies, institutions and even individuals is something that can set the Palo Alto public art can leverage. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? By its presence alone public art can heighten our awareness, question our assumptions, transform a landscape, or express community values. I have long been a fan of public art around Palo Alto, specifically works such as Kaikoo, Digital DNA and Tilted Donut are some of my favorites. I love when I am out with my children and they are mesmerized by the art pieces around the city. Palo Alto is recognized all over the world as a hub of creative ideas and a leading supporter of the arts. As a member of the Public Art CommiSSion, I would love to reach out to world-renowned artists such as Anish Kapoor, Stephan Powers and Richard Serra to bring more high-profile art to the city. I would also like to strengthen The Public Art Commission's relationship to local galleries and institutions. 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? The impact of public art on a community is priceless and immeasurable and once experienced it only appreciates. One specific idea I would like to see come to fruition is increased media attention and dialogue about Palo Alto's public art. This could be done in partnership with many great local institutions such as Ideo, Facebook and Stanford to name a few. Members of the community could learn more about the artists and thought process that went into creating the works and also be able to ask questions and interact with the artists. I am very motivated to engage Bay Area business leaders and entrepreneurs in the Public Art cause. I believe public art is a unifying force and, therefore, another idea might be developing forms of public art that are designed to encourage audience participation in a hands-on way, multi-dimensional way. Commissions such as the grouping of interactive sculptures by artist team Joe O'Connell and Blessing Hancock for the Main Library and Art Center campus is a great example of this. Public art has the power to energize our public spaces, arouse our thinking, and transform the places where we live, work, and play into more welcoming and beautiful environments. I would welcome the opportunity to serve on Palo Alto's Public Art Commission. Thank you for your consideration. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appOinted official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: D I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR c:lI I . V I K.1(.\· /0 b q Kequest that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Appiication prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address :ll> I 0 ~()(,t:.bQ '<:la1 Li 15· J.,(P6 .. 0 8 1 0 Phone Email :L/13/1:L Signature* Date *The applicant must have a digital Signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 PUBLIC ART COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO e ll~ UF P/~L O ~\LTO: •. CA ell Y CLERr\'S OFFICE , 2 FEB -9 PM 12: 03 BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place NIA in those areas that do not apply. All forms must have a digital signature or the applicant must print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. NAME: Walsh Patricia HOME PHONE: Last First RESIDENCE . 3031 Emerson Street ADDRESS: ______ ~--------------------------Street Palo Alto CA 94306 City State Zip Education: ------- WORK PHONE: ________ __ CELL PHONE: 650 862 6776 EMAIL: p.walsh6@gmail.com Master of Science in Arts Administration, Boston University, Boston MA Bachelor of Arts in Studio Art, Plattsburgh State University, Plattsburgh NY Associates in Applied Sciences in Commercial Art, Dutchess Community College, Poughkeepsie NY List. relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Americans for the Arts Professional Member 2012 Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, Or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact theCityAttorney's Office at 650-329-.2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT D [l] D D D [ZJ D Present or last employer Name of Company: City of San Jose -Office of Cultural Affairs / .... ,.. Occupation: Public Art Program Coordinator (If retired, indicate former occupation) . Signature of APPlicant(::::::_"'==t::::=_-=-=~¥ ___ ~=== __ Date: 2/9/2012 *The applicant must have a dig tal s' ure or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO PU5LIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Patricia Walsh Date: 2/9/2012 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application .. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? • Public Art Commission Yes [{] (Date: May 2010 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? No ) D Community Group:D Palo Alto Weekly: D The Daily Post: D website:DIfYeS, Please Identify: _________ ~ _____ _ Email from City Clerk: D Library Bulletin Board: D FlyerlBookmark: D Other, Please Specify: Recom·mendation from Elise DeMarzo, Public Art Manager 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Am a steering committee for genARTS Silicon Valley since 2009 and am currently the co-chair of thegenARTS Programs sub-committee 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? I have a strong interest in Public Art and enjoy volunteering for my community. I have been involved with the public art field since 2005 when I interned with the UrbanArts Institute at Massachusetts College of Art & Design, and more recently worked for over three years at the City of San Jose Public Art Program overseeing the public art collection, managing conservation and temporary projects, administering request for qualifications and artist outreach as well as assisting the Program Director with the financial management of the collection and managing the Public Art Committee. In addition I have attended the 2008 International Sculpture Conference and the 2011 Public Art Pre-Conference to gain a broader understanding of the public art field on a national level. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? My role as board member when recommending policy and working with Council would be as an advocate for the public art within the City of Palo Alto. I will research current and past policy to have a better understanding of the is~ues that are the cause for policy changes. I would approach making changes to current roles by understanding the issues, review the reasons behind the change recommendations and work with staff and Council as necessary to ensure that proper procedures are followed and the change is understood by the general public. 6. What are the current issues facing the Public Art Commission? Some of the current issues facing the Public Art Commission is managing the current collection, overseeing upcoming and current projects, the need for a general master plan for art in public places in both the private and public sector, and a private percent for" art ordinance or city policy. 7. What are your feelings about Palo Alto's current inventory/collection of Art in Public Places? What suggestions would you have for increasing the availability of more Art in Public Places? i think the current Art in Public Places collection has a good representation of local talent. It could,however expand to include more nationally and internationally recognized artists so as to increase the representation of the collection as a whole and to assist in making Palo Alto a larger tourist destination. I feel that the portable collection, which consists of most ofthe collection, is fairly large for a City with a small amount of publiC space and should ,consider ways to either de-accession parts of the current collection or create a loan system-with other municipalities to encourage a larger showing of the collection and still keep with the mission of keeping the collection accessible to the public. 8. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Public Art Commission achieve? The speCific goals that I would like the Public Art Commission achieve is to have a private percent for art ordinance/policy, a financially stable fund specifically for the conservation and maintenance of the current and future collection, and to have a permanent full-time employees specifically for management of theArt in Public Places program. Bds/Commissions -762-23 9/13/2011 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of . that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I . .f I I Patricia Walsh give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR D I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address Phone 2/9/2012 Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 CALIFORNIA CODES GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 6250-6270: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov 6254.21. (a) No stateor local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual. (b) No person shall knowingly post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official, or of the official's residing spouse or child, on the Internet knowing that person is an elected or appointed official and intending to cause imminent great bodily harm that is likely to occur or threatening to cause imminent great bodily harm to that individual, A violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor. A violation of this subdivision that leads to the bodily injury of the official, or his or her residing spouse or child, is a misdemeanor or a felony. . (c) (1) (A) No person, business, or association shall publicly post or publicly display on the Internet the home address or telephone number of any elected or aPPOinted official if that official has made a written demand of that person, business, or assoCiation to not disclose his or her home address or telephone number. (B) A written demand made under this paragraph by a state constitutional officer, a mayor, or a Member of the Legislature, a city council, or a board of supervisors shall include a statement describing a threat or fear for the.safety of that official or of ani person residing at the official's home address. (C) A written demand made under this paragraph by an elected official shall be effective for four years, regardless of whether or not the official's term has expired prior to the end of the four-year period. (D) (i) A person, business, or association that receives the written demand of an elected or appointed official pursuant to this paragraph shall remove the official's home address or telephone number from public display on the Internet, including information provided to cellular telephone applications, within 48 hours of delivery of the written demand, and shall continue to ensure that this information is not reposted on the same Internet Web site, subsidiary site, or any other Internet Web site maintained by the recipient of the written demand. (ii) After receiving the elected or appointed official's written demand, the person, b.usiness, or association shall not transfer the appOinted or elected official's home address or telephone number to any other person, business, or association through any other medium . . (iii) Clause (ii) s.hall not be deemed to prohibit a telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of the Public Utilities Code, or its affiliate; from transferring the elected or appointed official's home address or telephone number to any person, business, or association, if the transfer is authorized by federal or state law, regulation, order, or tariff, or necessary inthe event of an emergency, or to collect a debt owed by the elected or appointed official to the telephone corporation or its affiliate. (E) For purposes of this paragraph, "publicly post" or "publicly display" means to intentionally communicate or otherwise make available to the general public. (2) An official whose home address or telephone number is made public as a result of a violation of paragraph (1) may bring an action seeking injunctive or declarative relief in any court of competent jurisdiction; If a court finds that a violation has occurred, it may grant injunctive or declarative relief and shall award the official court costs and reasonable attorney's fees. A fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) may be imposed for a violation of the court's order for an injunction or declarative relief obtained pursuant to this paragraph. (3) An elected or appOinted official may deSignate in writing the official's employer, a related governmental entity, or any voluntary professional association of similar officials to act, on behalf of that official, as that official's agent with regard to making a written demand pursuant to this section. A written demand made by an agent pursuant to this paragraph shall include a statement describing a threat or fear for the safety of that official or of any person residing at the official's home address. , (d) (1) No person, buSiness, or association shall soliCit, sell, or trade on the Internet the home address or telephone number of an elected or appOinted official with the intent to cause iri1m·inent great bodily harm to the official or to any person residing at the official's home address. . (2) Notwithstanding any other law, an official whose home address or telephone nUri1ber is solicited, sold, Or traded in Violation of paragraph (1) may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. If a jury or court finds that a violation has occurred, it shall award dari1ages to that official in an amount up to a maximum of three times the actual dari1ages but in no case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000). (e) An interactive computer service or access software prOVider, as defined in Section 230(f) of Title 47 of the United States Code, shall not be liable under this section unless the service or provider intends to abet or cause iri1minent great bodily harm that is likely to occur Or threatens to cause imminent great bodily harri1 to an elected or appOinted official. (f) For purposes of this section, "elected or appointed official" includes, but is not limited to, all.of the following: (1) State constitutional officers, 2) Members of the Legislature, (3) Judges and court comri1issioners, (4) District attorneys, (5) Public defenders, (6) Members of a city council, (7) Members of a board of supervisors, (8) ApPOintees of the Governor, (9) Appointees of the Legislature, (10) Mayors, (11) City attorneys, (12) Police chiefs and sheriffs; (13) A j:lubliC safety official, as defined in Section 6254.24, (14) State adri1inistrative law judges, (15) Federal judges and federal defenders, (16) Members of the United States Congress and appointees of the President. (g) Nothing in this section is intended to preclude punishment instead under Sections 69, 76, or 422 of the Penal Code, or any other provision of law. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/13/2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Human Relations Commission for Three Terms Ending on March 31, 2015 Enclosed are four applications submitted for three terms, ending on March 31, 2015 on the Human Relations Commission. At the Council Meeting on February 21, 2012, the City Council will select the candidates to be interviewed for the Human Relations Commission, with the interview date to be determined. Council may move to interview all applicants, only specific applicants, or reopen the recruitment. Copies of all applications are attached. The applicants are as follows: 1.Ray Bacchetti 2.Renee Budak 3.Theresa Chen 4.Diane Morin REPORT PREPARED BY:Ronna Jojola Gonsalves, Deputy City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: Bacchetti Application (PDF) Budak Application (PDF) Chen Application (PDF) Updated: 2/15/2012 8:06 AM by Ronna Gonsalves Page 2 Morin Application (PDF) Department Head:Donna Grider, City Clerk Updated: 2/15/2012 8:06 AM by Ronna Gonsalves Page 3 ... ,~ '\ / rfa1\hlli~')~~ LH1 .e.A Board or Commission applying for: HUMAN RELATIONS '--YIl"r~5'O Ff{Ct CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION 12 JAN 21 AM \I: 50 SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with your signed application. NAME Bacchetti, Ray HOME PHONE 324-7423 WORKPHONE N/A E-MAIL ADDRESSraybac@earthlink.net RESIDENCE ADDRESS 850 Webster St., #700 Street City Palo Alto State CA EDUCATION Rutgers University, B.A. in Business Administration, 1956 Rutgers University, Ed.M. in Philosophy of Education, 1959 Zip Code 94301 Stanford University, Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education and Higher Education, 1968 Stanford University, Stanford Executive Program, Graduate School of Business, 1978 List relevant training and experience, certifIcates of training, licenses,. or professional registration Relevant experience includes service as a board and commission member (palo Alto Unified School District; Foothill-De Aoza Community College District; Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Senior College Accrediting Commission) where duties involved frequent controversial public issues and the need for listening, negotiation, and decision-making. Other relevant experience involved numerous conflict mediation activities while in the Stanford administration. I have no professional training or certification in fields relevant to the ORC. (A short resume is attached.) 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 board members or commissioners? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes california state law requires appointed board and commission members to fIle a detailed disclosure of their fInancial interests. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely 1) to engage in business with the City,2) to provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be aflilcted by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? No EMPLOYMENT --1 Present or last employer: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2001-20~ Occupation: Scholar in Residence (Now retired) , Signature of Applicant: _________ ~ __ , ) CITY OF PALO ALTO Human Relations Commission Supplemental Questionnaire Please return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 NAME: Ray Bacchetti DATE: December 28, 2007 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended any of the following meetings? • Board/Commission Orientation Session No • Human Relations Commission Yes Date October 14, 2007 2. How did you learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Community Group X Newspaper Ad Place of Employment __ _ Utility Bill Stuffer City Clerk's Office __ Other (Specify) ___________________ _ 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations. Having lived in Palo Alto and Stanford for more than 48 years, I have been active in a variety of ways. Most recently: I am a member of the board of PAGE (palo Altans for Government Effectiveness), a group advocating increased civic engagement for the common good; served on the Blue Ribbon Task Force on the Public Safety Building (2006); served in the Restorative Justice Program of Santa Clara County for several years before it ended in 2004, and, beginning in 2007, volunteer in the Palo Alto Police Department. Before that I was elected to the Palo Alto School Board (1978-1983) and the Foothill-De Anza Board of Trustees (1983-1991). In a long career at Stanford (1960-1993), I was involved in many ways in the bringing of diversity to the campus, working through problems of various sorts, and building a sense of community among my administrative colleagues. In foundation work (1993-2001), one of my goals was to make grant-seekers, whether successful or not, feel treated with understanding and respect. 4. What is itaboutthe Human Relations Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Human Relations Commission? The HRC has one of the more difficult roles in our community. Good human relations and what flows from them-trust, respect, the ability to disagree without jeopardizing the possibilities of agreement on other issues at other times-in many ways determines our potential for making good decisions in other areas and for keeping the community's well being topmost in our priorities. That sort of challenge interests me very much. I would bring more experience than expertise from meeting similar challenges in other contexts. Among the values energizing this application are a civic affection for the common good and a desire to have individual voices heard toward that end. Argument, disagreement, debate, and advocacy are important tools when those using them mean to persuade, to teach, to listen, and to reason with the topic in the foreground and the common good as context. The right to be rude and disagreeable is inalienable and most likely to be ineffective. In the short run, the point may be lost; in the long run, our continuing relationships with one another get battered and our willingness to work together shrivels. I am interested in working through the HRC to keep problems from festering, make disagreements productive, and build the sorts of relationships from which good things flow for our community. 5. How would you see your role as a commissioner when recommending policy and working with the Council? The Council-as nine individuals elected to keep Palo Alto civically, socially, and economically healthy-has several contributing commissions and other bodies to enable it to carry out its responsibilities with the best information, perspective, and insight possible. The HRC provides one channel for that advice. I would see my role as a commissioner in contributing that kind of information, perspective, and insight so that Council decisions would, whatever the topic, enhance the community's potential for bringing our best selves to those civic issues we feel strongly about. 6. What are the current issues that the Human Relations Commission will face? Combining issues I think it will face with those I hope it might face, here is my list: o Enhancing the contributions of our multiple diversities, i.e., race, religion, economic, age, gender, sexual orientation, long-timers and new residents, and the like; o Building community and elevating the common good in our civic conversations; o Assisting in the productivity of consequential debates on topics such as housing, economic development, preserving valued community qualities, community cohesion, individual prerogatives, and reconciling needs and aspirations with resources; o Increasing mutual respect and collaboration between City staff and citizens, with particular emphasis on public safety; o Increasing the level of skill and the height of our aspirations for conflict management and resolution, keeping the long term as well as the short term in our 2 sights; D Assessing tendencies toward civic dis-engagement and devising countermeasures; and D Contributing to the resolution of conflicts that come to the HRC's attention. 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve? All of the topics in item #6 are part of my answer to this question. Among them these lie nearest to my citizen's heart: matters that enhance our understanding of the common good and our attachment to it, making the City a professionally satisfying place to work, and engaging more of our citizens in civic and nonprofit efforts to enhance Palo Alto and make civic imagination a hallmark of our community. End 3 Ray Bacchetti 850 Webster Street, #700; Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone: 650-324-7423 Email: raybac@earthlink.net Prior to retiring in late 2007, Ray served as scholar in residence at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, where he co-directed, with Senior Scholar Tom Ehrlich, the Foundation's Centennial project. A book based on this project that they co-edited was published in October 2006: Reconnecting Foundations and Education: Turning Good Intentions into Educational Capital. His most recent prior position was program officer for K-12 and higher education at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (1993-2001). Prior to that he was vice president for planning and management at Stanford University, which had been his primary employer from 1960. He received his bachelor's and master's degrees from Rutgers University and a Ph.D. in philosophy of education and higher education from Stanford University in 1968. Other professional experience has included administrative posts at the City University of New York and Rutgers University and elementary school teaching. Professional assignments have included membership on the Senior College Commission of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (the accrediting association for California and Hawaii, 1985-92), including a three-year term as chair. He was elected a member of the board of education of the Palo Alto Unified School District (1978-83) and the board of trustees of the Foothill-De Anza Community College District (1983-91), serving from time to time as chair of both boards. He has taught workshops on management in higher education in Australia, England, New Zealand, Singapore, and the U.S. He has consulted in the Every Child a Reader and Writer program for the Noyce Foundation from 2001-03 and the Early College High School program for the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation from 2002-2005. He has also consulted for K-12, collegiate institutions, and philanthropic foundations in the U.S on a variety of topics. Past and current service on boards of directors includes the Bay Area School Reform Collaborative, 1998 to 2004, now called Springboard Schools; Grantmakers for Education, 1995-2000; EdSource, 2000 to the 2007; Developmental Studies Center, 2002 to 2010; the Student Loan Marketing Association (1978-1995); Channing House, 2007 to present, and the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, 2001 to 2011. He has also served on the national advisory board of the Stanford Center for the Comparative Study of Race and Ethnicity and the Alameda County Office of Education Task Force on Charter School Policy. He has volunteered for the Palo Alto Police Department since 2007. In 2007 he was appointed by the City Council to the Palo Alto Human Relations Commission and reappointed in 2009 for a three-year term. In 2008 he was appointed by the Palo Alto Board of Education to the Citizens' Oversight Committee for the school district's $378 million facilities bond issue and elected chair of the Committee for 2009. He was named by A venidas and the Palo Alto Weekly as a 2009 Lifetimes of Achievement honoree. In 2010, he was appointed to the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission by the City Council and served as its co-chair until it completed its work in January 2012. He is married to Carol Bacchetti and they have three children and three grandchildren. January 2012 C\ TY Of PALO ,t\Ll·O. CA CIT Y CU:.Rr\'S ®fFICE \2 JAN 3 \ ~M to! 08 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or apPointed official onthe Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: /' I ~ ~"-~,,h~/'!. give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application Intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address "ro-3J-'1' 7'(";-73 Phone rct-'1 bAL @ e..Q r-J/,./.,.)c. J?e-t. Email gi?,4"-6 t c> Ck"""'7 ~¢I;Z Signature* Date I *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 1130/2012 Gilj'Y gf!'" ~t 0 A, LTtIJ .•. ,.a .. ·'.lA mn Y CLERIrS t:JF'F'I&£c 12 FEB I ~ PH I: 53)' HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton A venue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place NI A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with your signed application. NAME: Budak Last RESIDENCE ADDRESS: Education: City State Renee First BA Degree University of California, Berkeley Continuing Education: HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: CELL PHONE: EMAIL: Zip University of California Extension: course work in science and computers San Jose State University: Certificate in Internet Technology List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: During my college years at The University of California, Berkeley, I majored in Sociology. Specifically, my major was 'Social Science Field Major, with an emphasis in Women's Studies and Rights, Black Studies and Native American Studies'. I think that this background will help me to understand the need for fairness and equality for everyone in our community and to appreciate the culture of diversity in our community. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of yow-household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or· director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City AUorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Auorney's Office at 650-329-2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT D [l] D D [£] o Present or last employer The T estingT earn Name of Company: Occupation: Founder, QA Specialist Qf retired, indicate former occupation) Signatw-e of Applicant Date: 2/13/2012 Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto,CA 94301 650-329-2571· CITY OF PALO ALTO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL OUESTIONNAIRE Name: Renee l. Budak Date: 2/13/2012 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. Yes No 1. Have you attended the following meeting? • Human Relations Commission [l] (Date: 6/15/2010 D 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D Email :from City Clerk: D Library Bulletin Board: D The Daily Post D . Flyer/Bookmark: D Other, Please Specify: Daryl Savage --~----~~------------------------------------- 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: When my children were in school in Palo Alto, I volunteered in the classroom and in various school activities. A major contribution that I made while my daughter was enrolled at Palo Verde Elementary School was as the Head of the Technology Committee for the school. In this pOSition, I worked with the Palo Alto Unified School District to enhan~ the computer systems in the school. and to bring in parent volunteers to enrich the computer experience for the children (work with teachers, network computers, install new computers in the Classrooms). 4. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that interests you? What. qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Human Relations Commission? I am interested in being a part of the Human Relations Commission, because I see the Commission as a body that is concerned about equality and fairness in our city. I have benefitted greatly by living in Palo Alto for over 33 years. It is time for me to give back and to help ensure that other members of our community are treated fairly as well. While I have never served on any City Commission or as part of the government, I believe that I can listen to both sides of an argument/dispute and then based upon the law, I believe that I can make a recommendation to the City Council about the proper course of action. Because I have never served on a City Commission or Committee, I think that I will bring an unbiased perspective and will do my best to meet the challenges with consideration and thought. I am not quick to jump to a conclusion and will listen, think and then act. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles~ how would you approach making such chatl.ges? My role as a board member would be to advise the City Council regarding the Human Relations Commission's analysis of a matter that has been brought before the Commission by a member of the community or a group within our community. if conversely, the City Council brought an issue to the Commission for advisement, I would approach it in the same manner; listen to a/l sides of the argument/dispute and then based upon the law regarding faimess and non-discrimination, help to advise the City Council. I see my roie as being an adjunct to the City Council in an advisory capaCity, and as part of the Human Relations Commission, I would work with the other members of the Commission to discuss and resolve issues together. 6. What are the current issues facing the Human Relations Commission? I suspect that the issues never totally change. We will always be concerned about fair housing, education, and employment. With the startup boom going on in the City of Palo Alto, there might also be issues regarding conversion of buildings to office space for startup companies. I think that the difficult economy over the past 3 years has probably had an impact on many members of our community who have lost jobs. There could be issues that are brought before the Commission related to this situation (discrimination or unfair termination of employment). Additionally, there might be issues/concerns relating to gay/trans-gender rights and to issues relating to our baby boomer generation. 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve? Without being a current member of the Human Relations Commission, it would be difficult to speak of specific goals until I learn more. However, there are areas that concern me that I would like to see addressed and resolved by our community. One area of particular concern is homelessness. We are a well educated and wealthy community with extremely high technological skills. Surely we as a community can come up with ways to help the general homeless population and to also help specific homeless people that have been on our streets for many years. We ail have seen certain people in downtown Palo Alto who have been living on the streets for years. Another area of concern is ageism in the workplace. There have been articles written about how older workers in Silicon Valley are being passed over in hiring or whose jobs have been eliminated so that companies can bring in younger people in their 20's. I think that if we as a community could come up with some solutions for these human relations issues, we could set an example for other cities. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 City of Pa 10 Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: D I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR [l] I Renee L. Budak request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Palo Alto, CA Address (650 )580-0936 Phone rbudak@thetestingteam.com Email 2/13/2012 Signature* Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO ~lY Of PAb9l"~0'7A Q3fTY CLERh v '" F\&'£ 12 fEB -I PH 21 55 BOARD AND COMMISSION INCUMBENT APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Incumbents may use this form to declare their intent to apply for another term in office. BOARD CURRENTLY SERVING ON: --L..H~L{<-!.!m..r..=;fll~n..~R-:.-....='..t1..:..r: .. ~~~' ~ _______ _ NMlli: ___ C~h~e_.~_. ______ -,r.~/ __ te~Y~~~k~ __ _ RESIDENCE ADDRESS:· Last First HOME WORK CEll I am reapplying for the board listed above; please resubmit the most recent application I have on file. I am reapplying for the board listed above; I will update my application and submit it prior to the deadline.· I Will NOT reapply for another term at this time. *Blank applications may be found at www.cityofpaloalto.org Signature of Applicant d-// I d-tJ/..l-Dme: ________ ~ ________ _ Bds/Commissions -702-23 1/28/2012 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give pennission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR r- ~ I --;her-est!. Ue.ne request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address , (6n) 22-1-sY-s-i Phone Email Signature* Date *The applicant must have a digital Signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 1/28/2012 CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 .-:J Please print or type answers to all questions and place Nt A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with your signed application. NAME: Chen Theresa ~~----------~--~~~---------------HOME PHONE: Last First WORK PHONE: ,ffiSIDENCE ADDRESS: CELL PHONE: . EMAIL: Education: Ph.D., University of Rochester, Rochester, New York M.A., University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri B.S., National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Research Scientist, Stanford Uni versi ty, Palo Alto VA Health Care System (volunteer) Adjunct faculty, Notre Dame de Namur University, Belmont, CA Group Leader, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL cientist, Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term appliedfor? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this appliCatiOn. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-2171 to arrange an appointment. • Excludingyour principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles x x of Palo Alto? X If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-2171 to arrange an appointment. ~MPLOYMENT Present or last employer x x Biomedical Research Scientist N arne of Company: Stanford University Occupation: University Faculty (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant Date: 0/ tJ-/..J.'V l u Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION .SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Theresa L. Chen Date: 212110 Please print or type yom answers to the following questions and submit with yom completed application. You may submit additional sheets, ifnecessary, to complete yom answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes • Human Relations Commission ~are: __________ -J) 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? No X Community Group: __ Palo Alto Weekly: Palo Alto Weekly Online: __ Email from City Clerk:.L Library Bulletin Board: Fogster.com: __ Other, Please Specify: 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I have been actively involving in the Chinese-American community, to serve new immigrants and visiting scholars. I have done the following: 1. Give numerous health-related seminars at Home of the Christ at Cupertino, A Chinese independent Evangelical Church for the past 10 years in various fellowship groups. 2. Work as a volunteer researcher at the Palo Alto VA hospital since 1997 to help visiting scholars, which includes newly arrived students and post-doctoral fellows to accommodate life in the US. 4. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that interests you? What qualitieS, experience and expertise would you bring to the Human Relations Commission? As an immigrant myself, I can relate with a broadly diversified population to understand their needs and ways of living. Not only with Chinese population, I am experienced to handle issues generated from many other ethnic origins. This experience is derived from my job as a faculty member at the Notre Dame de Namm University where student population is quire diversified. I believe with my experience, expertise and enthusiasm, I am able to acComplish my duties at the Human Relations Commission. --------------------------------~------------------------------------- -1- ,. 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? I will do a thorough investigation of each situation and recommend a fair and effective policy. This will be fccomPliShed after total understandiJig and careful consideration.. I am VeIY flexible and willingto change when situation requires. 6. What are the current issues facing the Human Relations Commission? I do not know the answer. 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve? To serve Palo Alto residents effectively with fair and responsible decisions. -2- HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place NI A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with your signed application. NAME: Morin Diane RESIDENCE ADDRESS: Education: ~L~M~'t-----------------F~~-t------------ HOME PHONE: PHONE: PHONE: EMAIL: 1972: B.A. Pomona College, Claremont California. English & International Relations.· 1975: M.A. Univ. of California, Berkeley. Comparative Literature. 1982: J.D. University of San Francisco List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: 1988-1991: District Attorney, Santa Clara County; 2000 to 2009 Training in Mediation (Family & Community), and Collaborative Law. 2002: Certified as Family Law SpeCialist by State Bar/Calif .. Born and raised in Italy, French & US citizen. Have empathy and experience in multi-cultural interactions and am skilled in the use of methods for alternative dispute resolution. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to me a detailed disclosure of theirfmancial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-2171. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? EMPLOYMENT D D D Presentorlast employer Law Offices of Diane J.N. Morin Name of Company: Attorney/Mediator Occupation: (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant Date: 2/9/2012 Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 , Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Diane J.N. Morin Date: 219/2012 Please Print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? • Human Relations Commission No D Yes I t/ I (Date: 11/12/09 & twic) 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Human Relations Commission? Community Group: D Palo Alto Weekly: D The Daily Post: D Email from City Clerk: 0 Library Bulletin Board: D FlyerlBookmark: 0 Other, Please Specify: I have applied before. 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: ~rvU~~~ 4. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Human Relations Commission? Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 S. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were ne'jSSary to· change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? ~~. ) 6. What are the current issues facing the Human Relations Commission7 k /lM . . ~ 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve? Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 Supplemental Sheet to Appl~cation of Diane J.N. Morin for: Human Relations Commis~ion of City of Palo Alto February 9. 2012 3. Describer your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I am a member of several court committees relating to my field oflaw Family Law (including Minor's Counsel; Family Law Executive Committee, ADRpanels in both San Mateo and Santa Clara Superior Courts and Collaborative Practice panels in San Mateo and Santa Clara County) These do not impinge directly on Palo Alto, but they ,have helped me networks with some of the people in our community. I have ~een involved in volunteer activities relating to Leadership Palo Alto in the past, and have been very involved in activities related to my child's schools. I am a single par~nt of a 19-* year old daughter, now in college. I have my own business (a law office) in Palo Alto. I have attended some council meetings in the past. 4. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Human Relations Commission? I am interested in the peaceful resolution of conflict between individuals and groups. I grew up in Rome, Italy, the daughter of a French and U.S. national, and attended an American school in Rome. I came to the U.S. when I wa~ eighteen years old for college. Hence I have great empathy for issues involving bi-cu)tural communication and have always been passionate about multi-lingual and multi- cultural learning. My only daughter speaks Chinese since she began studying the language in middle school (and she IS now concentrating in journalism & Chinese.) 5. How would you see your rale as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current rales, how would you approach making such changes? I am a facilitator by training and personality. I would try to build consensus after seriously examining the issues presented by the Commission so that we could give the Council information and also present our recommendations persuasively. I am not clear on the meaning of the second question. I act, however, similarly in most situations: (1) gather facts; (2) analyze the facts as objectively as I can; (3) come to a position and attempt to persuasively argue for it while keeping an open ear to the information I receive from others. I 6. What are the current issues facing the Human Relations Commission? The issues I can count, but are not inclusive are: (1) Diversity and intercultUral . communication; (2) public safety; (3) communication between the Council and city staff regarding labor negotiations. 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve: See above. I will attempt to add a supplemental document to this one, as I do not have the time to complete it at this time. City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code,'and check only ONE option below: D I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the . City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 01 Diane J.N. Morin request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Law Offices of Diane J.N. Morin, 2211 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306-1533 Address (650) 473-0822 Phone d.morin@sbcglobal.net Email ~ i,lt. ~ 2_19_/20_12 ______ _ Signaturet' . Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and . deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 9/1/2011 2211 PARK BLVD., PALO ALTO, CA 94306 T (650) 4730822 F (650) 4730812 Ms. Ronna Gonzalves Deputy City Clerk Office of the City Clerk . ~ ~" CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA DIANE J.N. MORIN CITY CLERK'S OFFICE ATIORNEY AT L.AW 5. 'CERTlFlED FAMILY L.AW SPECIAUST 12 FEB lOAM 6: . D.MORIN@SBCGLOBALNET WWW.DIANEMORfNFAMILYI..AW.COM February 8,2012 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Application for Library Advisory Commission, City of Palo Alto Dear Ms. Gonzalves: I enclose my application for a position on the Human Relations Commission. Thank you for your kind direction and attention. Thank you and best regards. Sincerely yours, ~J/l~ DIANE J.N. MORIN • AS CERTIFIED BY THE STATE BAR OF CAUFORNIA BOARD OF LEGAL SPECIALIZATION CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Utilities Advisory Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on June 30, 2013 Enclosed are five applications submitted for one unexpired term, ending on June 30, 2013 on the Utilities Advisory Commission. At the Council Meeting on February 21, 2012, the City Council will select the candidates to be interviewed for the Utilities Advisory Commission, with the interview date to be determined. Council may move to interview all applicants, only specific applicants, or reopen the recruitment. Copies of all applications are attached. The applicants are as follows: 1. Stuart Bernstein 2. Garth Hall 3. Mark Harris 4. Walter Loewenstein 5. Jason Matlof REPORT PREPARED BY:Ronna Jojola Gonsalves, Deputy City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: ·Bernstein Application (PDF) ·Hall Application(PDF) ·Harris Application (PDF) Updated: 2/15/2012 7:56 AM by Beth Minor Page 2 ·Loewenstein Application (PDF) ·Matlof Application (PDF) Department Head:Donna Grider, City Clerk \ J DEC-16-1991 23:53 From: CITy OF PA CITY CU:R L9ALTo, CA H S OFFICE II HAY -5" PH 2:0& To:650 328 3631 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of tile City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avcnvc, Palo AlLo, CA 94301 (650) 329~2S71 P.1/4 5//1 Plea.'Ie print or type answers to all quo..qf;ion!l and place NI A in those area!! that do not appl)'. Be sure that you fill out the attached Jq1pplemcnt and return it with your IiuId. application. NAME:Bernstein, Stuart I .• t FIrst EduL"atUtnU BS. 1Jnlverslty ofC.UfO .... 1a, Betkeley, 1985 HOMB WORK CELL ---------------------------_ ......... _._- MBA, RarvarC ausiness SchOOl, 1991 ~Ar Harvard Kennedy School, 1"1 DEC-16-1991 23:53 From: To: 650 328 3631 P.2/4 List rel~!a.!!~ !~IDln. ud ~perienec. ecrdflcares 01 .... lalDlt lkClD!CSt or prot_Ion •• regi(ltration: ... )Global'IIead of Clean Technology & ~enewables Group at Goldman, Sachs" Co. • All! you a PaitlA Ito Residenl'J -!..- • Do you have any relatives or members of YOID' bQus(lhold who arc employed by the City urt'~10 AUt), whl) arc curreotl), !leNin! on the City C.ouncil, or who 8R board mcmbm 01' c:ommisJi~ X X • ~ YOll available and c:ommitn:d to wm'Plc:t~ the lenD applied fotl J.!L • Clllifcmlia !llIIle law require! appoinrcd board and commission members to file a detailed di",Joiurt of thclr flnan~lal intMsts.· Fair PolItical ~ CommiRsilltl, Conflict of Inlerest. rom 700. Do YOIl haw an investment in. or do you ~c IJI IUl officer or direotor o~ Q company doing business ;n P~o Alll) which yOIl believe Js lilcely to; I) engage in business with the City, 2) provide ptOdueu or smices for C11y project\, or 3) \ be: affected by decisions of the bOArd Of c;ommi:llli"n 'you are applYln& for? If)lOu answered yes, yCIU may wish 10 ~Q1I6u11 willi lhe City AIIOI'nt)'. before filing (hi! appll",tion. P/ClCIJCl (.onluct the City Attor~y& Offict! at 650-119-2171 10 arrtmgc an app oJumunJ. • Exc;luding your princ:ipal residence, da yOll own teal -properlY in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Aho? . Ij }'au llff.Vwerr:d ye.'t, you m~ wilh to consult wtth thc City Allurnejl belore filtng Ihi.f application. Pleaf' contact the CIty Attorney) Office al 650-329-2171 to arrange an apJKlintment. • New t\) sel;l~ lillprVYllllhllTl my arnploycr and confirm that thm IIrC' n() business conl1lct.~ F.MPLOYMENT 0 x x Pn:scnt or last employer NM1C afCompany: Goldman, Sachs" Co. Occupation; Investment B&rtk ..... e;;.;r=-__ (If retired, indicate former OCCIlpld.inn) Signature of Applicant DEC-16-1991 23:53 From: To: 650 328 3631 CITY OF PALO ALTO um . .1TIF.8 ADVISORY COMMISSION Please Return to: Office of the CiLy Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 6S0-329·2571 SI 'PP' ,l{MHNTAL OJ JESTIQNNAIRE Name:Stua.'tt Bernstein Date:May !:>, 2011 Plea'le print Ollypt' your answ.,.,. III lhc; following questions and submil with your oompletcd appliQtion. YQU may wbmit 8dditionalliheet.~, i r necessary, to compltllll YOW' answers. -1- DEC-16-1991 23:53 From: To:650 328 3631 • J \, S. flow would )lOtI see your role II." huard member whe-n recnmmerJdiog policy IUld woIking wldl the ('oullcil? \ ) I would endeavor to objectively analyze alte~llalives ~nd ::Jolutlons in the context of .ci.ty and consumer objectives O. What are the current i5Su05 fiWing the Utilities Advisuty Cummission? Achip.v1ng renewable! portfolio obj\i}clives continu; ng U'udi'tion of uninte.n:1.lpled $ervice Kp.eping rates afford~ble 7. I f appointed. what specific &0015 wwld )'0\1 like to see the Utilities AdviKtJr)' C(HTImi$lIion achie~'? Continue to lead renewable adoption ConLlnue '''to 1 ead analYl:lis of new technologl.c:1 to ~chieve obj¢ct~,y.....;e_s ____________ _ -2- Page 1 of4 Gonsalves, Ronna From: Stuart Bemstein Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 8:29 PM To: Gonsalves, Ronna Subject: Re: City of Palo Alto Boards and Commissions Openings Thanks for the reminder, Ronna. Please submit myoId application if you don't hear from me by the deadline. stuart Ori Feb 6, 2012, at 2:33 PM; Gonsalves, Ronna wrote: This is a reminder that if you wish to apply I applications must be submitted by this Thursday, February 9th at 5:30 pm. If you have any 9uestions or concerns, please let me know. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves Deputy City Clerk I City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2267 I ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org I www.cityofpaloalto.org\clerk 2/7/2012 From: Gonsalves, Ronna Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 1:53 PM To: 'Stuart' . . Cc: Gonsalves, Ronna SUbject: RE: City of Palo Alto Boards and Commissions Openings I also have your application from last year. I will attach that to this email. If you would like, I can just resubmit that .. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves 650-329-2267 From: Gonsalves, Ronna Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 8:02 AM To: 'Stuart' Cc: Gonsalves, Ronna . Subject: RE: City of Palo Alto Boards and Commissions Openings 2/7/2012 Page 2 of'Jl. ) Thanks for the email Stuart! Applications for the UAC are due on February 9th at 5:30 pm. I will go ahead and attach an application in case you do decide to apply. Please let me know if you need any further information at all. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves 650-329-2267· To: GonSCIlves, Ronna Subject: Re: City of Palo Alto Boards and Commissions Openings I may be interested in the utilities advisory commission. What is the timeline for applying? Thanks, stuart On Jan 25,2012, at 1:52 PM, "Gonsalves, Ronna" <Ronna.Gonsalves@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote: Hello, The City of Palo Alto is currently recruiting for volunteers to serve on three Boards and Commissions: . The Human Resources Commission has three terms which will end on March 31, 2015. Palo Alto residency is required. .  The Public Art Commission has three terms which will . end on April 30,2015. Palo Alto residency is not required. .  The Utilities Advisory Commission has one ) unexpired term ending on June 30, 2013. Palo Alto residency is required for four members; this requirement is currently met by seated commissioners. If you are interested in serving on one of these important Commissions, or if you have any questions about the opportunities, please contact Ronna Jojola Gonsalves in the Palo Alto City Clerk's Office at 650-329-2267, or by email at ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org.The deadline for applications is 5:30 pm on February 9, 2012. If an incumbent on the Human Resources Commission or the Public Art Commission does not reapply, the application deadline for that commission will extend to 5:30 pm on February 14, 2012. Thanksl Ronna Jojola Gonsalves Deputy City Clerk I City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2267 I . ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org I www.cityofpaloalto.org\clerk You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in Palo Alto Boards and Commissions in the Past, or as a member of a Neighborhood Association distribution list. If you would prefer to not receive emails regarding future recruitments, please reply to this email and I will delete your name from my distribution list, if applicable. Neighborhood Association Distribution List Managers: Please forward this email to the members of your association. <UAC Application-Supplemental-Consent-Updated 8-11.pdf> 2/7/2012 Page 3 of4 Page 1 of 1 Gonsalves, Ronna From: Gonsalves, Ronna Sent: Friday, February 10,20121:02 PM To: 'Stuart Bernstein' Cc: Gonsalves, Ronna Subject: Missing a page of your UAC Application Importance: High Attachments: UAC Application-Supplemental-Consent-Updated 8-11.pdf; Bernstein Application APPROVED FOR PACKET. pdf Hello Stuart I I am missing a page from your application. If you would like to complete it again and send it to me I will make sure to include it in packet to Council as long as I can get it by Tuesday, February 14th at the end of the day. I'm sorry for the inconvenience. I will attach both your application as I have it now and will submit it unless I hear form you, and the blank application. It's the third page I am missing. Thanksl Ronna Jojola Gonsalves Deputy City Clerk I City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2267 I ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org I www.cityofpaloalto.org\clerk 2/10/2012 SUBMIT TO: UTILITIES ADVISOI 1( COMMISSION CITY OF PAl ,0 ALTO BOARD AND COMMISS i:ON APPLICATION Office of the C :ty Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, P 3110 Altai CA 94301 . (650) 329· ~~571 Please print or type answers to all questions and plat I~ N/A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you nil o~t the attached supplement and retun it with your signed application. NAME _____ H_a-II __ ~~ _________ G_art_h __ __ WOR.K PH EDUCATION B.Sc Civil Engineering. Univeraity of the Wrl.watel'$rand, South I inca --~--------------------------~ MS, Engineering Planning. stanford University MS, Management Science. Stanford University (Sloan Program Grad SChool of Business) -------------------------------Ph.O. Civil Engineering (Water R~urces), University of the Wi lNatel'$rand . Ust relevant training and experience, certificates of training, IIcensesf or professional registration PaGlfic Gas and Electric Company and PGAe Corporation. 1981-2001: -Director of Power Contracts. '997-1989. Negotiation of ele i:n::;:' 'c:-:power::-:::-:":=tra=nsm=:r:::i$S':"lro=::n:-:an'8=n:-:g::::em=en=ts-::a~nd:r:w~h=o;::-'esa::=r:le-- egyter purchase$/$ales. . -Director Of Reseaidi & Development, 1993-1996. Overaigh 'Of R&D projects in energy efficiency, renewable technologiH, gas transmission. power quality East Bay Municipal Utility DIstrict, 2004-p1'e$8nt ~ water supply contract negotiiilOris and issues resolution .. F 31rtnership development ana administration of jOint water supplY projects. (No identified conflict of interest with City 0 .,Io.:Pag;;Io:::..:A-=Ito=.....U;.:.::til~ities~.)~ ____________ _ Pro .... ional f8gi8tratlon: Professional Engineer. CA No. CSf !i23 -current. • Are you a Palo Alto resident? • Do you have any relatives or memberS of your he .lsehold who are employed by the City ot Palo Alto, who are currer !Iy serving on the City Council, or whQ are board members or C( rnmissloners? • Are you available and committed to completettle term applied for? • California state law requires appOinted board and commission members to fUe a detailed disclosure of their finanCial interl sts, , fair Political Practices CommiSSion, Conflict of lnterest, Form : 1)0.. Do you have an investment in, or do you selVe as an officer or dil {3C;tor at, a company doing business In Palo Alto which you believe Is Ii .ely 1) to engage in business with the City, 2) to provide products or oervices for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the bOl I'd or commiS$ion you are applying tor? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult wi' h the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the I :fty Attomey's OffIce at (6S0) 329-2171 to arrange an apPOintment. • Excluding your principal reSidence, do you own 1'1 ',al property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult wi :h the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the ::Ity Attorney's Office at (650)329-2171 to arrange an appointment. EMPLOYMENT Present or last employer: Name of Company: East Bay Municipal Utility Die !trlct Occupation: Senior Civil Engineer ---.;----...;;;;..-----.. ---icate former OC( upation) Signature of Applicant: ___ ""'----1~ __ h--(. ~ x x x x CITY OF PAI.,O ALTO Utilities Advisor, Commission SURal.Mental QI !llitignnaire Please return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 NAME Garth C. Hall DATE ~_J_an_u_a....:;ry_3_1_, 2_0_1_2 __ Please print or type your answers toe the foll::Jwing questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit add tiona I sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meet "g? . • Utilities Advisory Commission x Date _____ ~ ___ _ 2. How did you learn about the vacancy )n the Utility Advisory Commission? Community Group _ Newspaper ~Id _ Place of Employment _ Utility Bill Stuffer _ City Clerkls ()ffice l Other (Specify) _______ . ____________ _ 3. Describe your involvement in com 'nunity activities, volunteer and civiC: organizations. 1. Board member. Chabot Space and ScienCE Center, 1994-95 2. Boy Scout (CUb) leader, 1998·2001 S. AYSO soccer referee and coach, 1997-200 ~ 4. VICe President, Home Owners Assoeiatian, !..oma Verde Ave (current) 5. Member, Siena Club & National Audubon ~ .)Ciety (current) , ,A~ o CITY OF PAI.O ALTO ~ Utilities Advisol1 Commission Supglemental QJ !;estjonnajre 4. What is it about the Utilities Adviso "If Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and exp lrtise would you bring to the Utilities Advisory Commission? I am reaclyte volunteer for pUblic seNice nc !, that my children are almost independent. J enjoy coliaboratiDn with other&8imilariy mot ~'ated tD add perspectives. contribute to work products. and resolve issues in the electric. jiBS and water utility world. I find the new demands for conservation. COl!it control. am: lanvironmentalleadel'8hip faced by utilities today to be as challenging as ever. See _hmE (~ for qualities, experience and expertise. 5. How would you see your role as a C I)mmissioner when recommending policy and working with the Counci 'r The UAC has a duty to the Council to provic ;1 independent and objective recommendations on utility strategic plans, power. gas and water lroposed contraots. tariffs. policies and other matters prior to Council action. A well..funotioning UJ .C sh<Nld (a) previae feedback to th .. Utility Director on ~er proPOS9ls. allOWing those proposals to t i~ refined when naceaaary. and (b) reduce the amount of time needed by City Council members to 'eview the details of utility documents supporting recommendations and thus enhance the ov ~rall approval process. 6. What are the current issues that tt ~~ Utilities Advisory Commission will fac::e? _ a) Enhancing serviQe quality (e.g .• commun ;:ation with residents during outages, service reliability). b) Meeting societal goals (e.g., reducing 9n .. nhouse gas emission, waste-tCJoopoWer conversion). c) Ensuring employee and public safety (e.! ., gas distribution system integrity). d) Containing costa and communicating nee IJssary rate increases (e.g" forthcoming SFPUC rate hikes). e) Ensuring adequate long-term affordable ,'upplies of electric power, gas and water f) Enhancing strategies for service recovfjr after emergencies such as earthquakes. 7. If appointed, what specific goals w:.uld you like to see the Utilities Advisory CommiSSion achieve? It's best to frame this response in terms of f !netion and pertorrnance rather than Utilities bUSiness and service 9oal&. I'd like to contr1bute towards. I UAC that: a) does its homework (prepares well) so thi I: meetings are efficient b) is constructive and respectful. reoognlzir;1 the challenges faced by the utility leaders and personnel c) listens well and is insightful &0 that ill; 00 ltributlons and recommendations are useful d) is honest and courageous, so that problE rns are called out for attention fl'Aln when Irs uncomfortable e) is collaborative so that the City Council r )ceives a consensus recommendation whenever possible . f) is creative and encourages ereativlty ame ng utility leaders g) (in balance with the previous point) avoit II offerinQ too many random ideas for City ataff to explore h) is committed. with as few missed meeti" 18 as possible i) ~ a balanced perapective taking into .jccount the interests of all City residents. While the topics calfing for UAC attention v ill somewhat be in flu". I would lilte the UAC to include rEtView5 and recommendations with respec : to demand side management, energy efficiency. renewable energy incentiveslfeecl-in-tarlft's and water conservation incentiveelpolicies. Given the prices trends for power, gas and water, as IfSlI as wastewater collection and treatment. theUAC can contribute positively to CounCil actions to t ;,Ip coain residents' and businesses' cost of energy'. water and wastewater including their Imi!ll!I COi :is to conserve. Attachment to Snppleme Ita! Questionnaire Utilities Mvilory , :~ommillion Garth C. 1 Ian Continuation of Answer to Question 4: What qualities, experience and expertise' Ilould you bring to the Utilities Advisory Commission? Qualities: • Commitment (show UP. prepare WflII, work hard, remain engaged) • Abnity to focus on the key iaaue6 • Strong ability for collaboration '(give and take, pc I'suasion based on fact and rusoning, willingness to compl'l:lmi$e when appropriate, Iii len WEIll, resptlJd cithera, high level of engagement, good balance of spealclng and list, "ning) • Integrity (no personal agenda, serve the City's r ,sidents and ColJncii aa be$t I can) experience: • 26 yurs of utility experience (PG&E, EBMUD) . " primarily e/edfic and water service. • The above 26 years includes senior ,manageme 1t roles in PG&E -electric power contracts, R&D, information technology, program manage llttnt, executive asaistanceto President • Project management and contract negotiation ( 'G&E and EBMUO) • Engineering consulting -primarily application 0 infOrmation techn()logy for international utilities, auditing of utUity operations (3 years) • Familiarity with Brown Ad. and regular process or running public boardlcouncil meetings Expertise: • EconomiC analysis of utility projects • General knowledge of energy efficiency, renfNJIlble, and other infrastructure technologies • Understanding of the science behind technolos les used In electric. gas and water utilities • GeneJill undel'$tanding of the role and practice , of FERC and CPUC in regulating investor- owned utilities such as PG&E • Understanding of Califomia's Independent Sys iltTl Operator functions • Basic understanding of telecommunications tellmology • Application of $ndard cost accounting prlnoip os • Policy development in the context of utility mar atgement ""T'( 0" ' \"1 ',. F PALO ;\lTO " CITY CLERK'S fJFf(ecr 12FE8 -2 AM fJ: 17 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue,Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do'not apply. Be sure that you ftlloutthe attached supplement and return it with your Ii&!wl application. This application is public record and may be posted to the internet in its entirety. NAME; Harris Mark HOME PHONE; (650) 327-7066 Last First WORK PHONE: N/A RESIDENCE 1417 Dana Avenue ADDRESS: CELL PHONE: (650) 704-0571 Street EMAlL: mrhgoblue@aol.com Palo Alto CA 94301 City State Zip Education: 1 %5-70: SSE, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan -Science Engineering and Seeondruy Teaching Credential in Mathematics and Science, 1972-74; MBA, Stanford University Graduate School of Business, Stanford, California -Maj or in Public Management and Finance List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: From 1974-1988 worked for the CttY ofFalo Alto jn yadOIlS "odes jncludlng Asalstant Director of Utilities. treasqrer aUd fiDaoce directnL Major responsibilities included: lead involvement in the creation of City recycling, conservation, energy services and solar loan orograms. 1988-1993: Director of Utilities, City of Monntain View -ovenaw all aspects of water, wastewater, refuse and streets fupctious. This included preparation of annual operating 3Dd capital budgets. Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/1/2012 • Are you a Palo Alto Resident? • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently selVing on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their fmancial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, F orm700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? . If you answered yes, you may wish to cOTl8ult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-2171 to arrange an appointment. • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Aho? EMPLOYMENT Present or last employer The Sequoia Union High School Dis. x x x x Name of Company: Woodside High School Occupation: Math Teacher (retired) (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant Date: February 2,2012 Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/1/2012 Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2571 CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Mark R. Harris Date: February 1,2012 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, ifnecessruy, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes No • Utilities Advisory Commission x (Date: Februmy 1. 2012 )- 2. How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Utilities Advisory Commission? Community Group: x Palo Alto Weekly: The Daily Post: Email from City Clerk: x Librruy Bulletin Board: FlyerlBookmark: __ Other, Please Specify: Mentioned to me by the Director of Utilities 3; Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I have been intimately involved with Kara, a premier grief support organization located in Palo Alto, since 1980 I served on the board of directors from 1993-2008 and was at times secretary treasurer and president I am currently chair of the advisory committee. I have been a member of the Palo Alto Mediation Program since 2001 and have served as jts co-chair I am CUlTentlv an emeritus member I am a dues paying member of the Crescent Park Neighborhood Association. As a family, we contribute to many local organizations such as the Palo Alto Commubity Fund the PenjnSJlla Open Space Trust Boys and ('-rirIs Club of the PeninSUla and the League to name a few. In the past, I have been aT-ball coach, member of a local service club (Sertoma), seryed on the Duyeneck Site COUDcil Cub Scout den leader Worked on projects for the Stanford Graduate Alumni Consulting Team to assist local non-profit organizations to name a few. Most recently, served on City's Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission. 4. . What is it about the Utilities Advisory Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Utilities Advisory Commission? One of the unique and outstanding aspects of Palo Alto (among many) is that we own and operate our own municipal utilities. I Was verv fortunate to work for the Utilities Department for 11 years and the City for 14 I was directly involved in many of the issues facing the Utilities today and was part of the initiation of many of the current efforts. It saddened me to see the gradual erosion of the value of oW" Utilities in the eyes of the Community during the late 80's and 90's. I think the formation of the Utilities Advisory Cgmmission was a big step in the right direction and I get a sense that the current leadership is fully dedicated to reestablishing the premier status ofUti)jties jn the CQIDmlmjty Recently retired from a very rewarding teaching career I would like to be part of the effort to make Palo Alto Utilities the best example of what local control can do to create high value, responsive service that operates in a very business like manner. I have the time, energy and experience to be a contributing member of this effort and would be honored to do so. Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/1/2012 5. 6. What are the current issues facing the Utilities Advisory Commission? There are numerous supply, reliability, environmental and rate issues facing the Utilities Advisory Commission. I believe 2 key issues involve (l) decisions regarding the State of California Cap-and Trade Program and Options regarding the Use of Allowances provided to the Electric Utility and (2) the challenge of preparing Water Customers for the substantial rate increases coming our way over the next several years and how to best mitigate their impacts. In addition, there is the ongoing challenge of keeping customers informed on the very complex issues facing the Utilities and gaining confidence that the Department js strivjng to represent the interests of alJ customers and is responsive to their concerns. 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Utilities Advisory Commission achieve? For 2011-12, I would like to see a decision on the path to develop and construct a second electricity transmission line into the City. and continued implementation of the· Strategic Plan. In addition. I would like to see rate changes that are understood by residents and businesses and generally acceptable even though some are likely to increase more than would be desjrable -water rates in narticular I am sure that as I become more familiar with Issues facing the Commission, I will see the need for additional goals, particularly for 2012-13 and beyond. Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/1/2012 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This cons~nt form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the code, and check only ONE option below: --1L I Mark Harris give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. 1417 Dana Avenue Address (650) 327-7066 Phone mrhgohlue Email ,/ February 2. 2012 Sign ture* Date *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in ink, and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application will not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/1/2012 From: Raymond Sacchetti <raybac@earthlink.net> Subject: Appreciation Date: January 25, 2012 1 :58:07 PM PST To: Mark Harris <mrhgoblue@aol.com> Dear Mark, Now that our job is done and our report is in and the Council has discharged us, I want to write to your personally to say how much I enjoyed working with you. You were among the more multi·faceted members of the Commission. I admired your dedication to the task, your intelligence, your ability to speak your mind without giving offense, and the way you continually dove deep into issues--not just Cubberley, but the PSB, finance, and whatever was vexing a committee, working group, or the commission as a whole. It may take a village to raise a child, but it takes people like you for that village to be all that it ought to be. With best regards, Ray < . ) CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 08 JUN20 AM 10: 54 Board or Commission applying for UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION SUBMIT TO: CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571 Please print or type answers to all questions and place Nt A in those areas that do not apply .Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with yoursjgned application. NAME La c.-.I e",,~ e. ~""'" WQJ +.~,.. HOME PHONE ) ~~ A~ .fORK PHONE RESIDENCE ADDRESS· EDUCATION es-u,.~P~et-S.~J.../ Ifftq E-MAIL List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration C\e .... +e,. L To. N ... :~: ..... ..1. J::I--..44i -rt &9 .t ... ~ .. '1' 't'" 1 \.W' -IW'" ~ l. . , 11-11> ero -<il • Are you a Palo Alto resident? \ / • Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, , Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700.. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely 1) to engage il) business with the City, 2) to provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by deCisions of the board or commission you are applying for? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at (650) 329-2171 to arrange an appointment. • Excluding your principal reSidence, do you own real property in Palo Alto or within two miles of Palo Alto? If you answered yes, you may wish to consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at (650) 329-2171 to arrange an appointment. EMPLOYMENT Occupation: Signature of Applicant: / ) \ ) ) j , 4 ,'f ) ) " Please return to: CITY OF PALO ALTO Utilities Advisory Commission Supplemental Questionnaire Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329:-2571 flb P'; I Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended any of the following meetings? 2. 3. • Board/Commission Orientation Session Date ___________ _ • Utilities Advisory Commission Date ___________ _ How did you leam £t the vacancy on the Utility Advisory Commission? Community Group Newspaper Ad.K Place of Employment _ Utility Bill Stuffer _ City Clerk's Office _ Other (Specify) ___________________ _ Describe your involvement in community' activities, volunteer and CIVIC organizations. '. ~ M~oIIV~c.1"" (.\t ....... ).-JL C-\.,.~rU'~o~l l~) ~ c.'~~ NlttJAQr~" ..J ~\~ R!l>loo.... R...,!e.-.v ~ 1'co..\o ll-l+o E~e,..I"~~j t'~'~ f., It oW ; ~ 5 roo >--f-I "f 'f g. . 4. 5. 6. 7. \ ) CITY OF PALO ALTO Utiliti~s Advisory Commission Supplemental Questionnaire ". , ~ y \ ) ) Gonsalves, Ronna From: Sent: Friday, January 27,.20121 :39 PM To: Gonsalves, Ronna Subject: Re: Utilities Advisory Commission MsGonsalves, Page 1 of 1 Thank you for forwarding my past application for possible appointment to the Palo Alto UAC. It is substantially correct for today. Since I filed the application I have consulted to USDOE contractors and participated in advisory reviews for academic and other activities. I note also that I was elected a Fellow in both the American Physical Society and the American Nuclear Society. Please use this note with the earlier paperwork for submittal to the consideration for the interim appointment to the UAC Sincerely, Walter B Loewenstein PhD PE From: Ronna" <Ronna. To: Cc: "Gonsalves, Ronna" <Ronna.Gonsalves@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Fri, January 27,20121:06:21 PM Subject: Utilities Advisory Commission Mr. Loewenstein, Here is the application that I have on file. If you would like me to submit it to Council please confirm. If you would prefer to complete a new application, let me know and I'll send you a blank. Thanks! Ronna Jojola Gonsalves Deputy City Clerk I City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329-2267 I ronna.gonsalves@cityofpaloalto.org I www.cityofpaloalto.org\cJerk 1130/2012 ) y ClTY OF PALO ALTO. CA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE II HAY -5 PH 4: 53 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBMIT TO: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2571- Please print or type answers to all questions and place N/A in those areas that do not apply. Be sure that you fill out the attached supplement and return it with your signed application. N~E: ~~~~~ __________ ~~ ____________ ___ lESIDENCE ADDRESS: Education: I Harvard Business School, MBA 1996 University of California, Los Angeles, BA Political Science, 1991 Rio Americano High School, Sacramento, CA 1987 HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: CELL PHONE: EMAIL: List relevant training and experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: I've worked in the Cleantech and Energy Efficiency realms for the last 6 years. As an active entrepreneur and investor in these sectors. I've become somewhat expert in the issues of grid operations, smart grid technologies, challenges associated to peak demand! generation/transmission, and renewable energy integration. .. »elieve strongly that I can add to the level of discussion in a very valuable way. • ) } Are yo.u a Palo Alto Resident? .' Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are board members or commissioners? • Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? • California state law requires appointed board and commission members to tile a detailed disclosure of their fmancial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict .of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; I) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Jfyou answered yes, you may wish to' consult with the City Attorney be/ore filing this applicatiOn. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650-329-217 J 10 arrange an appointment. . . • Excluding your principal residence, do you own real'property in Palo Alto. or within two miles of Palo Alto? 1/ you an~ered yes, you may wish 10 consult with the City Attorney before filing this application. Please contact the City Attorney's Office at 650~329-2 J 7 J to arrange an appointme1Cl. )LOYMENT x x x x x Present or last employer Name of Company: ....;B;;;.;a;;;;tt;.;.e;;.,jry~V-'-e.;;.;;n;;;.;.ture=..;;.;;...s _____ --,-_ Occupation: Ventu~ Investor (If retired, indicate former occupation) Signature of Applicant \ ) \ ) Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 ·650-329-2571 \ ) CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE N arne: Jason Matlof Date: 5/2/11 Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? • Utilities Advisory Commission Yes X (Date: Roughly Nov, 2(10) 2: How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Utilities Advisory Commission? Community Group: Palo Alto Weekly: Email from City Clerk: Library Bulletin Board: Other, Please Specify; P A UAC Member, Jon Foster Palo Alto Weekly Online: Fogster.coni: 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: No Innvision / Breaking Bread Homeless Shelter -regular monthly volunteer at First Presbyterian (P A) food kitchen Campaign to Re-Elect Jay Inslee -Hosted large fundraiser for Congressman/ renewable energy advocate ('10) Finance Committee, Congregation Beth Jacob -Redwood City Congregation Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) -active participant in energy subcommittee lobbying Congress Charitable Giving -very active in numerous organizations 4. What is it about the Utilities Advisory Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Utilities Advisory Commission? I am personally and professionally committed to society's need to transition away from dependency upon dirty, non-sustainable fossil fuels and towards more sustainable and climate friendly forms of energy. Having said that I'm also a businessman and pragmatist with an appreciation that this transition must be economic and financially beneficial in order to be successful. I can merge the social and business interest in approaching policy, which is critical in my mind. I have committed my entire career to these pursuits and would like to contribute in this vein -1- ) . )1---. ~---o--:--~- To my community, as well. I believe that my personal and professional commitment and expertise in this domain will be of strong value to the Utility Advisory Commission. ) ) -2- \ Y \, j ) 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? Having worked forl decades as an entrepreneur and members of many for-profit and non-profit boards and Committees, I understand the need to create consensus in order to be effective. I plan to be an active participant in the dialogue; to advocate for Palo Alto citizens interests; to advocate for safety and a conservative approach to financial and budgeting issues; and to be an advocate for crafting a long-term energy policy that is consistent with our community's values. 6. What are the current issues facing the Utilities Advisory Commission? From the meeting(s) that I attended and various updates that I've read, I understand that a number of issues are discussed and reviewed by the UAC, including: Reviewing and Approving Operating Budgets for the Palo Alto Utility Long-term wholesale water sourcing allocation from the regional Bay Area consortium Feed-m.-Tariffs for renewable energy suppliers 7. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Utilities Advisory Commission achieve? Support for energy efficiency incentive programs that seek to achieve peak load reductions and the associated benefits related to cost of peak power generation / transmission congestion / green house gas emissions / et al. Consideration of electricity rate plans that more fully reflect the cost of power generation and delivery, and compensate users that avoid peak consumption periods. Consideration of automated meter reading and interval pricing schemes that reduce cost of service delivery, drive desired behavior, and increase the efficiency of energy consumption (load shifting, off-peak generation and distbirution, et al ... ) Investigative studies to ensure that increases in electric vehicle charging in our community projected in the coming decade will not cause grid reliability problems during peak afternoon , -3- City of Pa 10 Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 CONSENT FORM· California Government Code Section 6254.21 states( In part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code Is attached. ThIs consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. Read the coder and check only ONE option below: ~ .1 . __ I . l _i ~:-give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City'1s 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. V OR . I~ __ I (fa Sf.JtlI. M t:lvf{()r 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 web,site. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Emai Sig a~ e* oJte L *The applicant must have a digital signature or print the application, sign in inkl and deliver to the City Clerks Office. A typed signature or unsigned application wi II not be accepted. Bds/Commissions -702-23 2/8/2012 City of Palo Alto (ID # 1829) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 6 (ID # 1829) Summary Title: Tri Cities CAD Project Title: Approval for the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos to Purchase Public Safety Systems Technology, Including Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Police Records Management (RMS), and In-Vehicle Mobile and Reporting Applications for Police and Fire From: City Manager Lead Department: Police Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase and maintain, for a minimum of six (6) years, a joint public safety technology platform with the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos. The platform includes Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System (RMS), in-vehicle mobile applications for Police and Fire, in-field reporting and business intelligence. 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement between the Cities of Los Altos, Palo Alto and Mountain View for the purpose of procuring, sharing, and jointly operating regional public safety automated information systems. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Intergraph Corporation for the procurement of the jointly operated regional public safety automated information systems in an amount not to exceed $1,300,000. Background The City operates mission-critical public safety systems to record, process, and coordinate response to Police and Fire Department calls for service, as well as to document employee-initiated activity. The primary components of these systems are the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System (RMS), and Field Based Reporting (FBR) systems. These systems are also used to input, February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 6 (ID # 1829) retain, and retrieve information that is used for operational analysis, and to comply with regulatory reporting requirements for crime and emergency medical service incidents. The existing systems are twelve years old, have exceeded their expected service life, and are lacking features and functionality now available in contemporary public safety systems. During the initial stages of the process to replace these systems in 2007, the City Managers of Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos discussed the feasibility of sharing automated information systems to leverage purchasing power and lower costs. Currently, the cities operate with three separate systems for CAD, RMS, Mobile and 9-1-1, and none of these systems are interoperable. Representatives from the three cities began working collaboratively towards the goal of a shared procurement process. These efforts progressed into a broader initiative of sharing additional public safety technology as a method to share resources, improve response times, increase the resiliency and redundancy of these critical systems, as well as to enhance interoperable communications between the three cities’ first responders. In 2007, a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was released to 26 potential vendors of which 12 responded. From that group, six candidates were invited to participate in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Five of those vendors responded to the RFP. The RFP process was overseen by the City of Mountain View Purchasing Department. Of those five, three elected to participate in a product demonstration. Staff from the Police and Fire Departments from all three cities participated in the product evaluation. After the systems’ demonstrations and a thorough analysis by staff and the project's consultant, the proposal submitted by the Intergraph Corporation was identified as representing the best choice for the three cities. In August 2010, Intergraph Corporation conducted a detailed system design process with project stakeholders from the three Cities in order to validate the proposed system design and ensure that all three cities' requirements would be met or exceeded. Since the conclusion of this process, project team members have been working with Intergraph to further refine the scope of the project and to ensure all required features, functions, and interfaces will be present in the February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 6 (ID # 1829) proposed system. The cities equally shared a total of $77,120 in consulting services and $60,000 in design phase costs. The City of Palo Alto’s portion for these two costs is $45,681 ($25,681 for consulting and $20,000 for detailed design review). In spring of 2011, Intergraph acquired a new RMS company. Staff determined that the three cities needed clear direction from Intergraph on their future path for RMS and assurances that the system functionality would meet or exceed the requirements agreed to in the initial proposal. Staff directed Intergraph to divide the CAD project and the RMS project into separate proposals. After a second detailed design review of the new RMS system, staff is confident that the newly acquired product provides a more robust solution than the initial proposal with the legacy system. This initiative was discussed at a Council Study Session on May 2, 2011 that presented the "virtual consolidation" concept and the framework to share public safety technology and communication systems. Staff anticipates that once the shared systems are implemented, the Cities will be able to reduce costs in a variety of areas. Discussion The project has two separate, but related phases, and each phase has a separate contract. The primary contract is to purchase the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system and the Mobile applications that operate in the Police and Fire vehicles. The second contract is to purchase the Police Records Management System (RMS) which includes an automated in-field reporting system for Police. The CAD contract is in the final review process with the Intergraph Executive team and will be at places at Council on February 21st. The RMS contract has a not-to-exceed price established and details will be finalized by May 1st and submitted to Council for approval. The anticipated cost for the CAD and Mobile products is approximately $2,352,201. The RMS base system will not exceed $675,266. The three Cities’ have developed a cost-sharing agreement for the purchase and maintenance of these systems. The proposed cost-sharing formula is based on a previous regional agreement to fund the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority (SVRIA). Fifty percent of the project will be divided equally between the three cities. The remaining fifty percent will be allocated based on population (2010 US Census data). Stanford University contracts with the City of Palo Alto for Police and Fire dispatch services and Stanford’s population is included in Palo Alto’s percentage.1 February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 6 (ID # 1829) Fire Service specific costs will not be included in Los Altos’ portion as those services are outsourced by the City of Los Altos. The cost for specific “per seat” software licenses will be borne by the city that requires their use. Total joint system costs are estimated at $3,027,467. The City’s portion based on the proposed cost-sharing formula is $897,757 for CAD and $257,726 for RMS for a total of $1,155,483. Final acquisition cost for the City will be determined by final software license counts and selected system configuration options, but will not exceed $1,300,000 without Council approval. There are systems interface and data conversion costs that are still under negotiation, however, staff is confident that project costs will not exceed the allocated funding. Intergraph’s pricing for the CAD/Mobile systems includes a discount of $200,000 that expires on March 1, 2012. As part of the 2009 Capital Budget, Council approved $1,300,000 for CAD replacement in CIP TE-09000. Ongoing maintenance and support costs for the CAD system are calculated using the same cost-sharing formula and a six year commitment is required from the participating cities (the first year of maintenance is included in the contract). The cost for Palo Alto will increase from $89,585 annually, starting in FY 2014/15, to $108,891 in FY 2018/19. The Cities negotiated a fixed five percent increase annually for an additional five years. Estimated support costs are within currently budgeted amounts for these services. In 2011, Palo Alto paid $103,535 for CAD and RMS maintenance on the existing systems. There is a potential for cost savings by sharing costs for 3rd party services and other intergovernmental agreements currently borne by all three cities separately. For example, the City of Palo Alto pays approximately $50,000 annually for DOJ access through Santa Clara County. It is anticipated that most if not all of that expense will be eliminated by connecting directly through the City of Mountain View. Additional cost savings including reduced overtime and personnel costs are anticipated once the system is implemented. In the proposed agreement the City of Mountain View will serve as the lead agency for the procurement and Mountain View and will host the core set of equipment that comprises the systems (Palo Alto will serve as the back-up site). The City of Mountain View will invoice the other two participating cities as required and make payments to the Intergraph Corporation on behalf of all 1 Palo Alto will be reimbursed by Stanford for 25% of the CAD capital cost, approximately $224,439. February 21, 2012 Page 5 of 6 (ID # 1829) parties. Each city will be responsible for providing sufficient technical staff to support the enterprise system’s use and the joint administration of the systems. Each city will be responsible for the maintenance of its own data and will mutually indemnify each other with respect to the use of the systems. The procurement of regional public safety information systems is the first phase of the tri-city “virtual consolidation” project. The enterprise wide applications will serve as the centerpiece for the larger project that includes a common 9-1-1 phone system and a shared police radio frequency. “Virtual Consolidation” will provide both technical and physical redundancy for public safety systems and communications for all three cities. The Mountain View City Council approved the tri-city agreement and Intergraph Contract process on January 24, 2012 and the agreement and contract are on the agenda for the Los Altos City Council meeting on February 28th. RESOURCE IMPACT The initial costs for the project, estimated at $1,155,483, are within the budget established by the CIP, which has a balance of $1,300,000, and the City will be reimbursed by Stanford University for a portion of the CAD system expense (Stanford has their own RMS system). With the estimated Stanford reimbursement of $224,439, the estimated net City cost is $931,044. Maintenance costs have been fixed for an eleven year period ensuring stability and cost management. The Police Department pays allocated charges into the IT Application Maintenance fund to cover these costs. Staff time for Police and IT personnel will be impacted significantly by the twelve to eighteen month project. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This agreement is consistent with existing City policy. TIMELINE Following the execution of the specified agreements, a project start date in April, 2012 is anticipated. Installation of the primary hardware and software is scheduled for June 2012, with cutover to the new systems tentatively scheduled for the second calendar quarter in 2013. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW February 21, 2012 Page 6 of 6 (ID # 1829) The project to purchase and implement CAD and RMS systems is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3), and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. Attachments: Coop Agreement for Procurement 2-16 (PDF) Prepared By:Charles Cullen, TSD Coordinator Department Head:Dennis Burns, Police Chief City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF REGIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS THIS Cooperative Procurement Agreement (Cooperative Agreement) is dated February, ______, 2012 for identification, by and between the CITIES OF LOS ALTOS, MOUNTAIN VIEW AND PALO ALTO, all municipal corporations (hereafter "LOS ALTOS," "MOUNTAIN VIEW" and "PALO ALTO" respectively and individually "City" or collectively "Cities." RECITALS WHEREAS, in 2007, the Cities began the process to upgrade and or replace their existing public safety automated systems and agreed to work together to share resources in order to achieve cost savings by combining separate vendor selection processes; and WHEREAS, the Cities continue to explore sharing the procurement and use of public safety systems, sharing information, and workload where feasible to share costs and virtually consolidate the provision of services and agreed this is a common and important goal for all three cities; and WHEREAS, the Cities released a Request for Qualifications and a Request for Proposals, evaluated the vendor proposals for a detailed design of Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems and negotiated an agreement with Intergraph Corporation; and WHEREAS, based on the Request for Proposals, Intergraph Corporation has been selected as the vendor to provide a fully integrated Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems, including but not limited to Computer Aided Dispatch ("CAD"), Records Management ("RMS") Mobile for Public Safety ("MPS"), Field Based Reporting ("FBR") and various other subsystems and external interfaces; and WHEREAS, this Cooperative Agreement is intended to address the terms and conditions under which the Cities will fund, acquire, operate, maintain and upgrade the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems for the Cities; and WHEREAS, the Cities now wish to enter into this Cooperative Agreement for Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems and to set forth the terms and conditions under which the Cities will participate in the joint acquisition, installation, operation and maintenance of the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems. -1- AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing Recitals, the Cities enter into this Cooperative Agreement for the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems ("Cooperative Agreement"). 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Cooperative Agreement for Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems is to set forth the terms and conditions under which the Cities will fund, acquire, install, operate, maintain and upgrade the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems ("the Systems") acquired pursuant to this Cooperative Agreement. 2. LEAD CITYCITY. The City of Mountain View shall continue as the Lead City, for the purposes described below in accordance with its purchasing ordinances and procedures. As Lead City, the City of Mountain View, on behalf of the Cities, shall: A. Award and administer the contract dated _________ 2012 between the Cities and Intergraph Corporation to furnish the Systems pursuant to the agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" ("Intergraph Agreement"). The scope of this Cooperative Agreement also includes RMS should the Cities decide to amend the Intergraph Agreement to include that subsystem. As part of the administration of the Intergraph Agreement, the Lead City will receive payments from the Cities and make payments to Intergraph Corporation on behalf of the Cities for services rendered by Intergraph or any third party interfaces. B. Coordinate, in conjunction with Intergraph Corporation, the master project schedule for the implementation of the Systems. C. Host the core components of the Systems, including the provision of sufficient and suitable space, power and cooling for computing, storage, network and related equipment necessary to operate the Systems. D. Host the necessary third-party interfaces required in typical public safety information systems, such as the connection to the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System ("CLETS"), County of Santa Clara Law Enforcement Telecommunications System ("SLETS"), County of Santa Clara Criminal Justice Information Control ("CJIC") and others as agreed to by the Cities. E. Act as the "Message Switching Computer" (MSC) administrator with respect to the use of the Systems to access CLETS, and maintain the necessary documentation and agreements with the California Department of Justice (DOJ). -2- F. Invoice Los Altos and Palo Alto quarterly in advance for their respective share of any costs under the Intergraph Agreement to be incurred during the upcoming quarter. An itemized breakdown of those costs will be provided with the invoice. City- specific costs will be invoiced at time of procurement. G. Make periodic payments within thirty (30) days of receiving and approving a billing statement from Intergraph Corporation in proportion to the satisfactory completion of Intergraph's services. 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITIES A. Executive Sponsorship. In support of the shared use of the Systems and as necessary, the Police Chief or his/her designee from all the Cities shall jointly prepare written guidelines for the shared use of Systems, including but not limited to an informal dispute resolution process. B. Operation of the Systems. Each City will acquire, install, maintain, operate and periodically maintain the Systems for a minimum of six (6) years from the go-live date for the Systems in accordance with this Cooperative Agreement, unless otherwise agreed to by the Cities in writing. Each City will devote sufficient personnel resources to allow their employees to develop subject matter expertise in the operation and management of the Systems in order to successfully implement City-specific workflow(s) required by their respective City. C. Project Management Team. A Project Management Team shall be formed and shall be composed of one representative from each City. The Project Management Team shall be responsible for the day-to-day supervision of the contract for the delivery, installation, training, operation and implementation of the Systems of each City. D. Core Implementation Team. To ensure a successful project and the implementation of the systems, a "Core Team" of employees, representing a cross- section of the various disciplines such as dispatch, fire suppression, police patrol, records and investigations, will be assembled. Each City will select and assign employees to perform Core Team duties, including but not limited to, participating in conference calls, traveling to meetings at various locations, developing system usage policies and procedures, configuring the systems for use, developing training plans and materials, attending conferences and training classes provided by Intergraph Corporation or other parties, and other duties as required. E. Facility Preparation. Each City shall be responsible for the preparation of its facilities including but not limited to air conditioning, space, all electrical drops, cabling and any other items to be furnished by the City per the Intergraph Agreement. -3- F. Alterations and Upgrades. Each City shall notify the other Cities at least ninety (90) days in advance of any modifications to or upgrades not included in the Intergraph Agreement that it intends to make to the Systems in order to provide the other Cities with the opportunity to participate in the modification or upgrade or provide comments on the proposed modification or upgrade. Each City understands and agrees that the modification or upgrade cannot interfere with the public safety operations of the other Cities nor can it substantially alter the function and form of the shared Systems. While the other Cities may elect to participate in the modification or upgrade, they are under no obligation to do so. G. Training and User Support. Each City shall assign qualified personnel to attend training classes and in turn, train other users within their respective City. Each City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for their own internal training and user support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing personnel resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for training purposes, however there is no obligation to do so. H. Systems Administration and Technical Support. Each City shall assign qualified personnel to perform the Systems administration tasks necessary for successful operation and use of the Systems. To the greatest extent possible, each City shall administer its own City-specific data, within the agreed-to Systems policies. Each City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for its own system administration and technical support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing personnel resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for system administration and technical support purposes, however there is no obligation to do so. I. Information Security and Confidentiality. Each City shall be responsible for the accuracy, timeliness and completeness of information entered into or through the Systems by their respective Systems users. Each City shall be the owner of record for all information entered into and stored by the Systems users authorized by that City. Each City shall act as their own custodian of records for data or records entered into the Systems. J. Interfaces and Supporting Systems. Third-party independent systems are the responsibility of the hosting City. K. Compliance with Applicable Laws, Policies, Rules and Regulations. Each City is responsible for compliance with all applicable state and federal laws, regulations and policies. L. Software Licenses. At the request of Intergraph Corporation, Mountain View will hold the software licenses for the benefit of the other Cities and shall transfer -4- licenses to Los Altos or Palo Alto in accordance with the Intergraph Agreement if this Cooperative Agreement is terminated for any reason. M. Project Deliverable Sign Off. The Cities will prepare a mutually agreed upon sign off form to document each City’s sign off on the Project Deliverables/Milestones in Exhibit “_” to the Intergraph Agreement (“Milestones”) as the Milestones are completed . Each City understands and agrees that Intergraph Corporation requires Mountain View to sign the Project Deliverable Sign Off on behalf of all Cities within fifteen (15) workdays of the completion of the Milestones itemized (insert reference document). Accordingly, each City shall endeavor to sign the mutually agreed upon sign off form for the Cities at least ten (10) workdays of completion of a Milestone. If a Milestone is rejected for any reason, the City rejecting the Milestone or the Cities jointly, as the case may be, will prepare a written description of the deficiencies within ten (10) workdays of the rejection. The Cities understand and agree that if Mountain View fail to accept or reject a Milestone on behalf of the Cities within fifteen (15) workdays, or if the Cities elect to place a Subsystem into production operation, then Intergraph requires full payment of the contract price for the Milestone. 4. COSTS/FUNDING A. Cost Allocation Calculation. The parties have agreed to share the cost of the acquisition, implementation, and ongoing maintenance and support costs to operate and maintain the Systems ("Total Project Cost") as shown on Exhibit "B." The City's share of the Total Project Cost shall be calculated using the following formula: i. Each City shall pay a one-third (1/3) share of fifty percent (50%) of the Total Project Cost. ii. Each City shall also pay a proportionate share of the remaining fifty percent (50%) of the Total Project Cost. This proportionate share shall be calculated based upon the ratio of population served by each City to the total population served by the Systems. For purposes of this calculation, the population for each City shall be the 2010 United States Census information. For purposes of this calculation, the population of the Stanford Community as shown in the 2010 United States Census shall be included in the population of Palo Alto. B. Cost Allocation Calculation Estimate. A Cost Allocation Calculation Estimate of each Party's share of the Total Project Cost is attached as Exhibit "C" to this Cooperative Agreement. -5- C. Per-User License Costs. Costs for per-user or per-seat software licenses used with Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City. D. Computer Workstation Hardware. Costs for computer workstations and their associated peripheral equipment purchased via the Intergraph Agreement and for use with the Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City, with the exception of the "Map Maintenance Workstation," as described in _________ of the Intergraph Agreement. E. Fire Specific Costs. Los Altos shall not be responsible for enhancements and interfaces to the CAD System for fire specific services as denoted above and described in detail in _______ of the Intergraph Agreement. F. Quarterly Invoicing. The Cities shall pay the quarterly payment to the City of Mountain View within thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt of an invoice from the City of Mountain View. G. Detail Design Agreement. On behalf of the Cities, Mountain View retained Intergraph Corporation to provide the Cities with a detailed design for the Systems. Each City agreed to share in the cost of obtaining these services. The cost of the detailed system design is Sixty Thousand Dollars. Accordingly, each CITY shall pay Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) for the detailed system design.ʺ 5. THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS. It is not the intent of the Cities of this Cooperative Agreement to create any third-party beneficiary. Any failure to perform under the terms of this Cooperative Agreement shall not create any claim or right by any individual or entity who is not a signatory to this Cooperative Agreement. 6. TERM OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. The term of this Cooperative Agreement shall commence on the date the City of Mountain View awards the contract to Intergraph Corporation and shall continue through June 30, 2019. 7. TERMINATION. Any City may terminate its participation in this Cooperative Agreement by giving written notice of not less than ninety (90) days before the beginning of the next fiscal year (hereby defined as July 1 of each year) and effective only on July 1 of each year. If a City terminates its participation in this Cooperative Agreement, it shall pay its portion of costs for which it has been billed pursuant to Paragraph 4 above to the date of termination. Upon termination of a City's -6- participation in this Cooperative Agreement, the City shall relinquish its interest in any jointly purchased equipment acquired pursuant to this Cooperative Agreement. 8. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEES. By executing this Cooperative Agreement, each City agrees to complete any and all necessary actions to accomplish successfully the purpose of this Cooperative Agreement and all other agreements authorized pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Cooperative Agreement. 9. GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM REGIONAL COOPERATION. The Cities recognize that the existence of an up-to-date and accurate Geographical Information System ("GIS") for all Cities is necessary for the effective operation of centralized CAD System for law enforcement and fire protection services. Each City agrees to participate and cooperate in all activities necessary to maintain an up-to-date and accurate GIS. 10. MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro-rata risk allocation which might otherwise be imposed between the parties pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a party shall not be shared pro rata, but instead, the Cities agree that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each of the parties hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other parties, their officers, board members, employees and agents harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officers, board members, employees or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to such party under this Cooperative Agreement. No party, nor any officer, board member, employee or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of other parties hereto, their officers, board members, employees or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to such other parties under this Cooperative Agreement. -7- 11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 11.1 Notice. All notices required by this Cooperative Agreement will be deemed given when in writing and delivered personally or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the other party at the address set forth below or at such other address as the party may designate in writing: To Los Altos: To Mountain View: To Palo Alto: Police Services Manager City of Los Altos 1 North San Antonio Road Los Altos, CA 94022-3088 Senior Systems Specialist Police Department City of Mountain View P.O. Box 7540 Mountain View, CA 94039-7540 Technical Services Director City of Palo Alto 275 Forest Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 11.2 Governing Law. This Cooperative Agreement has been executed and delivered in, and will be construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. 11.3 Assignment. The parties may not assign this Cooperative Agreement or the rights and obligations hereunder without the specific written consent of the others. 11.4 Entire Agreement. This document represents the entire Cooperative Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. All prior negotiations and written and/or oral agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Cooperative Agreement are merged into this Cooperative Agreement. 11.5 Amendments. This Cooperative Agreement may only be amended by an instrument signed by the parties. 11.6 Counterparts. This Cooperative Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 11.7 Severability. If any provision of this Cooperative Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or unenforceable, the same will either be reformed to comply with applicable law or stricken if not so conformable, so as not to affect the validity or enforceability of this Cooperative Agreement. -8- 11.8 Waiver. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this Cooperative Agreement shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted by a party must be in writing and shall apply to the specific instance expressly stated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities have caused this Cooperative Agreement to be executed by their respective governing officials duly authorized by their respective legislative bodies. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: City Attorney FINANCIAL APPROVAL: Finance and Administrative Services Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, a California Charter City and municipal corporation By: City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney CITY OF LOS ALTOS, a municipal corporation By: City Manager -9- -10- APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney CITY OF PALO ALTO, a municipal corporation By: City Manager JLQ/4/ATY 010-01-31-12A-E^ City of Palo Alto (ID # 2487) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 3 (ID # 2487) Summary Title: Electric Pole Replacement & Area C7 4-12kV Project Title: Approval of a Utilities Enterprise Fund Contract with PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. in the Amount of $553,180 for Electric Pole Replacement at Locations Throughout the City (System Improvement: EL-98003) and a 4kV to 12kV Electric Capital Improvement Project Between Alma Street, West Charleston Road, El Camino Real and Del Medio Avenue (EL-09004) From:City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the attached contract with PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $553,180 for electric pole replacements at various locations throughout the City and the conversion of the 4 kilovolt (kV) electrical system to 12kV in the area bounded by Alma St/West Charleston Rd/El Camino Real/Del Medio Ave. Staff also recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. for additional related, but unforeseen, work which may develop during the project, the total of which shall not exceed $55,300, equal to ten percent of the contract amount. Project Description This contract with PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. is requested in order to implement a project to replace aged electric poles that were identified as needing replacement during pole inspection and testing. These poles have been selected for replacement to address reliability and safety concerns. New poles will be installed and built to current City and industry standards. This project also involves the replacement of aging 4kV electric system components with new components that will operate at 12kV. The neighborhood included in this project requires this component replacement to prevent power outages caused by aging equipment. The Utilities Department is upgrading its entire 4kV system to a 12kV system gradually as part of its ongoing Capital Improvement Program. The electric voltage conversion from 4kV to 12kV improves system efficiency and reduces electrical losses. The work typically involves changing out the 4kV transformers, fuses, insulators and other line hardware to equipment compatible with 12kV operation. February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 3 (ID # 2487) The design of all pole replacements as well as the 4kV to 12kV electric conversion project (shown in Attachment C as area C7 in the 2012/2016 CIP Map) has been completed by in-house staff and all the materials will be procured by the City. The work to be performed under this contract is for the actual construction work to replace poles and implement the 4kV to 12kV conversion planned for the fiscal year 2011/2012 and includes supplying of all crew, equipment and managing all field activities, in coordination with the City’s operations staff. This construction work is being contracted out because there are insufficient resources in the Operations Division to complete a project of this size. Summary of Bid Process Bid Name/Number Electric Pole Replacement and Area C7 4kV to 12kV Conversion Project /IFB-143408 Proposed Length of Project 90 Calendar Days (~ 3 months) Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors 14 Number of Bids Mailed to Builder’s Exchanges 11 Total Days to Respond to Bid 21 Pre-Bid Meeting Yes Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting 13 Number of Bids Received:5* Bid Price Range From $553,180 to $1,036,254 *Bid summary provided in Attachment B. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted, see Attachment B, and recommends that the bid of $553,180 submitted by PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. be accepted and that PAR Electric Contractors, Inc. be declared the lowest responsible bidder by Council. The $553,180 bid is approximately 16% percent below the engineer's estimate of $660,000. Staff confirmed with the Contractor's State License Board that the contractor has an active license on file. Staff checked references supplied by the contractor for previous work performed and found all to be satisfactory. Resource Impact Funds for pole replacement are available in FY2011-2012 Electric System Improvement (EL- 98003) and funds for the 4 to 12kV electric conversion are available in Capital Improvement Program (EL-09004) budgets. This project is not subject to prevailing wage requirements as the work will be completed within City limits and local funds. Policy Implications February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 3 (ID # 2487) The approval of this contract is consistent with existing City policies, including the Council- approved Utilities Strategic Plan to operate the system safely and replace infrastructure before the end of its useful life. Environmental Review This project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15302 replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities. Attachments: ·Attachment A: Contract -C12143408 PAR (PDF) ·Attachment B: Bid Summary (PDF) ·Attachment C: Boundary Map-C7 2 (PDF) Prepared By:Michael Mintz, Department Head:Valerie Fong, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager Rev. August 3, 2010 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C12143408 City of Palo Alto and PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. PROJECT “Electric Pole Replacement and Area C7 4kV to 12kV Conversion Project” Rev. August 3, 2010 FILENAME C12143408.PAR.DOC i CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS....................................1 1.1 Recitals................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Definitions ...........................................................................................................................1 SECTION 2. THE PROJECT ...................................................................................................1 SECTION 3. THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS........................................................................1 LIST OF DOCUMENTS.....................................................................................................................1 3.2 ORDER OF PRECEDENCE ...............................................................................2 SECTION 4. THE WORK.........................................................................................................2 SECTION 5. PROJECT TEAM ................................................................................................2 SECTION 6. TIME OF COMPLETION.....................................................................................3 6.1 Time Is of Essence .............................................................................................................3 6.2 Commencement of Work ...................................................................................................3 6.3 Contract Time......................................................................................................................3 6.4 Liquidated Damages...........................................................................................................3 6.4.1 Entitlement...................................................................................................................3 6.4.2 Daily Amount................................................................................................................3 6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy........................................................................................................3 6.4.4 Other Remedies...........................................................................................................3 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time ..........................................................................................3 SECTION 7. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR ..............................................................3 7.1 Contract Sum ......................................................................................................................3 7.2 Full Compensation..............................................................................................................4 7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work ........................................................................4 7.3.1 Self Performed Work....................................................................................................4 7.3.2 Subcontractors.............................................................................................................4 Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC ii SECTION 8. STANDARD OF CARE.......................................................................................4 SECTION 9. INDEMNIFICATION ............................................................................................4 9.1 Hold Harmless.....................................................................................................................4 9.2 Survival................................................................................................................................5 SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION ......................................................................................5 SECTION 11. INSURANCE AND BONDS................................................................................5 SECTION 12. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS.............................................................5 SECTION 13. NOTICES ............................................................................................................6 13.1 Method of Notice.................................................................................................................6 13.2 Notice Recipients................................................................................................................6 13.3 Change of Address.............................................................................................................6 14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes.......................................................................................7 14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes............................................................................................7 14.2.1 Non-Contract Disputes.................................................................................................7 14.2.2 Litigation, City Election.................................................................................................7 14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute.......................................................................................7 14.3.1 By Contractor...............................................................................................................7 14.3.2 By City..........................................................................................................................8 14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process ..............................................................................8 14.4.1 Direct Negotiations.......................................................................................................8 14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes.......................................................................................8 14.4.3 Mediation......................................................................................................................8 14.4.4 Binding Arbitration........................................................................................................9 14.5 Non-Waiver........................................................................................................................10 SECTION 15. DEFAULT..........................................................................................................10 15.1 Notice of Default ...............................................................................................................10 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default.............................................................................................10 SECTION 16. CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES....................................................................10 16.1 Remedies Upon Default ...................................................................................................10 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services .............................................................................................11 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold ................................................................................................11 Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC iii 16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract..........................................................................11 16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default........................................................11 16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond....................................................................................11 16.1.6 Additional Provisions..................................................................................................11 16.2 Delays by Sureties............................................................................................................11 16.3 Damages to City................................................................................................................12 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default.............................................................................................12 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses ..........................................................................................12 16.5 Suspension by City for Convenience .............................................................................12 16.6 Termination Without Cause.............................................................................................12 16.6.1 Compensation............................................................................................................12 16.6.2 Subcontractors...........................................................................................................13 16.7 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination...........................................................................13 SECTION 17. CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES ..................................................13 17.1 Contractor’s Remedies ....................................................................................................13 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage....................................................................................................13 17.1.2. For City's Non-Payment.............................................................................................13 17.2 Damages to Contractor....................................................................................................14 SECTION 18. ACCOUNTING RECORDS...............................................................................14 18.1 Financial Management and City Access.........................................................................14 18.2 Compliance with City Requests ......................................................................................14 SECTION 19. INDEPENDENT PARTIES................................................................................14 SECTION 20. NUISANCE........................................................................................................14 SECTION 21. PERMITS AND LICENSES...............................................................................14 SECTION 22. WAIVER............................................................................................................14 SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW ...........................................................................................15 SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT ..............................................................................15 SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT.............................................................................15 SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES......................................................................................15 Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC iv SECTION 27 NON APPROPRIATION ...................................................................................15 SECTION 28 GOVERNMENTAL POWERS...........................................................................15 SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES ............................................................................................15 SECTION 30 SEVERABILITY ................................................................................................15 1 Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on February 21, 2012 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a General Engineering Contractor duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, Contractor’s License Number 687343. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On December 16, 2011, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Electric Pole Replacement and Area C7 4kV to 12 kV Conversion (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Bid Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the construction of the Electric Pole Replacement and Area C7 4kV to 12 kV Conversion ("Project"). SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Change Orders 3) Contract 4) Project Plans and Drawings Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 2 5) Technical Specifications 6) Special Provisions 7) Notice Inviting Bids 8) Instructions to Bidders 9) General Conditions 10) Bidding Addenda 11) Invitation for Bids 12) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 13) Reports listed in the Bidding Documents 14) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications dated 2007 and updated from time to time 15) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards dated 2005 and updated from time to time 16) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 17) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 18) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 19) Performance and Payment Bonds 20) Insurance Forms 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. SECTION 4 THE WORK. The Work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, fees, licenses and taxes, and all other things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without limitation, any Changes approved by City, in accordance with the Contract Documents and all Applicable Code Requirements. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Project requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 3 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed within ninety calendar days (90) after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. 6.4.1 Entitlement. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, City will suffer, as a result of Contractor’s failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and impracticable to ascertain. Such damages may include, but are not limited to: (i) Loss of public confidence in City and its contractors and consultants. (ii) Loss of public use of public facilities. (iii) Extended disruption to public. 6.4.2 Daily Amount. City and Contractor have reasonably endeavored, but failed, to ascertain the actual damage that City will incur if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. Therefore, the parties agree that in addition to all other damages to which City may be entitled other than delay damages, in the event Contractor shall fail to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, Contractor shall pay City as liquidated damages the amount of $500 per day for each Day occurring after the expiration of the Contract Time until Contractor achieves Substantial Completion of the entire Work. The liquidated damages amount is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. 6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that this liquidated damages provision shall be City’s only remedy for delay damages caused by Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.4.4 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and agreed to by Change Order executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Five Hundred Fifty Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty Dollars ($553,180). 4 Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders issued, executed and satisfactorily performed in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work. The Contract Sum shall be adjusted (either by addition or credit) for Changes in the Work involving Extra Work or Deleted Work based on one or more of the following methods to be selected by City: 1. Unit prices stated in the Contract Documents or agreed upon by City and Contractor, which unit prices shall be deemed to include Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups permitted by this Section. 2. A lump sum agreed upon by City and Contractor, based on the estimated Allowable Costs and Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markup computed in accordance with this Section. 3. Contractor’s Allowable Costs, plus Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markups applicable to such Extra Work computed in accordance with this Section. Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups set forth herein are the full amount of compensation to be added for Extra Work or to be subtracted for Deleted Work that is attributable to overhead (direct and indirect) and profit of Contractor and of its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors, of every Tier. When using this payment methodology, Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub-subcontractor Markups, which shall not be compounded, shall be computed as follows: 7.3.1 Markup Self-Performed Work. 10% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be performed by Contractor with its own forces. 7.3.2 Markup for Work Performed by Subcontractors. 15% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be performed by a first Tier Subcontractor. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and all Losses arising directly or indirectly from, or in any manner relating to any of, the following: (i) Performance or nonperformance of the Work by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors, of any tier; Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 5 (ii) Performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of any of the obligations under the Contract Documents; (iii) The construction activities of Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors, of any tier, either on the Site or on other properties; (iv) The payment or nonpayment by Contractor to any of its employees, Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors of any tier, for Work performed on or off the Site for the Project; and (v) Any personal injury, property damage or economic loss to third persons associated with the performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of the Work. However, nothing herein shall obligate Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for Losses resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. On or before the Execution Date, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Failure to do so shall be deemed a material breach of this Construction Contract. SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. City is entering into this Construction Contract based upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 6 SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (iv) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Or City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Mike Mintz In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Mike Mintz 13.3 Change of Address. In the event of any change of address, the moving party shall notify the other party of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 7 SECTION 14 DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes. Contract Disputes shall be resolved by the parties in accordance with the provisions of this Section 14, in lieu of any and all rights under the law that either party have its rights adjudged by a trial court or jury. All Contract Disputes shall be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process set forth in this Section 14, which shall be the exclusive recourse of Contractor and City for such Contract Disputes. 14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes. 14.2.1 Non-Contract Disputes. Contract Disputes shall not include any of the following: (i) Penalties or forfeitures prescribed by statute or regulation imposed by a governmental agency; (ii) Third party tort claims for personal injury, property damage or death relating to any Work performed by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors of any tier; (iii) False claims liability under California Government Code Section 12650, et. seq.; (iv) Defects in the Work first discovered by City after Final Payment by City to Contractor; (v) Stop notices; or (vi) The right of City to specific performance or injunctive relief to compel performance of any provision of the Contract Documents. 14.2.2 Litigation, City Election. Matters that do not constitute Contract Disputes shall be resolved by way of an action filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, and shall not be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process. However, the City reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to treat such disputes as Contract Disputes. Upon written notice by City of its election as provided in the preceding sentence, such dispute shall be submitted by the parties and finally decided pursuant to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process in the manner as required for Contract Disputes, including, without limitation, City’s right under Paragraph 14.4.2 to defer resolution and final determination until after Final Completion of the Work. 14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute. 14.3.1 By Contractor. Contractors may commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process upon City's written response denying all or part of a Claim pursuant to Paragraph 4.2.9 or 4.2.10 of the General Conditions. Contractor shall submit a written Statement of Contract Dispute (as set forth below) to City within seven (7) Days after City rejects all or a portion of Contractor's Claim. Failure by Contractor to submit its Statement of Contract Dispute in a timely manner shall result in City’s decision by City on the Claim becoming final and binding. Contractor’s Statement of Contract Dispute shall be signed under penalty of perjury and shall state with specificity the events or circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the asserted effect on the Contract Sum and the Contract Time. The Statement of Contract Dispute shall include adequate supporting data to substantiate the disputed Claim. Adequate supporting data for a Contract Dispute relating to an adjustment of the Contract Time shall include both of the following: (i) All of the scheduling data required to be submitted by Contractor under the Contract Documents to obtain extensions of time and adjustments to the Contract Time and (ii) A detailed, event-by-event description of the impact of each event on completion of Work. Adequate data to support a Statement of Contract Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 8 Dispute involving an adjustment of the Contract Sum must include both of the following: (a) A detailed cost breakdown and (b) Supporting cost data in such form and including such information and other supporting data as required under the Contract Documents for submission of Change Order Requests and Claims. 14.3.2 By City. City's right to commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall arise at any time following City's actual discovery of the circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute. City asserts Contract Disputes in response to a Contract Dispute asserted by Contractor. A Statement of Contract Dispute submitted by City shall state the events or circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the damages or other relief claimed by City as a result of such events. 14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process. The parties shall utilize each of the following steps in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process in the sequence they appear below. Each party shall participate fully and in good faith in each step in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process, and good faith effort shall be a condition precedent to the right of each party to proceed to the next step in the process. 14.4.1 Direct Negotiations. Designated representatives of City and Contractor shall meet as soon as possible (but not later than ten (10) Days after receipt of the Statement of Contract Dispute) in a good faith effort to negotiate a resolution to the Contract Dispute. Each party shall be represented in such negotiations by an authorized representative with full knowledge of the details of the Claims or defenses being asserted by such party in the negotiations, and with full authority to resolve such Contract Dispute then and there, subject only to City’s obligation to obtain administrative and/or City Council approval of any agreed settlement or resolution. If the Contract Dispute involves the assertion of a right or claim by a Subcontractor or Sub-subcontractor, of any tier, against Contractor that is in turn being asserted by Contractor against City (“Pass-Through Claim”), then the Subcontractor or Sub-Subcontractor shall also have a representative attend the negotiations, with the same authority and knowledge as described above. Upon completion of the meeting, if the Contract Dispute is not resolved, the parties may either continue the negotiations or any party may declare negotiations ended. All discussions that occur during such negotiations and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of such negotiations shall be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 1119 and 1152. 14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes. Following the completion of the negotiations required by Paragraph 14.4.1, all unresolved Contract Disputes shall be deferred pending Final Completion of the Project, subject to City’s right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to require that the Contract Dispute Resolution Process proceed prior to Final Completion. All Contract Disputes that have been deferred until Final Completion shall be consolidated within a reasonable time after Final Completion and thereafter pursued to resolution pursuant to this Contract Dispute Resolution Process. The parties can continue informal negotiations of Contract Disputes; provided, however, that such informal negotiations shall not be alter the provisions of the Agreement deferring final determination and resolution of unresolved Contract Disputes until after Final Completion. 14.4.3 Mediation. If the Contract Dispute remains unresolved after negotiations pursuant to Paragraph 14.4.1, the parties shall submit the Contract Dispute to non-binding mediation before a mutually acceptable third party mediator. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 9 .1 Qualifications of Mediator. The parties shall endeavor to select a mediator who is a retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years of experience in public works construction contract law and in mediating public works construction disputes. In addition, the mediator shall have at least twenty (20) hours of formal training in mediation skills. .2 Submission to Mediation and Selection of Mediator. The party initiating mediation of a Contract Dispute shall provide written notice to the other party of its decision to mediate. In the event the parties are unable to agree upon a mediator within fifteen (15) Days after the receipt of such written notice, then the parties shall submit the matter to the American Arbitration Association (AAA) at its San Francisco Regional Office for selection of a mediator in accordance with the AAA Construction Industry Mediation Rules. .3 Mediation Process. The location of the mediation shall be at the offices of City. The costs of mediation shall be shared equally by both parties. The mediator shall provide an independent assessment on the merits of the Contract Dispute and recommendations for resolution. All discussions that occur during the mediation and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of the mediation shall be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 1119 and 1152. 14.4.4 Binding Arbitration. If the Contract Dispute is not resolved by mediation, then any party may submit the Contract Dispute for final and binding arbitration pursuant to the provisions of California Public Contract Code Sections 10240, et seq. The award of the arbitrator therein shall be final and may be entered as a judgment by any court of competent jurisdiction. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the following: .1 Arbitration Initiation. The arbitration shall be initiated by filing a complaint in arbitration in accordance with the regulations promulgated pursuant to California Public Contract Code Section 10240.5. .2 Qualifications of the Arbitrator. The arbitrator shall be approved by all parties. The arbitrator shall be a retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years of experience in public works construction contract law and in arbitrating public works construction disputes. In addition, the arbitrator shall have at least twenty (20) hours of formal training in arbitration skills. In the event the parties cannot agree upon an arbitrator, the provisions of California Public Contract Code Section 10240.3 shall be followed in selecting an arbitrator possessing the qualifications required herein. .3 Hearing Days and Location. Arbitration hearings shall be held at the offices of City and shall, except for good cause shown to and determined by the arbitrator, be conducted on consecutive business days, without interruption or continuance. .4 Hearing Delays. Arbitration hearings shall not be delayed except upon good cause shown. .5 Recording Hearings. All hearings to receive evidence shall be recorded by a certified stenographic reporter, with the costs thereof borne equally by City and Contractor and allocated by the arbitrator in the final award. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 10 .6 Limitation of Depositions. The parties may conduct discovery in accordance with the provisions of section 10240.11 of the Public Contract Code; provided, however, that depositions shall be limited to both of the following: (i) Ten (10) percipient witnesses for each party and 5 expert witnesses per party. Upon a showing of good cause, the arbitrator may increase the number of permitted depositions. An individual who is both percipient and expert shall, for purposes of applying the foregoing numerical limitation only, be deemed an expert. Expert reports shall be exchanged prior to receipt of evidence, in accordance with the direction of the arbitrator, and expert reports (including initial and rebuttal reports) not so submitted shall not be admissible as evidence. .7 Authority of the Arbitrator. The arbitrator shall have the authority to hear dispositive motions and issue interim orders and interim or executory awards. .8 Waiver of Jury Trial. Contractor and City each voluntarily waives its right to a jury trial with respect to any Contract Dispute that is subject to binding arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph 14.4.4. Contractor shall include this provision in its contracts with its Subcontractors who provide any portion of the Work. 14.5 Non-Waiver. Participation in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall not waive, release or compromise any defense of City, including, without limitation, any defense based on the assertion that the rights or Claims of Contractor that are the basis of a Contract Dispute were previously waived by Contractor due to Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents, including, without limitation, Contractor’s failure to comply with any time periods for providing notice of requests for adjustments of the Contract Sum or Contract Time or for submission of Claims or supporting documentation of Claims. SECTION 15 DEFAULT. 15.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. SECTION 16 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 15, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 11 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 15. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 16.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 16.2 Delays by Sureties. Without limiting to any of City’s other rights or remedies, City has the right to suspend the performance of the Work by Contractor’s sureties in the event of any of the following: (i) The sureties’ failure to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure full compliance with the Construction Contract within the Contract Time; (ii) The sureties’ abandonment of the Work; (iii) If at any time City is of the opinion the sureties’ Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably delaying the Work; (iv) The sureties’ violation of any terms of the Construction Contract; (v) The sureties’ failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or (vi) The sureties’ failure to follow City’s instructions for completion of the Work within the Contract Time. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 12 16.3 Damages to City. 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion of the Project. If City incurs Losses due to Contractor’s default, then the amount of Losses shall be deducted from the amounts withheld. Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted, the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 16.4 Suspension by City for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 16.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole by giving thirty (30) Days written notice to Contractor. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 16.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. 16.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 16.5, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors for: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 13 .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. 16.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 16.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. SECTION 17 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 17.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 17.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 14 17.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 16.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 18 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 18.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. 18.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 18 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 18.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 19 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint venturers of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 20 NUISANCE. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 21 PERMITS AND LICENSES. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 22 WAIVER. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 15 SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. The Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project, because the City, pursuant to its authority as a chartered city, has adopted Resolution No. 5981 exempting the City from prevailing wages. The City invokes the exemption from the state prevailing wage requirement for this Project and declares that the Project is funded one hundred percent (100%) by the City of Palo Alto. SECTION 27 NON APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 28 AUTHORITY. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES. Each Party shall bear its own costs, including attorney’s fees through the completion of mediation. If the claim or dispute is not resolved through mediation and in any dispute described in Paragraph 14.2, the prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provision of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorney’s fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorney’s’ fees paid to third parties. SECTION 30 SEVERABILITY. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. Rev. August 3, 2010 C12143408.PAR.DOC 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney PAR ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS INC. By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ BID SUMMARY Invitation For Bid 143408 Title Electric Pole Replacement and Area C7 4kV to 12kV Conversion Project Date January 18, 2012 List of Bidders (Company Name) Bid Total 1. PAR Electric Contractors, Inc.553,180.00$ 2. Wilson Construction Company 699,579.50$ 3. Diversified 944,329.00$ 4. Pacheco Utility Line Builders, Inc.961,975.00$ 5. Herman Weissker, Inc.1,036,254.00$ PROPOSED 4/12KV CONVERSION AREA C7 EL CAMINO REAL/W. CHARLESTON/ALMA/DEL MEDIO City of Palo Alto (ID # 2445) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 2 (ID # 2445) Summary Title: All City Mgmt Contract Amendment Title: Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Add the Amount of $47,878.71 to Contract No. C09127439 with All City Management Services, Inc. for a Total Contract Not to Exceed Value of $1,101,784.71 for Adult Crossing Guard Services Provided During the Period of September 1, 2011 –November 30, 2011 From:City Manager Lead Department: Police Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1.Approval of Amendment No. 2 to add the amount of $47,878.71 to Contract No. C09127439 with All City Management Services, Inc. for a total contract not to exceed value of $1,101,784.71 for adult crossing guard services provided during the period of September 1, 2011 –November 30, 2011. Background The City is dedicated to ensuring the safety of children traveling to and from school. Since August 1999, All City Management Services (ACM) had been responsible for the management of all crossing guard program functions during the regular school year and the summer session. ACM’s most recent contract expired on August 30, 2011. On July 15, 2011 the City issued an RFP for crossing guard services for three years commencing on December 1, 2011. As a result of that process, the City approved a three-year crossing guard services contract with a new vendor, American Guard Services, Inc. Discussion Funds in the amount of $345,000 were included in the FY 2012 Police Department Budget for crossing guard services. Due to the expiration date of ACM’s contract overlapping with the RFP process, it was necessary to extend the ACM contract for a period of approximately three months (August 31, 2011 through November 30, 2011) to ensure that crossing guard services would be available at the beginning of the school year. However, additional resources were not appropriated to the ACM contract for these additional services, which totaled $58,575.60 for the three month period. Staff recommends that the contract with ACM be amended to add the amount of $47,878.71 to the ACM contract, which represents the amount due, less available contingency funds of $10,696.89. February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 2 (ID # 2445) Resource Impact Funds in the amount of $345,000 were included in the FY 2012 Police Department Budget for crossing guard services. ACM provided two months of services under their prior contract in FY 2012, for a total of approximately $15,000, which has been paid. Due to the timing of the initiation of the new contract, staff estimates that approximately $195,000 will be incurred by American Guard Services for services provided in FY 2012 (December 2011 –June 2012). All of these expenses will be covered by existing FY 2012 budgeted resources and staff anticipates there will be sufficient resources for this contract amendment without requesting any additional allocation of funds. Policy Implications The provision of adult crossing guards is consistent with City policy, the criteria established by the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, the requirements of Program T-45 of the Comprehensive Plan and the Council priority of Community Collaboration for Youth Well Being. Environmental Review This is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: ·AMENDMENT TWO (PDF) Prepared By:Ron Watson, Police Lieutenant Department Head:Dennis Burns, Police Chief City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager City of Palo Alto (ID # 2489) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 4 (ID # 2489) Summary Title: Safe Routes to School Contract -Alta Planning Title: Approval of a Contract Agreement with Alta Planning & Design in the Amount of $400,000 to Develop a New Safe Routes to School Program From:City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Alta Planning + Design (Attachment A) in the total amount not to exceed $400,000 for professional services related to the Safe Routes to School program enhancements funded by the grant from the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) -Vehicle Emission Reductions Based at Schools (VERBS) Program. Background The City’s “4 E’s” program focusing on school commute safety began in the 1990s, when increasing vehicle congestion around public schools led to new Education and Encouragement elements at school sites and reinforced the longstanding priorities for Engineering and Enforcement along school commute routes. Since 2005, the City’s programs have formed the basis for a growing Safe Routes to School partnership between the City, the Palo Alto Unified School District and Parent –Teacher Association volunteers. In October 2010, the City submitted an application for funding of non-infrastructure Safe Routes to School program enhancements through the VTA-VERBS Program. The City was awarded a $528,000 grant that, when matched with the City’s $132,000 local match fund, provide for a $660,000 project that will significantly expand the City’s Safe Routes to School program. Walking and biking to PAUSD public schools have greatly increased in recent years, due mostly to successful education and encouragement programs. This project will build on those past successes and introduce new program elements. Discussion This contract strengthens the Enforcement, Education, and Encouragement elements of the current Safe Routes to School program and adds a fifth “E” for Evaluation. Alta Planning + Design, through this project, will assist the City in expanding its Safe Routes to School program, including: February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 4 (ID # 2489) a)comprehensive Walk and Roll to School maps for each of the 17 public schools in the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) and for the south Palo Alto neighborhood served by public schools in the City of Los Altos; b) new school-transportation-policy guidance for elements such as reduced speed limit zones (15-to 20 MPH) near schools and establishment criteria for adult crossing guards based on data collection and industry-standard best practices; c) evaluation and update of the existing bicycle safety education curriculum in PAUSD schools, and expansion of what is offered for middle school students and parents; and d) evaluation of the impact of the Safe Routes to School program on improving school commute safety as well as reducing peak period congestion and related greenhouse gas emissions. Table 1 below provides a summary of the Request for Proposals (RFP) solicitation process used by the City to help select Alta Planning + Design as the recommended consultant for award of the project. Table 1 Summary of Solicitation Process Request for Proposals (RFP) Task Task Duration/Info Proposed Length of Project Approximately 2 years (through June 2014) RFP Release Date September 22, 2011 Number of Proposals Mailed 12 Total Days to Respond to RFP 41 Days Pre-proposal Meeting Date October 6, 2011 No. of Attendees at Pre-proposal Meeting 9 Proposal Submittal Deadline October 25, 2011 Number of Proposals Received:4 Proposal Respondents Location (City, State)Selected for Oral Interview? Alta Planning + Design Berkeley, CA Yes Fehr and Peers Walnut Creek, CA Yes RBF Consulting Walnut Creek, CA No VentanaEdu Fremont, CA No The City received four proposals in response to the RFP. Proposals were evaluated against the following set of criteria: ·Quality and completeness of proposal ·Quality, performance and effectiveness of the solution and/or services to be provided by Proposer ·Proposer’s experience, including the experience of staff to be assigned to the project, the engagements of similar scope and complexity ·Cost to the city February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 4 (ID # 2489) ·Proposer’s financial stability ·Proposer’s ability to perform the work within the time specified ·Proposer’s prior record of performance with the city or others ·Proposer’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies (including city council policies), guidelines and orders governing prior or existing contracts performed by the contractor The Proposal Evaluation Committee included members from the City Department of Planning and Community Environment staff and one representative each from the Palo Alto Police Department, the Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Traffic Safety Committee of the Palo Alto Council of Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs). This committee reviewed the proposals and recommended two consultant teams for oral interviews held on November 15, 2011. The same proposal review committee interviewed the short-list consultant teams and recommended Alta Planning + Design for award of this project because of their extensive background in the completion of similar projects, track record in innovation in the development of safe route to school programs, and understanding of Palo Alto issues through their work on the Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Public Outreach The award of this contract was coordinated with the City’s Safe Routes to School partners on the City/School Traffic Safety Committee. After initiation of the project, a more extensive community outreach plan for implementation will be developed that includes a minimum of two community meetings for the development of Walk and Roll Maps for each of the 18 PAUSD public schools. The project will also include a focused South Palo Alto Safe Routes to School analysis of walking and biking patterns to schools in Los Altos serving Palo Alto students. Regular project updates will be made to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission, City Council, and the PAUSD Board of Education. Timeline The Safe Routes to School project with Alta Planning + Design will begin in March 2012 and last approximately two years. Additional Safe Routes to School program elements will be implemented concurrently over that period including the deployment of bicycle and pedestrian counting stations to monitor seasonal commuting trends at schools and the development of a web-based carpool and trip share tool. Grant requirements from the VTA –VERBS Program require all project elements to be completed by 2014. Resource Impact Funding for the project is included in the Capital Improvement Program project, PL-00026, Safe Routes to School. On February 14, 2011 (ID# 1549), Council approved the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) to fund the Safe Routes to School Program Development and Implementation. This project is 80% reimbursed by the VTA –VERBS grant. Policy Implications February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 4 (ID # 2489) This project is consistent with key transportation goals in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, including giving priority to facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling, and to providing a high level of safety for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. Specific policies and programs include: ·Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping centers and multi-modal transit stations. ·Policy T-39: To the extent allowed by law, continue to make safety the first priority of citywide transportation planning. ·Policy T-40: Continue to prioritize the safety and comfort of children on school travel routes. This includes program T-45, which calls for providing adult crossing guards at school crossings that meet adopted criteria, and T-46, which encourages the City-sponsored bicycle education programs in the public schools. Environmental Review This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061 and 15301 . Attachments: ·Attachment A: Agreement Between City of Palo Alto and Alta Planning & Design Services (PDF) Prepared By:Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official Department Head:Curtis Williams, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C12143475 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 21st day of February 2012, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC., a California corporation, located at 2560 9th Street, Suite 212, Berkeley, CA 94710 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to expand its Safe Routes to School program (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through June 30, 2014 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 2 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Hundred Thirty Thousand Six Hundred Forty Five Dollars ($330,645). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C-1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the deliverables submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 4 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of the CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are: Parisi Associates Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Solutions Collectively Rich Swent CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Brett Hondorp as the principal-in-charge to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and as the Project Manager to represent CONSULTANT during the day- to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 4 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City’s project manager is Jaime Rodriguez, Planning & Community Environment Department, Transportation Division, at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, Telephone:650-329-2136. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement as instruments of professional services, shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 5 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured (except professional liability and workers compensation) under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification, CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 6 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 7 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 8 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written, CITY OF PALO ALTO ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC. City Manager ~ \A =-/5? . V Name :---='6:.:.Y",,,, -".tt"'---JHo"",-,Y\'-!.d",o",-,Y,-"p,,--_ By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Title:_y-'-----"-,_n-=C(:..;' P"-I""'----'t..'-__ _ Senior Ass!. City Attomey Attachments: EXH IBIT "'A": EXH IBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": EXHIB IT "C-I": EXHIB IT "D": SCOPE OF WORK SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE OF RATES INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 9 Professional SerYice,~ Rev.June2,2010 \\('c~lcrra\shD.n:d\ASf)\J>URCH\SOJ.l('lT A TIONS\CURRENT BUYER-C'M rOLDERS\OTllERS -MEUSSA\!43475 Sale Roules\CI2143475.FinaLK.doc Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1 Ongoing Task: Project Management 1.1 Project Initiation As part of project initiation, the Alta Team (hereinafter “Consultant”) will hold two initial project kick-off meetings – one with Palo Alto City staff and one with the City/School Traffic Safety Committee – and conduct follow-up as necessary to:  Modify the project scope and schedule (if appropriate)  Gather and/or identify critical data and potential sources, and  Confirm the list of stakeholders Based on the project kick-off meeting, the Consultant shall revise draft project schedule shown in Exhibit B of this Agreement, and develop a contact list of stakeholders for the project. 1.2 Project Management Over the course of the project, the Consultant shall attend monthly progress meetings in person with City staff to ensure that the project is moving ahead on schedule. During critical phases of the project the Consultant shall meet more frequently via phone conference or in person, as needed, to complete project tasks. The Consultant shall use an Open Item Status Report (OISR) to track all ongoing project tasks and deliverables that clearly identifies the task and responsible staff person for each task item. The OISR shall be submitted every two weeks to the City to document completed tasks, forecast schedule impacts, and highlight critical tasks. In addition to bi-weekly submittals of the OISR, the OISR shall also be submitted to the City two working days in advance of monthly progress meetings, community meetings, and as requested by the City. All subconsultant work products, budgets and schedules will be managed directly by the Consultant. Consultant will review and perform a quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) check on all overall program products of subconsultants before submission of work products to the City to ensure quality and consistency throughout the project. Lines of communication will flow from subconsultants through the Consultant to the City. As part of the project management task, Consultant will develop and submit to City of Palo Alto a detailed project schedule identifying all deliverables, performance measures, evaluation criteria, budgets and other milestones prior to initiation of any task work. Task 1 Deliverables:  Project kick-off meeting minutes  Final schedule and stakeholder contact list  Monthly in-person project meetings and ongoing correspondence with staff to coordinate scheduling, report progress, respond to client requests, and anticipate next steps Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Task 2 Walk and Roll to School Maps Consultant will lead the development of the “Walk and Roll to School Maps” for the project through an extensive community outreach process for each of the 17 PAUSD public schools (minimum of two meetings per school) and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by public schools in the City of Los Altos. The South Palo Alto Walk and Roll Map shall highlight walking and biking routes out of the City of Palo Alto to the City of Los Altos city limits only. 2.1 Data Collection and Development of Base Maps Consultant will work with the City to confirm the exact requirements for the Walk and Roll to School Maps, including layout, content, method of distribution, and potential interactive features. Map elements may include, but not be limited to the following:  Enrollment boundaries (if applicable)  Previously identified walking and biking routes  Average times for walking and biking in five-minute increments  Pedestrian walkways (e.g., sidewalks, trails)  Bicycle travelways (e.g., bicycle lanes, bicycle boulevards, trails)  Intersection control (e.g., stop signs, traffic signals, beacons)  Traffic calming (traffic circles, speed humps, speed feedback signs)  Marked crosswalks  Locations of adult crossing guards  Driver access and circulation routes in vicinity of school, including designated drop off/pick-up zones  School and park campus internal circulation and access (as appropriate)  Major after-school activity locations  Safe practices for those who are bicycling, walking, skating, or using a scooter  Safety guidelines for drivers  SR2S program and school contact information, branding elements Once the recommended mapping methodology has been approved by the City with input from the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, Consultant will collect existing data regarding the locations of schools, enrollment boundaries, crossing guard locations, traffic control devices, pavement markings, signage, routes, aerial photos, and other relevant data. These data elements will be consolidated into a mapping geodatabase, which will be provided to the City at the conclusion of Task 3. As part of this task, Consultant will develop base maps for use during the first set of community meetings. High graphical quality is essential to Walk and Roll to School Maps. A version of the base maps will be made available online for review and comment by those who are unable to attend the school site meeting proposed in Task 2.2. Task 2.1 Deliverables:  Memo summarizing mapping methodology Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc  Development of mapping geodatabase  Base maps for 17 PAUSD public schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by public schools in the City of Los Altos 2.2 Community Mapping Meeting #1 The school community will play a key role in developing the Walk and Roll to School Maps. Consultant will meet with each school twice during their map development through the form of Community Meetings. At the first community meeting, described in this task, Consultant will lead the school community on a circulation and infrastructure assessment in the school vicinity and a discussion of community concerns and preferences. In the second community meeting (described in Task 2.4) Consultant will ask the school community to confirm the summary of their concerns and provide feedback on the Walk and Roll Map. Consultant will invite parents, teachers, school administrators, key district staff, City staff, law enforcement officers, and middle and high school students to participate in the community meetings. Consultant will prepare marketing materials for community meetings and City staff will be responsible for advertising in local newspapers. Consultant will work with the City and school staff or designated-volunteer community members to advertise meetings on school newsletters of websites. Consultant will be responsible for preparing and procuring community meeting materials such as PowerPoint presentations and print-outs, community meeting facilitation and meeting notes documentation. At Community Meeting #1, Consultant will introduce the mapping program, conduct a circulation and infrastructure assessment of each school site during a school commute period, identify stakeholder preferences and concerns, including existing routes, and gather feedback on the base maps developed in Task 2.1. In preparation for each community meeting, Consultant will conduct a site visit of each public school, including a field review of infrastructure within about a quarter mile radius of the periphery of each school to:  Confirm the base map inventory of existing school-related infrastructure, and  Observe and confirm areas of concern identified by the community during the school site meetings. For South Palo Alto near the border with the City of Mountain View and City of Los Altos, the Consultant will also conduct a community meeting to document the walking and biking routes to Los Altos schools serving residents of this South Palo Alto neighborhood. Task 2.2 Deliverables:  Community mapping meeting #1 for each of the 17 PAUSD public schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools  Follow-up field review at each school site  Notes and recommendation maps from meetings and field review 2.3 Develop Draft Walk and Roll to School Maps Based on community input and supplemental field work, the Consultant will develop a Draft Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Walk and Roll to School Map for each of the 17 public schools and a Walk and Roll Map for South Palo Alto to the border with the City of Los Altos. Walk and Roll to School Maps will be developed in GIS to take advantage of existing City and Consultant-produced data files as well as GIS-based interactive comments and the ability to export map data to Google Maps (.KML format). These maps shall be provided in Adobe Illustrator and Adobe InDesign for integration of branding elements. The Consultant’s team of graphic designers will create a final map design that is web-compatible in color format and that is legible in black and white to permit cost savings when printing maps. Consultant will also summarize the community concerns and field observations. Where appropriate, preliminary recommended solutions to community concerns and civil improvements in response to field observations will be prepared and formatted around the four E’s of education, encouragement, enforcement, and engineering and show consistency with the Five I’s of the Draft City of Palo Alto Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Consultant will develop an Administrative Draft and Public Review Draft versions of each deliverable that responds to comments on the administrative draft maps and improvement recommendations. Task 2.3 Deliverables:  Administrative draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans for 17 PAUSD schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools (.DOC and .PDF format)  Public review draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans for 17 PAUSD schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools (.PDF format) 2.4 Community Meeting #2 Consultant will develop marketing materials to help advertise a second community meeting at each school and be responsible for the facilitation of each meeting. At the Community Meeting #2 participants will review and comment on the public review draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and summarized recommendations. Consultant will summarize the process for developing the maps and improvement plans at the meeting and highlight the particular elements of each. To encourage feedback, the larger school community will be provided with online draft materials online in advance of the meeting. After the Community Meeting #2 for each school, Consultant will present the public review draft Walk and Roll to School Map and recommendations and a summary of community comments to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee for review and comment. Consultant may consolidate presentations to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee to maximize efficiency time with the group. Task 2.4 Deliverables:  Second community mapping meeting at each of the 17 PAUSD public schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools.  Presentation to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee (estimated 4 meetings) Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc 2.5 Develop Final Walk and Roll to School Maps Consultant will refine the Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans based on feedback from the community meetings and discussion with the City/School Traffic Safety Committee. Consultant will present the final Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, the City Planning & Transportation Committee, and the City Council. Task 2.5 Deliverables:  Final draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and Improvement Plans  Presentation to City/School Traffic Safety Committee, City Planning & Transportation Committee, and City Council (3 total meetings) Task 3 Recommended Safe Route to School Policy Development 3.1.1 Adult Crossing Guard Criteria and Evaluation Consultant will prepare adult crossing guard establishment criteria to both validate the deployment locations of existing adult crossing guard locations and to help the City respond to future requests for consideration of adult crossing guards. Consultant will prepare recommended establishment criteria for crossing guards, based on prior City practices, state standards and national best practices. Upon approval of the establishment criteria by City staff, the Consultant shall evaluate each of the City’s 29 existing adult crossing guard locations against the approved criteria and report the findings. An additional 10 locations may be identified by the City for evaluation by the Consultant. In developing the adult crossing guard establishment criteria, the Consultant may identify the appropriate criteria including, but not limited to: vehicle volume, estimated school age and adult pedestrian volumes, bicycle volume, community quality of life factors, policy factors, and safety factors (i.e, crosswalk crossing length, number of vehicular travel lanes, presence of pedestrian refuge island, truck percentages, sight distance, etc.). The recommended criteria will be summarized in an Administrative Draft memo for review by the City. The memo will take into account the sensitive nature of assigning/reassigning crossing guards and include a suggested procedure for working with the school community during the evaluation process, in addition to the more qualitative evaluation criteria. After incorporating revisions to the memo Consultant will present the Public Review draft memo to a study session of the Planning & Transportation Commission and City Council. Consultant will develop a final memo based on comments from the study sessions. Task 3.1.1 Deliverables:  Administrative Draft, Public Review Draft, and Final memo outlining proposed crossing guard establishment criteria  Presentation to CSTSC, PTC, and City Council Study Sessions Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc 3.1.2 Develop Data Collection Plan Consultant will develop a data collection plan that will collect all data pertinent to the evaluation criteria. The plan will include a list of count locations, proposed data collection schedule, proposed outreach to schools, data collection methodology and the final data format desired by the City. This plan will be approved by the City before data collection begins. Specifically:  Consultant will confirm the up to 39 count locations to be evaluated (29 existing crossing guard locations and up to 10 additional locations without crossing guards identified by Palo Alto).  Consultant will develop a counting schedule that takes into account each school’s drop-off and pick-up times and school calendar, including minimum days and holidays, so that counts can be scheduled during times that students are walking or biking to or from school. Counts will not be scheduled on Fridays or within two days of a school holiday. No counts will be taken during inclement weather, during construction activities, or any other incident that disrupts the normal flow of traffic.  Data will be collected in accordance with the Institute of Traffic Engineers Circular 214, the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project, and other applicable industry standards. A traffic data collection form will be presented to the City for approval prior to data collection. Task 3.1.2 Deliverables:  Draft and final data collection plan 3.1.3 Traffic Data Collection The decision to assign an adult crossing guard relies on not only the student pedestrian volumes, bicycle volumes, and traffic volumes, but also the operations and unique physical characteristics of each intersection. Consultant will visit the count locations to record and document the following information, or similar related information, via photos, graphics, and/or text:  Presence of traffic control devices in the immediate vicinity, including traffic signs, signals and pavement markings  Sight distance at crossing(s)  Width of street and number of lanes students must cross  Distance of crossing from school grounds  Posted speed limit  Presence or absence of sidewalks and curb ramps immediately adjacent to intersection This visit may coincide with the school assessments conducted in Task 2. Consultant will provide the information as an appendix to the count data. After the site check, Consultant will collect motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts during school commute peak periods at up to 39 locations. Consultant will work with a count firm experienced with conducting similar counts. Consultant will provide additional overview training to counters that explains the purpose of the counts, rules for counting pedestrians and bicyclists when observing unusual behavior, and methodology for identifying school children. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Count data will be provided to the City per the data collection plan finalized in a prior task. Task 3.1.3 Deliverables:  Appendix to traffic data summary report listing field notes for each intersection  Traffic counts at up to 39 intersections  Traffic count data summary report and raw data 3.2 Reduced School Zone Speed Limits AB 321 became effective January 2008 to allow local jurisdictions to extend the 25 mph prima facie speed limit (up to 1,000 feet from school grounds), or to establish a 15 mph speed limit in school zones (up to 500 feet from school grounds), under certain criteria. The reduced or extended school zone speed limit is only applicable on local streets in a residential district that have a maximum of two traffic lanes, and a maximum posted speed limit of 30 mph immediately prior to and after the school zone; and must be established for both directions of travel. Consultant will provide overall policy guidance on implementing reduced school zone speed limits in the City of Palo Alto. This will include a thorough background review of the legal requirements (CVC and CAMUTCD), a discussion of other California cities that have implemented reduced speed limits, and a review of school locations in Palo Alto that may be appropriate for reduced school speed limits in accordance with the requirements of the CVC and CA MUTCD. Consultant will make recommendations for implementing a reduced school speed limit policy in Palo Alto, including the appropriate speed limit (15 or 20 mph), additional traffic engineering study that may be required prior to implementing speeds, and evaluation to analyze the traffic safety benefits of lowered speed limits once implemented. Task 3.2 Deliverables:  Policy recommendation summary memo for reduced school zone speed limits 3.3 Policy Recommendations Memo & Public Outreach Recommendations for the crossing guards and reduced school zone speed limit policies will be compiled in an Administrative Draft memo for review by the City. City comments will be incorporated into a Public Review Draft memo. For the crossing guard analysis, Consultant will use the traffic data and field review to rank crossing guard locations, and make recommendations for adding, removing, or moving crossing guards. The data will also be used, if appropriate, to suggest minor revisions to the proposed criteria. The Public Review Draft memo will be presented at up to two citywide community workshops (or potentially as part of the map review meetings in Task 2.4), and at meetings of the City/School Traffic Safety Committee and the City Planning & Transportation Commission. Members of the school community, including district staff, school administrators and teachers, and parents will be invited to participate in the community workshops. The presentation will be geared to a non-technical audience, as appropriate. Workshops will be scheduled at a time and location that is easiest for these key participants to attend. Consultant will work with the City to determine if attendance could be further increased by providing a meal, child care, or language translation. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Based on comments received during workshops and committee and commission meetings, Consultant will revise the Public Review Draft memo to present a Final Draft memo to the City Council. Task 3.3 Deliverables:  Administrative, Public Review Draft, and Final Draft Policy Memo  Up to two preliminary policy evaluation criteria study sessions (PTC, City Council)  Up to two public workshops  One presentation of findings each to City/School Traffic Safety Committee, the City Planning & Transportation Commission, and City Council. Task 4 Scheduling and Encouragement Activities Consultant will develop a toolkit and schedule of potential activities offered by the Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Program, including the curriculum developed as part of this proposal. The tool kit will be targeted toward parents of elementary and middle school students, and be intended to encourage a range of alternatives to solo family driving to school. Consultant will also develop a tool kit geared toward high school students that encourages alternative modes. Consultant shall recommend a schedule of encouragement activities for each school to help promote ongoing Walk & Roll to School activities. The schedule will take advantage of existing City-sponsored and neighborhood events (such as Operation Safe Passage, International Walk & Roll to School Day, Bike to Work/School Day, Earth Week activities, Bike Palo Alto events, and major Farmer’s Markets) and propose new events to maximize participation and engagement of Palo Alto children and families. This schedule will be posted on the new Safe Routes to School website and cross-promoted through social media and other approved methods. We also suggest creating an interactive schedule that lets parents, teachers, and students add their events to the calendar. Consultant will also work with the City to identify appropriate rewards that can be integrated into the encouragement events to help continue regular alternative transportation mode use to and from school by students. Based on the potential for new encouragement events and rewards, our proposed budget includes a reserve/contingency line item for programming elements and funding. Task 4 Deliverables:  Tool kit of activities  Initial and regularly updated schedule of events  Memo recommending encouragement rewards Task 5 Evaluate and Update 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum The common goal of Safe Routes education tasks is to grow a self-sustaining culture of family and student bicycling in which self-powered school commutes are the norm. Palo Alto has made Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc great strides toward this goal – progress on which the updated and expanded Program will build. The current Palo Alto program draws from the League of American Bicyclists’ “Smart Cycling” framework and the Program and Consultant shall develop a curriculum that expands on this approach. Consultant shall develop a curriculum that includes the formation of a Curriculum Development Working Group (CDWG) to review and inform the curriculum, test-teaching curriculum, and finalizing the curriculum based on feedback from the CDWG and test-teaching results. Each of the Curriculum Development tasks (3rd Grade, Middle School, Parent) will follow the same basic subtask sequence below. Their subtasks will proceed in parallel, woven into the Curriculum Development master schedule and coordinated with the Project’s other meetings and workshops.  Gather information o Interview persons (teachers, SVBC trainers, key volunteers and parents, etc.) who have direct experience (institutional knowledge) of developing and delivering the existing curriculum o Review existing curriculum materials and framework (lesson plans, learning objectives, agendas/schedules/calendars, resource and volunteer/role lists, classroom and outdoor layouts and routes, visual and audio media) o Observe delivery of existing curriculum o Research and summarize curricula available elsewhere  Create and test draft updated curriculum o Create framework, learning objectives and content outlines for updating modules o Review with CDWG and other advisors o Develop draft updated curriculum o Review with CDWG and other advisors o Train trainers to test-teach draft updated curriculum o Test-teach draft updated curriculum o Summarize and review test-teach results with CDWG o If necessary, develop/review/test-teach 2nd-draft module(s)  Deliver final updated curriculum o Develop final updated curriculum o Present to CDWG and City 5.1 Curriculum Development Working Group Consultant will convene a Curriculum Development Working Group (CDWG) to support Tasks 5, 6, and 7. The CDWG will capture teacher, parent and student issues and perspectives, review Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc draft content and materials, and serve as a sounding board. The Consultant will convene the meetings and handle agendas and minutes. A kick-off meeting for the CDWG shall consist of:  City staff person  City/School Traffic Safety Committee (CSTSC) member who will be responsible for reporting back to that body  3rd Grade teacher familiar with the existing classroom presentation and bike rodeo curriculum  Proposed Middle School Physical Education teacher from each of the City’s three middle schools  Parent PTA representative interested in curriculum, representing parent needs and issues – ideally a parent of a middle school student who has also been through the 3rd Grade program It is anticipated that the CDWG will meet five times and the Consultant shall attend, facilitate, and be responsible for taking meeting minutes and report at each meeting. The scope for each of the meetings is noted below, but the scope for each meeting may be changed depending on need:  Meeting #1: Introduction to program, purpose and role of CDWG, schedule  Meeting #2: Review Working Paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices  Meeting #3: Review Draft Curriculum prior to test-teaching  Meeting #4: Review Working Paper #2: Draft Curriculum and Results of Test- Teaching  Meeting #5: Review Final Curriculum Working Paper #1 and the Final Curriculum will also be presented to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee. Task 5.1 Deliverables:  Formation of Curriculum Development Working Group and facilitation at up to five meetings  Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices  Draft Curriculum  Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching  Final Curriculum  Presentations at City/School Traffic Safety Committee (WP #1, Final Curriculum) 5.2 Evaluate 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum and Develop Draft Curriculum This task will build on Palo Alto’s existing comprehensive cycling education delivery to this age group. Age 10 (3rd grade) is a critical age because most children’s reasoning capabilities are now sufficient to learn how to safely traverse simple intersections independently. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc All 3rd grade students in Palo Alto currently experience a classroom session with video and teacher-led discussion, a school-wide bicycle skills rodeo, and an in-class presentation by a firefighter. In addition to helmet fitting and a bicycle safety check, the rodeo covers the fundamental traffic cycling skills of scanning over the shoulder, yielding when necessary, entering the street safely, and approaching and safely traversing simple intersections while negotiating with other road users (fellow 3rd graders on their own bikes). Current 3rd grade student bicycling programs in Palo Alto Classroom session Video and teacher-led discussion Firefighter talk Presentation on laws and safety Bicycle rodeo School-wide event. Helmet fitting, safety check, scanning over the shoulder, yielding when necessary, entering the street safely, approaching and safely traversing simple intersections while negotiating with other road users (fellow 3rd graders on their own bikes). Based on input received from the CDWG and in-classroom observation, Consultant will evaluate these existing curriculum modules (including conducting observation of existing teaching delivery, if possible), and summarize issues and opportunities including staff and volunteer resource requirements. Consultant will compare the existing curriculum to best-practice curriculum modules and programs. After receiving feedback on the Existing Curriculum and Best Practices Memo, Consultant will develop preliminary curriculum for review by the City and the CDWG. Draft curriculum elements will include lesson plans, web and mobile-compatible videos, website content, and social media. Consultant will also prepare a plan for test-teaching the curriculum. Task 5.2 Deliverables:  Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices  Preliminary Curriculum and Plan for Test-Teaching 5.3 Test-Teach Draft Curriculum and Develop Final Curriculum Consultant will test-teach the curriculum in a subset of Palo Alto schools. Consultant will summarize the results of the test-teaching in a memo and develop draft final curriculum in Spanish and English. The memo will include suggestions for a year-round schedule of on- and off-bike options for elementary school students and their families. Consultant will present the memo to the CDWG and the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, and develop final curriculum based on their feedback. Task 5.3 Deliverables:  Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc  Final Curriculum Task 6 Middle School Bike Education Program This task follows the same process as that outlined in Task 5: coordination with the CDWG, test- teaching the curriculum, and developing final curriculum based on test-teaching results and input from the CDWG and City/School Traffic Safety Committee. The Middle School Bike Education Program will build on the comprehensive 3rd Grade program. At the 6th Grade transition to middle school, as students enter an environment of greater responsibility and flexibility, most are capable of handling more complex traffic scenarios. They bike for longer distances to school and activities, and some use higher-volume streets and intersections than they did when younger. There are currently two offerings, one school-based and one through the City’s recreation catalog: Current middle school oriented bicycling programs in Palo Alto 5th Grade Lesson Firefighter-led bike / traffic safety lesson given in spring for graduating 5th graders. 45 minute presentation includes PowerPoint, “The Bicycle Zone” video. Parent education materials sent home following presentation. “Drive Your Bike” 1-period, all-6th-grade “game show” interactive assembly featuring a Host and an Expert (a local LCI). Students divide into teams of up to 20 and nominate a Team Captain. Questions are displayed, with 4 possible answers. Teams discuss among themselves, choose an answer. After a short time the correct answer is revealed (and explained by the Expert), and points are scored. All 6th graders attend one of these. Middle School Bike Skills A class for children age 10-14 accompanied by a parent or guardian. Classroom-style discussion, off-street skills practice on a paved area, and a neighborhood ride with observation and feedback. Covers traffic law basics, bike and helmet fitting, crash types and deterrence, proper positioning, 4- way stops and left turns, and communicating with drivers. 4.5 hours total. Offered through Palo Alto Recreation Department’s ENJOY catalog. There is currently no school-based on-bicycle training at the middle school level and the City plans to work with PAUSD middle school staff to develop these options. Following the procedures described in Task 5, our team will evaluate these existing options, observe their delivery, and summarize issues and opportunities including resource requirements. Consultant will review and summarize national best practices for middle school curriculum options and promotional, many of which use LAB’s “Kids II” content as a foundation. Because perceptions and expectations are as important to teens as formal curriculum content, Consultant will begin by seeking to understand Palo Alto’s current middle school bicycling culture, including student cycling behavior, assumptions, issues, and opportunities. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Working with teachers, and with input from students, Consultant will expand the current options into a comprehensive program for the middle school age group. It will contain modules for assemblies, lesson plans and teaching kits for classroom presentation and discussion, on-bike / off-street practice, and on-street teaching rides. On-bike modules will be designed for delivery as part of the school curriculum by Physical Education teachers, and developed with their input. School-oriented materials will be complemented by age-appropriate web and video content and supporting teacher material. Where possible we will explore options for delivery of class and self-teaching materials in Spanish. Consultant will also explore ways to include parents in the education of their middle school and pre-middle-school children, including the possibility of expanding the Middle School Bike Skills parent-and-child classes. All of these options will be integrated into a year-round calendar that includes new-middle-school student orientation and bike-to-school orientation rides. Task 6 Deliverables:  Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices  Draft Curriculum  Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching  Final Curriculum Task 7 Creating Parent Education Curriculum and Program This task follows the same process as that outlined in Task 5: coordination with the CDWG, test- teaching the curriculum, and developing final curriculum based on test-teaching results and input from the CDWG and City/School Traffic Safety Committee. The Parent Education curriculum will create options to equip and empower parents with knowledge and skills – a key part of creating a self-sustaining adult and student bicycling culture. In often-cited northern European cities there is not a substantial “bicycling generation gap” because most parents know the principles of safe bicycle operation, ride bicycles for utility trips, understand children’s capabilities and readiness stages, teach their children, and support further cycling education in schools. Task 7 activities will continue Palo Alto’s progress toward closing this generation gap by developing several ways for parents and guardians to increase their understanding of bicycle use and their children’s’ capabilities: Current parent-oriented bicycling programs in and near Palo Alto Parent Orientation Short class (no bicycle required) on understanding children’s perceptual and cognitive differences from adult bicyclists, how to help children ride safely (including helmet fitting), basic skills to teach, mistakes children make, how to evaluate skills and guide development, and tips on buying children’s bikes. Offered in Palo Alto at PTA events as “Bringing Up Bicyclists”. Uses LAB’s “Kids I” content and “Kid’s Eye View” video Bicycle handling skills Short off-street, no-traffic group practice of bicycle handling fundamentals: safety check; safe mounting and dismounting; effective starting and precise Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc practice stopping; confident turning, and use of the bicycle’s gears. Offered through Stanford’s Health Improvement Program as “Bicycle Handling Skills Clinic”. Similar to LAB’s “Bicycling 123” short course. Traffic cycling understanding In-class module that builds on motorist understanding of Rules of the Road, adding bicycle law, how to deter and avoid conflicts, riding between and through intersections. LAB Traffic Skills 101 Part 1, “Cyclist’s Eye View” and other videos. Offered regularly (along with Part 2) in San Francisco and the East Bay; less frequently in Palo Alto and nearby. Traffic cycling practice On-bike module in which adult and driving-age teen bicyclists practice the techniques learned in the in-class module, [LAB Traffic Skills 101 Part 2] Using the procedure outlined in Task 5, Consultant will evaluate the existing parent education options and delivery, survey cycling educator-accepted options available in other Bay Area cities and beyond, and develop a new or improved parent education curriculum deliverable in English and Spanish. Task 7 Deliverables:  Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices  Draft Curriculum  Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum (Spanish/English) and Results of Test- Teaching  Final Curriculum (Spanish/English) Task 8 Website Content Consultant will develop text and graphics content for the City’s Safe Routes to School website. In addition to deliverables intended for public review, the content may include but not be limited to text and graphics relating to:  Blog content  Newsletters  Project descriptions  Program activities  Collection and development of charts and photographs  Downloadable educational materials including Walk and Roll to School Maps  Course curriculum Consultant will design all public deliverables developed as part of this scope of work to match the graphic design guidelines established by the website developer. Materials will be translated into Spanish and Chinese-Mandarin. Task 8 Deliverables: Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc  Ongoing text and graphics content for website Task 9 Program Evaluation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Survey Consultant will lead the evaluation component of the Palo Alto SR2S program. The GHG evaluation is essential to complying with the terms of the grant, but is only one component of what we envision to be a more comprehensive assessment of school travel mode choices and related issues in Palo Alto. Based on the efforts and outreach described in the above tasks, the final evaluation report will include a review of individual program elements and their contribution to the overall goals and sustainability of the Safe Routes program. 9.1 Before and After Surveys The MTC evaluation team has developed a modified version of the standard Federal SR2S parent survey and uses the existing Federal student tally forms to gather before and after data. These surveys help measure average changes in school travel modes and trip distances before and after SR2S program activities, which can then be quantified to VMT and GHG emission impacts using emission factors. Parent surveys – to be administered in coordination with each program sponsor – should provide important qualitative feedback on specific program components and their effectiveness. Consultant will conduct parent surveys only at the elementary and middle schools, and working with student leaders at the high school(s) to develop a comparable student-led travel survey to gather high school mode share information. Parent surveys (print and/or online) shall be conducted up to three times: in fall/winter 2011 to establish baseline data, in fall 2012, and in fall 2013. Consultant will develop the parent survey in English, Spanish, and Chinese-Mandarin, and work with City staff to distribute or promote to each school according to the translation needs. The City will continue to conduct student hand tallies using the Federal Safe Routes to School forms, and submit data to the National Center for tabulation. The surveys will provide an estimate of replaced auto-based trips resulting from program activities (vehicle trips replaced by walking, bicycling, transit, or carpooling). Consultant will tabulate all survey data, and provide the survey results to the MTC Evaluation team for the GHG emissions calculations. Trip distances will be calculated and used to calculate VMT reductions, which will in turn be used to calculate GHG reductions. Task 9.1 Deliverables:  Parent surveys conducted annually at all elementary and middle schools  High school student travel survey at all high schools 9.2 Deploy Automated Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Stations To supplement hand tallies, the City plans on installing automated bicycle and pedestrian counters near all 17 PAUSD schools. These counters will collect 24-hour data that will allow the Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc City to identify temporal travel trends, establish baseline data, and understand mode splits. Count data can also be integrated into school curriculum and student-based program monitoring and analysis. To assist with this task, Consultant will identify locations for automatic counters. Count station locations should take into account school travel patterns, physical characteristics of the count site, and the type of data to be collected. Consultant will also develop recommendations for count technologies, taking into account ease of data collection, ability to track bicyclists and pedestrians separately, capital cost and ongoing maintenance cost, online data tracking features, and other factors that the City may wish to consider in their decision. Location and technology recommendations will be consolidated into a memo. Task 9.2 Deliverables:  Memo recommending count locations and automatic count technology options 9.3 Final Evaluation Report At the end of the second year of the program, Consultant will write a Final Program Evaluation Report that will include a description of the program, the results from the parent and student surveys, the result of GHG reduction calculations (obtained from MTC’s evaluation team), and a description of the programs that were implemented and participation levels. The primary findings would be changes in number of walkers and bikers along with estimation of transportation and GHG benefits. The report will also include recommendations based on the evaluation findings. Consultant will submit an administrative draft evaluation report and a final evaluation report, and make revisions to each based on a single, consolidated, and internally- consistent set of comments from the City. The final report will include a short executive summary that is translated into Spanish and Mandarin-Chinese. Task 9.3 Deliverables:  Final Evaluation Report (1 PDF Admin Draft, 1 PDF Final Report and 20 printed copies) OPTIONAL SERVICES Optional Task A. Safe Routes to School Website Consultant will lead the development of a new Safe Routes to School website for the City of Palo Alto. Community members currently reference the volunteer-developed Safe Routes to School website at www.saferoutes.paloaltopta.org. Consultant will provide comprehensive assistance to the City in creating a new Safe Routes to School website that will ultimately supersede much of the existing site’s content and contain robust branding, social media, and tripsharing features. The new City website will serve as a community resource for teaching the benefits of SR2S; allow the City to disseminate information and encourage activity participation across a range of web-based platforms; and provide the interface for visitors to learn about and sign up for the SchoolPool/Tripshare tool developed in Optional Task B. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc As part of this task, the Consultant will work with City staff, PTA representatives, and others as appropriate to develop a shared strategy for placing and packaging SR2S content on the City- maintained website, administering and cross-promoting activities through social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Flickr), and minimizing potential confusion or conflict associated with multiple Safe Routes websites. A.1 Graphic Design and Website Template Development Consultant will hold an initial meeting with web design team and City staff to discuss the overall vision for the website, key desired features, and review other example websites to get a sense of potential graphical and navigation look / feel. Following this meeting, Consultant will develop up to three (3) initial graphic design and website layout templates for review by the City. Each template option will include basic website architecture and a sample page, along with an associated set of graphic design guidelines for use by all Safe Routes to School public deliverables developed as part of this scope of work. Graphic design guidelines will include specifications for fonts, colors, graphic identity guidelines such as proper use of the logo, and formatting via style sheets. To provide brand consistency, one or more of the initial design options may be based on the existing logo and website colors of the volunteer-led website. Once a preferred website design option has been selected, Consultant will design and implement the site. The website will include interactive features discussed in Task A.2, and have a web- based content management system that can be used by City staff and consultants. Consultant will use the free, open-source content management system Drupal, which streamlines organization, management, and publication of web content, and is highly customizable. This solution will be low-cost to start up and maintain, and City staff can easily update, customize, and maintain the site after the contract ends. A.1 Deliverables:  Initial meeting with City and web design team to discuss desired website look and features  Up to 3 initial web site/graphic design concept options  Website development and supporting graphic design guidelines for the Preferred Design Concept  Templates for publishable materials: flyers, newsletters, educational materials, and Walk and Roll Maps A.2 Integration of Social Media and Interactive Mapping Platforms In Task A.2, Consultant will research and summarize recommended interactive website elements, integrate these features into the City’s new Safe Routes to School website, and ultimately use the web-based platforms and elements as part of the public outreach and project delivery tasks. An interactive SR2S website with related social media platforms will create a community of users centered on web-based services, and provide exciting new engagement opportunities, to help improve the efficacy and efficiency of public outreach and reinforce the Safe Routes program ‘brand’. Creating an enjoyable, easy-to-use, and useful experience converts visitors into ambassadors for the SR2S program, reaching a far broader audience than the City could hope to accomplish on its own. Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Consultant will work with the City to launch a Facebook Page and Twitter Account whose activities are integrated into the SR2S website, and vice versa. Cultivating relationships with interested users on Facebook and Twitter will increase goodwill, raise the visibility of the Palo Alto SR2S program online, and expand the reach and potential of public communications – for this project and beyond. The City will be able to cross-promote upcoming events, highlight program success, solicit feedback, and cultivate a community of users that will make SR2S a normal part of their daily online routine. Having a section of the website dedicated to “blog” activities will also ensure steady traffic of repeat users who are interested in progress made on SR2S issues. This can create spillover traffic, as repeat users will occasionally utilize other, more information-heavy sections of the website during their site visits. Consultant will work with the City to provide content for such features as part of Task A.3. The website will also integrate tools for organizing, including the SchoolPool / Tripshare tool described in Optional Task B, as well as interactive mapping features described in Task 2. Mobile device compatibility is also essential, as users are likely to utilize such tools when out of the house, especially so for youth. Finally, the website will provide opportunities to integrate trip tracking and greenhouse gas emissions reduction calculators. In addition to providing real-time data on the benefits of walking, bicycling and carpooling, they provide opportunities for contests and other fun activities that encourage and reward participation. These could be linked to existing programs like Freiker/Boltage, to the City’s installation of automated counters (which could be programmed to upload count data to the website at regular intervals), or to new systems developed through web tools such as www.saveagallon.org. A.2 Deliverables:  Issue Memo describing recommended interactive features for City SR2S website  One City and/or SR2S stakeholder meeting to confirm website/social media approach  Website and project delivery integration of preferred interactive and social media elements A.3 Website Maintenance Consultant will maintain the website during the contract period. Maintenance includes approximately 2 hours per month of regular server health monitoring, including log rotation, daily backups, and other tasks focused on maintaining server reliability such as resolving bugs and other unforeseen issues. A.3 Deliverables:  Ongoing website maintenance Optional Task B. SchoolPool and Tripshare Program Consultant will develop an online SchoolPool and Tripshare tool that is integrated into the City’s new Safe Routes to School website. The tool will be used primarily to encourage carpooling to Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc choice schools and will permit parents and students at other schools to establish carpools, walking school buses, bicycle trains, and informal travel arrangements. Basic functionality of the tool will include:  Easy Sign Up - Sign up through Facebook Connect or by filling out a simple form with parent neighborhood and preferred modes of transportation (bike/walk/carpool). This will be a simple input form (no long, overly complicated forms that ask for all their travel details).  School and Neighborhood Groups - Each neighborhood and school in Palo Alto will have its own group page that hosts a list of the parents signed up for that neighborhood or school. Group members can also setup notifications for when new parents join their neighborhood and/or school.  Quickly Search for School Pool Matches - Parents can search the list of parents in their neighborhood by transportation mode, school and neighborhood and then click on any parents that show up in the list to send them a message.  Build Trust Through Existing Social Connections - Parents can see which common friends they share with other parents in their neighborhood, helping them expand their network of trust.  Full Integration with SR2S Website - The SchoolPool tool will have the same look and feel as the website for Palo Alto’s Safe Routes to School Program, providing a single login and website for parents to find all the information they need to make their family’s commuting greener and healthier.  Authentication and Profile Management - Palo Alto SchoolPool will include a user account system for parents to log in securely and manage their profile choices (school, neighborhoods, transportation modes and contact info). Optional elements may include:  Facebook Integration - Speeds up signup even further by letting parents sign up using their Facebook account to find friends that are already on the system and quickly invite them to be your friend on School Pool.  Private Messaging and Friends Lists - Parents may contact each other through anonymous email addresses, similar to Craigslist, allowing them to reach out to potential school pool matches without putting their privacy at risk. Parents can invite other parents to become their friends. When the other parent accepts, both parents get the other’s contact info added to a list of all their friends, providing them with a quick directory for setting up school pools, which can be viewed online or printed out. Consultant will also develop promotional materials for the program for distribution by the City and school district including copy for mailers, newsletter advertisements, and website promotion. Task B Deliverables:  SchoolPool and Tripshare web based tool  Promotional materials including copy for mailers, newsletters and website promotion Professional Services \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each task within the number of hours specified below. The time to complete each task may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. Tasks: 1. Project Management (Part of tasks below) 2. Walk and Roll to School Maps (1076 hours) 3. Policy Recommendations (298 hours) 4. Scheduling and Encouragement Activities (132 hours) 5. Evaluate & Update 3rd Grade Bicycling (441 hours) Life Skills Curriculum 6. Middle School Bike Education Program (316 hours) 7. Creating Parent Education Curriculum (204 hours) & Program 8. Website Content (229 hours) 9. Program Evaluation & GHG Survey (343 hours) Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $330,645. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $400,000. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $330,645 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $69,355. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $0 (Project Management) Task 2 $118,510 (Walk and Roll to School Maps) Task 3 $38,090 (Policy Recommendations) Task 4 $13,730 (Scheduling and Encouragement Activities) Task 5 $43,150 (Evaluate & Update 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum) Task 6 $30,740 (Middle School Bike Education Program) Task 7 $19,030 (Creating Parent Education Curriculum & Program) Task 8 $15,285 (Website Content) Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc Task 9 (Program Evaluation & GHG Surveys) $31,860 Sub-total Basic Services $310,395 Optional Task A $27,350 (Safe Routes to School Website) Optional Task B $31,630 (Schoolpool & Tripshare Program) Other $10,375 Optional Additional Services $69,355 Reimbursable Expenses $20,250 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $330,645 Optional Additional Services (Not-to-Exceed) $69,355 Maximum Total Compensation $400,000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: A. Expenses for vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian counts. B. Expenses for travel and transportation in connection with the performance of Basic and/or Additional Services. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $250.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Alta Planning + Design Project Manager $195 Assistant Project Manager $100 Senior Associate $110 SR25 Advisor $110 Senior Planner/Programs $ 85 Project Planner $ 80 GIS/Graphics $ 65 Admin/Production $ 65 Parisi Associates Senior Project Advisor/Project Engineer $185 Project Associate $120 Project Support $ 85 Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Programs Manager $80 Programs Coodinator $34 Assistant/Surveys $24 Bicycle Solutions Curriculum Lead $120 Outreach Coordinator $ 90 Collectively Website Design $125 Website Architecture $ 85 Rich Swent Curriculum Advisor $ 75 Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: MINIMUM LIMITS REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 37 \\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 City of Palo Alto (ID # 2496) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 2 (ID # 2496) Summary Title: Donation of Laptop Computers to Oaxaca Mexico Title: Adoption of a Resolution Donating Surplus Fire Equipment to Oaxaca, Mexico From:City Manager Lead Department: Fire Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution donating surplus laptop computers to Oaxaca, Mexico. Background NEIGHBORS ABROAD, a volunteer community organization operating under the auspices of the City of Palo Alto, directs the activities of Palo Alto's officially recognized Sister Cities program. Its purpose is to promote international and intercultural understanding. Neighbors Abroad was founded on January 18, 1963 after the Palo Alto City Council initiated a Sister City organization in concert with President Eisenhower's Town Affiliation Program. Neighbors Abroad has received thirteen awards from Sister Cities International, and Neighbors Abroad projects have received recognition from the United Nations and the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce. Oaxaca became a sister city in 1964 and Palo Alto and Oaxaca have had an annual student exchange since 1965; numerous other exchange opportunities occur frequently, including the donation of a 100 foot aerial Fire Truck, ambulances, and most recently three fire engines. The Fire Department currently has surplus equipment, five (5) Armor laptop computers. This equipment is no longer used by the Fire Department as it has exceeded its useful life. It has been determined that this equipment has little or no commercial resale value. Discussion In December 2011, the Fire Department decommissioned five Armor laptop computers that were used on transport ambulances to complete electronic patient care reports (ePCR’s) in the field. These computers had the ability to collect electronic signatures, which greatly assisted in the billing and documentation of an incident. The laptops are approximately four years old and a first generation of electronic PCR’s. Although they were “ruggedized,” they had a history of breakage and were not supported by the City’s IT department. Furthermore, the operating systems and outdated wireless cards February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 2 (ID # 2496) were not supported by software upgrades and are not compatible with our current IT interface on the ambulances. New generation laptops, which support our current system, have been purchased. These computers have been decommissioned and scrubbed of their operating system and data by the Information Technology department and have been determined to have no monetary value. Although the laptops have little commercial value, they do have value to a department in need, such as Oaxaca, Mexico. Staff communicated with Oaxaca’s Fire Chief and confirmed the need for such equipment and the willingness to receive them should the request be approved by the City Council. Neighbors Abroad has agreed to help coordinate for the delivery of the equipment which may be delivered in person during a visit in lieu of shipping. Timeline Delivery of the equipment will occur within 90 days of Council’s approval of this resolution. Resource Impact This surplus equipment has no dollar value. Policy Implication This donation is consistent with existing City policies and furthers international and intercultural understanding. Environmental Review (If Applicable) The request is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: ·Final Oaxaca Donation Reso (PDF) Prepared By:Roger Bloom, Department Head:Dennis Burns, Police Chief City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager ** NOT YET APPROVED ** Resolution No. ______ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Donating Surplus Fire Equipment to Oaxaca, Mexico WHEREAS, the Council did in 1964, establish a sister city affiliation with Oaxaca, Mexico; and WHEREAS, 2012 marks the 48th anniversary of the sister city relationship between City of Palo Alto and Oaxaca, Mexico; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to continue to serve the community interests of international and intercultural understanding; and WHEREAS, the Fire Department has five surplus Armor ruggedized laptop computers; and WHEREAS, Neighbors Abroad is a volunteer organization that maintains and carries out the activities of the city of Palo Alto’s officially recognized Sister City Program; and WHEREAS, Neighbors Abroad has collaborated with the Fire Department to donate this surplus equipment to Oaxaca, Mexico; and WHEREAS, the surplus computers would serve the Fire Department of Oaxaca, Mexico by increasing technological capabilities; and WHEREAS, the Palo Alto Fire Department has communicated with the Fire Chief of Oaxaca and has confirmed the desire to accept such equipment; and WHEREAS, Neighbors Abroad has agreed to coordinated the transfer of said equipment; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 3711.0 authorizes a city to spend money for promotion of sister city and town affiliation programs. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. To authorize the City Manager to cause the donation and transfer of the surplus equipment consisting of five (5) Armor laptop computers (the “Surplus Equipment”) to the City of Palo Alto’s Sister City of Oaxaca, Mexico. SECTION 2. To authorize the Fire Chief of Palo Alto to coordinate with the Fire Chief of Oaxaca, Mexico, and the Palo Alto Neighbors Abroad for the delivery of the Surplus Equipment. 120206 sh 8261810 1 ** NOT YET APPROVED ** 120206 sh 8261810 2 SECTION 3. The Council finds that this is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Sr. Deputy City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Fire Chief CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds The City Auditor’s Office recommends acceptance of the Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds. At its meeting on December 6, 2011, the Finance Committee approved and recommended the report 3-1. The Finance Committee minutes are included in this packet. Respectfully submitted, Jim Pelletier City Auditor Audit Staff: Houman Boussina, Senior Performance Auditor Ian Hagerman, Senior Performance Auditor ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds (PDF) Department Head:Jim Pelletier, City Auditor Updated: 2/15/2012 12:38 PM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR December 6, 2011 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized In accordance with the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Annual Audit Work Plan, the City Auditor’s Office has completed an Audit of Library Bond Proceeds. The audit contains one finding with a total of four recommendations. Finding 1: The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized Our review found the City has used Library Bond funds appropriately and established oversight processes to help ensure the proper use of Library Bond funds. However, the Administrative Services Department and Public Works Department should formalize policies and procedures to ensure on-going compliance with federal and state regulations. In addition, while Library Bond proceeds may be used to pay for staff labor costs associated with the Library Projects, the City does not have a policy on using Library Bond funds to pay for these costs. Staff should also ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment. We thank the staff of the Administrative Services Department (ASD), the Public Works Department (PWD), the City Attorney’s Office, and the Library Department for their time, information, and cooperation during the audit process. This report will be presented to the Finance Committee on December 6, 2011. Respectfully submitted, Ian Hagerman Senior Performance Auditor Audit Staff: Ian Hagerman, Senior Performance Auditor Attachment A Updated: 11/30/2011 11:46 AM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 Houman Boussina, Senior Performance Auditor ATTACHMENTS: ·Attachment A: Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds (PDF) Department Head:Ian Hagerman, Sr. Performance Auditor Attachment A Updated: 11/30/2011 11:46 AM by Deniz Tunc Page 3 Attachment A AUDIT OF THE USE OF LIBRARY BOND PROCEEDS The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR DECEMBER 2011 Attachment A Office of the City Auditor Honorable City Council December 6, 2011 Attn: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds: The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized In accordance with the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Annual Audit Work Plan, the City Auditor’s Office has completed an Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds. The audit contains one finding and four recommendations. Finding 1: The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized Our review found the City has used Library Bond funds appropriately and established oversight processes to help ensure the proper use of Library Bond funds. However, the Administrative Services Department and Public Works Department should formalize policies and procedures to ensure on going compliance with federal and state regulations. In addition, while Library Bond proceeds may be used to pay for staff labor costs associated with the Library Projects, the City does not have a policy on using Library Bond funds to pay for these costs. Staff should also ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment. We thank the staff of the Administrative Services Department (ASD), the Public Works Department (PWD), the City Attorney’s Office, and the Library Department for their time, information, and cooperation during the audit process. This report will be presented to the Finance Committee on December 6, 2011. Respectfully submitted, Ian Hagerman Senior Performance Auditor Audit Staff: Houman Boussina, Senior Performance Auditor Ian Hagerman, Senior Performance Auditor -1- Attachment A -2- TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter 1 Introduction 3 Background 3 Objective, Scope, and Methodology 5 Finding 1: The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, but policies and procedures should be formalized 6 Appropriate use of Library Bond monies 6 Library Bond monies were used appropriately, but the City should formalize policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of bond funds 6 The City Council should consider providing policy guidance on the use of bond funds to pay for staff labor costs 9 Staff should ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to delivery of services or payment 9 Conclusion 10 Recommendations 10 City Manager Response 11 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Net Proceeds to the City for Issuance of Measure N General Obligation Bonds 4 Exhibit 2: Library Project Expenditures from March 2, 2009 through July 11, 2011 7 Exhibit 3: Overview of the Process to Authorize, Classify, and Pay for Library Project Expenditures 8 Attachment A -3- Introduction In accordance with the FY 2012 Annual Audit Work Plan, the City Auditor’s Office has completed an Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds. The primary purpose of this audit was to determine whether the City has appropriately used General Obligation Bond (bonds) funds issued under the 2008 voter-approved Measure N and whether the City has established adequate policies and procedures to ensure that these funds are used appropriately in the future . We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Background On August 4, 2008, City Council approved placing a $76 million General Obligation Bond measure on the November 2008 ballot to fund construction and completion of a new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, renovation and expansion of the Main Library, and renovation of the Downtown Library (Library Projects). On November 4, 2008, over 69 percent of Palo Alto voters approved Measure N and the issuance of the General Obligation Bonds. Key provisions of Measure N included:  The proceeds from the sale of the bonds would be used to build a new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, expand and renovate the Main Library, and renovate the Downtown Library.  Costs for the Library Projects in excess of $76 million are to be paid with other City funds.  The estimated tax rate to property owners would be $27 per $100,000 of assessed property value.  The City is required to comply with rules under State law for financial accountability and reporting.  The Administrative Services Director is responsible for filing an annual report with the City Council regarding the amount of funds collected and expended as well as the status of the Library Projects.  The City would create a citizen’s oversight committee to monitor the projects and report to the City Council.  Annual audits of the bond funds are required. Attachment A -4- The Library Projects consist of the following components:  Mitchell Park Library and Community Center: A new joint-use facility with larger library collections, reading and meeting areas and community center space. The renovation will also improve seismic and fire safety.  Main Library: The Main Library will expand to allow for new group study and meeting rooms and more collection space. The renovation will also include seismic upgrades.  Downtown Library: The renovation will improve seating and computer areas, meeting rooms, lighting, access for individuals with disabilities, and enhance seismic and fire safety.  Temporary Facilities: The City constructed temporary library facilities at the Cubberley Community Center Auditorium to use while the Mitchell Park Library and the Community Center are under construction. Staff recommended issuance of two series of bonds to pay for the $76 million Library Projects. In June 2010, the City sold bonds that yielded net proceeds of $58.5 million, as shown in Exhibit 1, for the Downtown and Mitchell Park Libraries and Community Center. The City is planning another bond issuance to pay for the remaining costs of the work on the Main Library in 2012. Exhibit 1: Net Proceeds to the City for Issuance of Measure N General Obligation Bonds Total Amount of Bonds Issued $59,071,208 Less Underwriter’s Discount ($348,010) Less Estimated Cost of Issuance ($223,198) Net Proceeds to the City $58,500,000 Source: Official Statement on the Issuance of the Series 2010A Bonds The City initially allocated the $58.5 million in net proceeds as follows:  The City reimbursed the Infrastructure Reserve $4.2 million for all expenditures except staff labor charges associated with management of the projects dating back to March 2, 2009.  The City deposited the remaining $54.3 million into the City’s California Asset Management Program (CAMP) account to pay for future costs of Library Projects. Several City departments will play a key role in the management and oversight of the Library Projects. PWD has the primary responsibility for managing the construction projects and has hired a construction project manager to support and supplement the work of PWD staff. ASD is responsible for overseeing the bond issuance. ASD also hired a financial advisory firm to assist with bond issuance. The Library and Community Attachment A -5- Services Department has coordinated temporary closures, as well as services and programming at the new facilities. In accordance with Measure N, the City has implemented measures to provide oversight of the use of Library Bond monies. It has established a five-member Library Bond Citizen Oversight Committee to monitor bond fund expenditures. In addition, Measure N requires annual reports from the City’s external financial auditor on the City’s compliance with key provisions of Measure N. The first report was issued in October 2010 covering the period through June 30, 2010. The report stated the City appropriately deposited and used proceeds from the sale of the bonds for the purposes specified in Measure N. The report also recommended the ASD Director file a required annual report regarding the amount of funds collected and expended, as well as the status of the Library Projects approved in Measure N. Objective, Scope, and Methodology The objective of this audit was to evaluate controls for the use of the general obligation bond funds to ensure the funds are used in accordance with the bond requirements and federal regulations for the use of tax-exempt bonds. Our review was limited to pre- issuance costs dating back to March 2009 and other bond fund expenditures through July 11, 2011. To assess whether the City used bond monies appropriately we reviewed a judgmental sample of 30 pre-bond issuance Library Project expenditures totaling $1.5 million incurred during the period from March 2, 2009,1 through July 21, 2010. We also reviewed a judgmental sample of 22 Library Project expenditures totaling $1.3 million incurred during FY 2011. We selected samples to test a variety of vendors and expenditure amounts. We also reviewed applicable sections of the California Constitution and the Internal Revenue Code, City Council Resolutions, City Manager Reports, and written guidance from the City’s Bond Counsel. We also reviewed guidance from the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission, and other jurisdictions’ policies and procedures. We met with staff in ASD, PWD, the City Attorney’s Office, and the Library Department. We also attended meetings with the Library Bond Oversight Committee. To assess the adequacy of the City’s policies and procedures for oversight and disbursement of bond funds we reviewed ASD and PWD’s procedures and processes to track and classify Library Project expenditures paid with bond proceeds, and reviewed the City’s process to contract for professional services associated with issuance of the bonds. The audit did not include a review of construction management and the adequacy of the oversight provided on the Library Projects. 1 This is the City’s inception date for financial reporting on the Library Projects. Attachment A -6- Finding 1: The City has used Library Bond monies appropriately, policies and procedures should be formalized The City has used Library Bond funds appropriately and established oversight processes to help ensure the proper use of bond funds. However, ASD and PWD should formalize policies and procedures to ensure on going compliance with Federal and State regulations. In addition, while bond proceeds may be used to pay for staff labor costs associated with the Library Projects, the City does not have a policy on using bond funds to pay for these costs. Staff should also ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment and consider developing a checklist of steps to take to properly execute contracts. Appropriate use of Library bond monies Government issuers of tax-exempt bonds must comply with a variety of rules and regulations associated with the issuance and use of tax-exempt bond monies. In particular, these proceeds may only be used to finance the acquisition or improvement of real property and bond issuers must maintain adequate policies and procedures to ensure that bond monies are used appropriately. Bonds could lose their tax-exempt status from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for violations of rules and regulations of their bonds.” The City's Bond Counsel has provided additional guidance on the appropriate use of bond monies. Specifically, the bond counsel stated, "real property will be considered to include land, buildings, and fixtures (items of moveable tangible property which are affixed to a building in such a manner as to indicate a permanent location for that item of property). In addition, consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, any cost that an accountant would include in the capital cost of the improvement such as architect and engineering fees are treated as includable within the meaning of real property for purposes of interpreting Article XIIIA, Section 1 (b)(2).” The City’s Bond Counsel also stated that site improvements, costs of building a temporary library, and traffic signal improvements necessitated by the library project would also qualify to be paid for from bond proceeds. The California Debt Issuance Primer (Primer) issued by the California State Treasurer also provides guidance on the appropriate use of general obligation bonds. Specifically, the Primer states "… labor costs, professional fees (such as for general contractors, architects, real estate appraisers, and brokers), real estate closing costs, and other costs directly connected to real property acquisition and improvement are probably also appropriately financed from general obligation bonds.” Library Bond monies were used appropriately, but the City should formalize policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of bond funds From March 2, 2009 through July 11, 2011, the City spent approximately $19.7 million on the Library Projects. Library Bond funds were used in accordance with Measure N, such as for engineering, construction, and architectural costs associated with the Library Projects. Exhibit 2 summarizes Library Project expenditures through July 11, 2011. Attachment A Exhibit 2: Library Project Expenditures from March 2, 2009 through July 11, 2011 Source: City of Palo Alto SAP Financial System The City used bond funds to reimburse the Infrastructure Reserve for all expenditures except staff labor charges associated with management of the projects. The bond proceeds were properly used in most instances. We noted only minor ineligible expenses totaling approximately $400 that were reimbursed with bond proceeds; however, staff reallocated these costs to other funding sources when notified. The City has not issued General Obligation Bonds in over 30 years. According to staff, there were no known existing procedures to oversee the expenditures of General Obligation Bonds, so staff has had to develop new processes to ensure appropriate use of the bond monies. The City also utilized outside legal and financial expertise to assist in the issuance and oversight of the Library Bonds. In general, the City has established processes which appear to be adequate to ensure Library Bond funds are used appropriately. Exhibit 3 summarizes the process used by staff to review, authorize and classify Library Project expenditures and use bond proceeds to reimburse the City’s Infrastructure Reserve fund for bondable expenditures. According to staff, PWD receives Library Project invoices which are then reviewed to determine whether the expenditure is bondable and enters the invoices into the City’s financial system where they are reviewed and authorized by ASD staff (for construction- related invoices, the City’s construction manager reviews invoices and ensures that the work is done properly prior to forwarding invoices to PWD staff for review. When Library Project expenditures from the date of the last disbursement request reach a threshold of $100,000, ASD staff prepares a disbursement request from the City’s CAMP account to reimburse the Infrastructure Reserve for bondable expenditures. -7- Attachment A Exhibit 3: Overview of the Process to Authorize, Classify, and Pay for Library Project Expenditures 1. Receive & Validate Invoices 2. Classify (Bondable or Not) 3. Enter into Financial System PWD STAFF ASD STAFF FUNDS/ACCOUNTS Bond Funds in CAMP Investment Account Infrastructure Reserve Fund Library Project Expenditures -8- Reimburse Bondable Expenditures 1. Review & Validate Entry 2. Authorize Payment 3. Generate Weekly Report Bondable Expenditures > $100,000? Source: Interviews with staff and auditor’s analysis of reimbursements However, while ASD and PWD have taken steps to develop policies and procedures relating to the use of bond funds, the City does not yet have formalized policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of bond funds, which the IRS uses to evaluate post-issuance compliance. These procedures are important for assessing compliance related to the Library Projects and any future bond funded projects. The City Auditor’s Office forwarded procedures to ensure proper use of bond monies, developed by the City of San Jose, for ASD staff to consider when developing policies for the City. The IRS evaluates post-issuance compliance on a variety of factors including the availability of formal written procedures addressing:  Proper use of bond proceeds  Timely expenditure of bond proceeds  Proper use of bond-financed property  Arbitrage yield restriction and rebate  Timely return of filings  Roles and responsibilities to monitor post-issuance compliance  Compliance with other general requirements In 2007, the IRS Tax Exempt Bonds function (TEB) initiated a compliance project to evaluate the post-issuance and record retention policies, procedures, and practices of governmental issuers of General Obligation Bonds. In 2009, the TEB reported they issued a questionnaire to 200 selected government agencies to measure aspects of the post-issuance compliance. The City Auditor’s Office forwarded the IRS questionnaire and other guidance documentation to staff during the course of the audit. In the absence of formalized procedures, ASD is primarily relying on a memo from the City’s Bond Counsel and its general accounting procedures to ensure proper use of bond funds. ASD and PWD should formalize policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of Library Bond funds to ensure continued compliance with federal and state regulations. In particular, policies and procedures should provide specific direction, based on applicable Attachment A -9- regulations, best practices and legal guidance, for determining the eligibility and proper classification of Library Bond expenditures and contain documentation of management review and approval of the policies and procedures. RECOMMENDATION #1: ASD should complete the IRS Governmental Bond Financings Compliance Check Questionnaire as a basis to evaluate compliance with IRS post-issuance requirements. RECOMMENDATION #2: ASD and PWD should formalize policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of Library Bond funds to ensure continued compliance with federal and state regulations and best practices. The City Council should consider providing policy guidance on the use of bond funds to pay for staff labor costs As of July 13, 2011, the City’s has incurred approximately $619,000 in direct staff labor costs associated with project management of the Library Projects. Staff did not have an estimate of total staff costs over the life of the Library Projects available at the time of report issuance. Labor costs that are directly related to the completion of the project, such as project management costs, and that are specifically identifiable may be capitalized and included as bondable project costs. In addition, the text of Measure N does not prohibit the use of the bond funds to pay for staff labor costs associated with the project management of the construction. The City does not have a policy on using Library Bond funds to pay for these costs. However, staff costs related to management of other capital projects in the City are capitalized and are added to the total costs of projects. In our opinion, the City Council should consider providing policy guidance on the use of bond funds to pay for bondable staff labor costs related to the Library Projects and future bond funded projects. RECOMMENDATION #3: The City Council should consider providing policy guidance on the use of bond funds to pay for bondable staff labor costs related to the Library Projects and future bond funded projects. Staff should ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to delivery of services or payment The City made payments on financial advisory and legal counsel contracts associated with the Library Bonds that had not been properly executed. In both instances, prior professional services contracts had expired and new agreements covering the Library Projects had not been signed or executed prior to payment by the City. While the City has subsequently remedied these situations, staff should ensure that the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment in the future and consider developing a checklist of steps to take to properly execute contracts. RECOMMENDATION #4: ASD should ensure that the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment and consider developing a checklist of steps to take to properly execute contracts. Attachment A -10- Conclusion In August 2008, City Council approved placing a $76 million General Obligation Bond measure on the November 2008 ballot to fund construction and completion of a new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, renovation and expansion of the Main Library, and renovation of the Downtown Library. Our review found the City has used Library Bond funds appropriately and established oversight processes to help ensure the proper use of Library Bond funds. However, policies and procedures should be formalized to ensure on going compliance with federal and state regulations. In addition, while Library Bond proceeds may be used to pay for staff labor costs associated with the Library Projects, the City does not have a policy on using Library Bond funds to pay for these costs. Staff should also ensure the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment. Recommendations RECOMMENDATION #1: ASD should complete the IRS Governmental Bond Financings Compliance Check Questionnaire as a basis to evaluate compliance with IRS post-issuance requirements. RECOMMENDATION #2: ASD and PWD should formalize policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of Library Bond funds to ensure continued compliance with federal and state regulations and best practices. RECOMMENDATION #3: The City Council should consider providing policy guidance on the use of bond funds to pay for bondable staff labor costs related to the Library Projects and future bond funded projects. RECOMMENDATION #4: ASD should ensure that the City’s contracting requirements are met prior to the delivery of services or payment and consider developing a checklist of steps to take to properly execute contracts. Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A CITY AUDITOR’S OFFICE RESPONSE TO THE CITY MANAGER’S RESPONSE The City Auditor’s Office (Auditor’s Office) appreciates the assistance from the Administrative Services Department (ASD) in completing this audit. Staff disagreed with Recommendation 1 on the basis of the possible implication from the recommendation that the City was not in compliance with IRS requirements. The audit report states that written procedures governing the use of bond proceeds are a factor the IRS uses to evaluate compliance, but does not make the argument that the City has not complied with those regulatory requirements nor has the Auditor’s Office communicated such an opinion to management. In our opinion, there are no substantive areas of disagreement with the recommendation, and we caution against reading beyond the clear language of the recommendation and audit report which was to complete the IRS questionnaire as a means to evaluate and ensure continued compliance with regulatory requirements. Furthermore, we do not agree with staff’s assertion that compliance with Recommendations 1 and 2 would result in additional costs to the City and require diverting staff resources in any meaningful way. The audit does not make recommendations to substantively adopt additional policies and procedures, but rather to formalize the processes and procedures that staff is currently following to ensure ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements. In our opinion, this would not incur substantial cost or require significant staff resources. In addition, the Auditor’s Office took steps to assist staff in these efforts by identifying and documenting processes and providing sample policies and procedures and IRS guidance. While ASD does have general accounting policies/practices and legal guidance that it relies on to ensure proper use of bond monies, these should be formalized to ensure they are fully- defined, consistently applied, and tailored specifically to general obligation bond projects. The importance of regulatory compliance surrounding general obligation bonds, the possibility of future bond issuances, the public scrutiny of the use of bond monies, and the significant dollar amounts often associated with bond issuance further warrant specific attention from City management. Management’s response mentions that the Public Works Department has an internal written process for payment processing related to the Library Projects. While this is accurate, this process, while written, was originally written down in an email to the Auditor’s Office in response to our risk assessment and had not evolved beyond that stage by the time we completed audit work. In our opinion, this is an insufficient maturity level for policies and procedures that should ensure appropriate use of a $76 million capital improvement project and any future bond issuances. Lastly, staff disagreed with Recommendation 3 on several grounds. First, the response stated that staff costs are not normally included in General Fund capital budgets. While this may be the case, the City does separately capitalize General Fund Capital Improvement Project costs related to project management in its General Fund CIP and allocates those costs to CIP projects (see CIP project AS-10000 in the FY 2012 Capital Budget). In addition, staff was unable to provide any documentation of guidance or communication from the City Council regarding whether staff costs related to project management would be reimbursable by the bond. In the absence of a documented policy decision, we felt it would be prudent for direction to be given on this issue for the Library Projects and any future general obligation bond issuances. Attachment A FINANCE COMMITTEE DRAFT EXCERPT Special Meeting December 6, 2011 1. Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds Ian Hagerman, Senior Performance Auditor, discussed the Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds which was conducted in accordance with the Fiscal Year 2012 work plan. The Audit had one finding and four recommendations. The objective was to evaluate controls of the use of the general obligation bond funds. Staff reviewed pre- issuance costs dating back to March 2009, and expenditures back to mid-July 2011. They did not review the change order process or construction management for Mitchell Park. Staff sampled about $3 million of costs for the library project. He reviewed the Measure N projects and Staff’s recommendations to accomplish them. He reviewed the various department roles in the project as well as the oversight components to the project. He said the first required annual external audit report was issued last year which assessed appropriate use of monies as well as some additional requirements. He clarified that the money has been used appropriately, but Staff was recommending some formalized policies and procedures. Between March and July 2011 approximately $20 million was spent on the Library Projects. Staff identified about $400 in exceptions which was not significant. He recommended Staff complete an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) government bond financing compliance questionnaire. This questionnaire will help the City self-assess compliance with the rules and regulations associated with government issuers of tax exempt bonds. He recommended that the Administrative Services Division (ASD) and the Public Works Department (PWD) formalize policies regarding oversight. He stated that Staff disagreed with portions of these recommendations as indicated in the Staff response. He stated that ASD relied on the general accounting policies and procedures and legal guidance. PWD did have a written process for the library project. However that was written in an electronic mail (e mail)format and not formally adopted. He said such a large project should have a more mature and formal process. The IRS Tax Exempt Bond Compliance Program found that 60 percent government bond issuers stated they had written procedures for Attachment B use of bond proceeds, but further review demonstrated that only about 20 percent actually had written specific procedures. The IRS response was that this was a significant inattention to post-issuance compliance. This issue will continue to receive attention from the IRS. He said this risk warrants a specific approach to procedures. The third recommendation was for the City Council to recommend policy guidance on the use of bond funds to reimburse bondable staff labor cost related to project management. There had been about $619,000 in Staff labor related to project management, these costs can be capitalized to the General Fund Capital Improvement Project (CIP). There had been undocumented discussion about these costs not being included in the project budget. It would be prudent for Council to discuss formalizing a policy regarding Staff management labor costs not only as it relates to the library projects but also as a permanent policy. Another recommendation was for ASD to ensure contract requirements would be met prior to services or payment. There were two professional services contracts in the Audit that were not properly executed prior to services being provided. Joe Saccio, Assistant Director of Administrative Services said that he agreed with the Auditor’s findings that some contracts were not properly managed. Staff had developed a procedure to address this issue going forward. Staff also agreed with the recommendation to use the IRS checklist. The City was compliant with and could provide back up documentation to demonstrate compliance with all of the IRS requirements. He said Staff understood from previous Council direction that Staff salaries were not to be included in the bond budget, and this is how the bond was addressed to the voters. These costs were assumed to be about $1 to $1.5 million dollars. Staff was open to the City Auditor’s recommendation that Council review that process. This can be brought to the attention of the full Council and will affect bond rates. He stated the process and procedures were adequate and did not agree with the City Auditor’s recommendation. There were sufficient measures in place. Staff requested Bond Council generate a letter indicating what could be covered. There was not much information available to make these determinations. Staff also reviewed the City of San Jose’s processes. ASD Staff also worked closely with the Library Bond Oversight Committee, and PWD to ensure processes were in place. Workload limited Staff’s ability to formalize many processes, when sufficient procedures were already in place. The email referred to by the City Auditor was created by PWD early in the project to ensure procedures were in place. Those procedures have been abided by. Lalo Perez, Administrative Services Director, discussed the impact of the City Auditor’s recommendations. The cumulative affect of all of the yearly City Auditor’s recommendations were dramatic. He agreed it would be optimum to accommodate all of the recommendations, but a balance needed to be struck. Staff would accommodate any Council recommendations. Attachment B Chair Scharff asked if Staff was requesting the Finance Committee take action on this. Mr. Hagerman said this was an unusual circumstance as Staff typically agreed with the City Auditor’s recommendations. For this disagreement, Staff would appreciate guidance from the Finance Committee for follow-up purposes. As Staff prepares for future bond issuances, direction from Council on these recommendations would be useful. Council Member Shepherd stated the Finance Committee discussed this in May and directed Staff to return with costs related to bond projects. She said there was $619,000 that needed to be discussed as part of this request. She said she understood the need to spend public funds wisely, but she also wanted to know where money was being spent. That was the focus she wanted to take on this issue. Mr. Perez said Staff did not have an issue with Council Member Shepherds suggestion. The main issue would be for PWD and Library Staff to code their time. This was approximately $1 million in operating costs that were unfunded that would need to be considered. Some operating costs and non-bondable costs could be covered. Council Member Shepherd agreed and added this was a good discussion along with the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission (IBRC) recommendations to determine how to sustain what was built. Vice Mayor Yeh said the minutes from May should be reviewed, as he did remember that discussion. There had been some discussions to not count Staff costs to keep the bond costs as low as possible. There had also been discussions around a second issuance but it would not be for the balance to get to $76 million. He asked if Staff had an estimate of what the 2012 issuance would be. Mr. Saccio said there had been a discussion about change orders. He did not have specific information available, but thought they had issued $7 or $8 million but that had changed based on the change orders. Mr. Perez said Staff could return with that information if directed to. Vice Mayor Yeh confirmed there was Measure N authorization for about $18 million more. Mr. Saccio said that was correct. Vice Mayor Yeh said that after all was said and done, he would like to tell the public they finished a higher number projects below what was approved by the public for Attachment B Measure N. Including the Staff costs at this point could counter that goal. If we absorb the Staff labor costs as originally intended it creates a clear message that we stuck to the original approved plan. Council Member Schmid said that if the original estimate was done without including Staff costs the obligation would be to complete the project in that way. The Council should discuss how to move forward. Chair Scharff shared concerns about spending bond money on anything that has less than a 30 year life. Adding to the costs of the projects was concerning. He said more information was needed regarding this issue, the current library issue, future bond issues, what the impact will be, Council comments at the time, and what the language of Measure N actually includes. He suggested Staff take a clear report to the Finance Committee to allow them to make a recommendation to Council. Council Member Shepherd said she considered this a bondable capital improvement and should be expensed over 30 years. She did agree that the dollars needed to be used efficiently. She suggested that Staff return with language for a policy to not include Staff costs. Mr. Perez suggested Staff return with this information at mid year, which would typically be in February, to give Staff the time to gather the information. Council Member Scharff agreed that mid year would be good timing as it would be after the IBRC report. Mr. Perez said Staff would start listing the pending items on the back of the agendas to help the Committee and Staff keep track of added items. Mr. Saccio asked if the Committee was requesting Staff document the background and make a policy recommendation. Council Member Scharff said that if Staff developed a policy while working on this that would be fine, but he didn’t need a recommendation as much as information and policy implications. Mr. Perez said they would probably just bring facts back, versus recommendations. They would work with the City Clerk’s office to find the appropriate minutes, and try to estimate the next issuance and perhaps a sense of the unfunded items. Mr. Hagerman said this was an ideal resolution to this issue and was an important conversation. Attachment B Vice Mayor Yeh said there was a policy preference from the Committee that Staff labor costs should not be included for the library projects. He said Staff should return with documentation to help the discussions for mid-year and the City Clerk’s records. Mr. Perez clarified they also wanted an on-going policy. Council Member Shepherd said on-going policy was a different discussion. Council Member Scharff said Staff would return to remind Council of the discussions regarding the library bond issue. A second conversation was how to address the issue going forward which should have a hard-core analysis. Council Member Shepherd said there was a portion of the CIP for supervising projects. This wasn’t tied to any CIP and thus seemed unaccounted for. A policy should be created for this process. Council Member Scharff asked if it should be a broader conversation than bonds. Council Member Shepherd said it could relate to a CIP budget process as it might affect other projects. MOTION: Vice Mayor Yeh moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to recommend the City Council affirm that no Measure N proceeds will be used to pay for bondable Staff costs. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 MOTION: Vice Mayor Yeh moved, seconded by Council Member Shepherd that staff return to the Finance Committee at mid-year with an analysis to enable policy discussion for the use of future bond funded projects and Staff labor costs. Council Member Shepherd asked if the CIP budget was going to be changed. Mr. Perez said the pending budget changes would focus on the Operating Budget. Council Member Shepherd said she hoped this would help springboard changes. Vice Mayor Yeh asked if the motion should include both bond and CIP. Attachment B Mr. Perez said Staff almost always included labor in CIP. They thought they were just dealing with bondable proceeds. He recommended they keep them separate. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 Mr. Hagerman stated that there was not a strong disagreement with the first recommendation and suggested they move to the second recommendation. Vice Mayor Yeh said this was a standard recommendation for controls. He understood the recommendations, but also wanted to have a better understanding of the impacts on Staff work-load. Mr. Saccio said they had capable Staff to make existing procedures tighter. They had to consider not only the time it would take, but how deep they wanted to look into it. He said they did not want to lose sight of their other projects or goals by spending too much time writing procedures. Mr. Perez agreed Staff could accommodate whatever Council directed them to do. He said this type of work did take away the creative work the department should be doing. He stated he was not objecting to the recommendation in principle, it was the practicality of it he was objecting to. Vice Mayor Yeh said the recommendation focused on the library bond funds. The IBRC report would include alternatives for financing structure. Policies could help focus the process. Mr. Hagerman stated the intent of the recommendation was not to develop a desk level procedure. Their intent was to, for example, some things bond monies could be used for and to handle certain circumstances such as drop-downs. Procedures should not live in Outlook. They should be more formal, even at a high level. Council Member Schmid asked what level of oversight was appropriate. They only found $400 in their random sample. Mr. Hagerman said there was $20 million in the sample; Staff looked at $3 million. They used a generalized sample not a random sample. Council Member Schmid asked for the level of confidence associated with the sample structure. Attachment B Mr. Hagerman said they cannot apply assurance that there was only $400 misapplied entirely, but only for their sample. They had assurance that the processes were working. Council Member Schmid asked about the library oversight. Mr. Hagerman said the project manager reviews each invoice and verifies the work has been completed. The project manager is relied on to do a detailed review of the invoices. Council Member Schmid said there were four oversights; 1) ASD completes an annual report on funds expended, 2) the Citizens Oversight Committee for the use of Library Bond Funds provides quarterly reports 3) the external auditor provides annual audits of the funds, and 4) the City auditor completes audits. They are all on expenditures, tracking what was already spent. He asked how oversight for items such as change orders that had not been expended yet. Mr. Hagerman said auditing provides value by reviewing the items after the fact. Council Member Schmid asked if the point then for creating policy was to allow for oversight prior to the project instead of only after the fact. He asked if, because these details were not expenditures there wouldn’t be anything to catch. Mr. Hagerman said it would not be limited to small items such as reviewing invoices. Council Member Schmid said the amount of money to spend on a project was the first step in the process. His concern with so much oversight and then additional procedures were added, was the City should be able to spend what the citizens approved. If oversight was only after the fact it would be difficult. Council Member Shepherd said much of the oversight though was not handled in house. Council Member Schmid said his concern was that it was all done after the fact. Council Member Shepherd said there were peaks throughout the process, but they needed people to see them. She said this was being reviewed now at an appropriate level. She said there was one other oversight too when ASD provides a checklist of debt requirements. Council Member Schmid said Council oversight seemed very far removed. Attachment B Mr. Perez said there were different levels of responsibility. But high level management does review the process. Council Member Schmid said the Council didn’t receive feedback on the executive group oversight. Mr. Perez said Mike Sartor, the Director of Public Works, would be the one to provide that oversight. Council Member Shepherd said a procedure needed to be put in place. It did not need to be elaborate. She discussed the importance of internal controls to keep fraud out of the process. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Yeh, that the Administrative Services Division formalizes policies and procedures regarding the oversight and expenditure of Library Bond funds. Mr. Hagerman said the library projects were unique, but this could help going forward as well. Council Member Scharff said he was not going to support the budget. Spending money on this type of project could create cuts in services that have a higher priority to the community. Council should support Staff in this case. He asked what formalized procedures meant. Mr. Hagerman said one aspect would be policies and procedures for funds that have to do with bond dollars. He said a level of formalization means a high level manager has seen and approved the procedures. Specific attention to this issue would be a component. He said this would not require a significant amount of Staff resources. The City Auditor’s Office had already completed some of the pre-work involved by evaluating other programs such as the one in the City of San Jose. Council Member Scharff asked how many Staff hours this should take. Mr. Hagerman said, as a guess, less than 20 hours. Council Member Scharff asked if he meant 20 hours for ASD and then 20 hours for PWD. Mr. Hagerman said he didn’t feel there needed to be separate procedures for the two departments. Attachment B Mr. Saccio said 20 hours was a lot of Staff time to embellish what was already in place. Mr. Perez said he should show Council how many policies they had and how much time Staff spent updating them. At some point it is the cumulative effect they need to understand. Council Member Scharff referring to Staff’s regular references to the City of San Jose statedthey were almost bankrupt. They were unable to move nimbly because they had so many procedures. If assembling these procedures detracts from the mission, it should not be done. Mr. Hagerman said an organization with immature policies can waste a lot of time training and figuring out how things go wrong. With mature processes they can move more easily. The intent was not to hinder operations. Vice Mayor Yeh said if creativity and innovation were a goal and policies and procedures were a hindrance, perhaps there were other ways to develop the procedures. Policy discussions should be captured to be able to make decisions that are appropriate. Mr. Perez said he recognized a need for policies and procedures. He said that the City had a AAA rating. His department received good audits and financial awards. They are generally capable as a group. Every piece did not need to be formalized. He reiterated that he is not resisting following Council direction. Vice Mayor Yeh said that open analysis of procedures seemed to be something that could provide time to be more strategic. Mr. Perez with too many other tasks there is no time left to be strategic. Vice Mayor Yeh agreed. He said if policies could be tied to that innovative model a lot of Staff time would be freed up. Council Member Schmid said he would support the Motion. He said it would be helpful to have milestones that someone saw the completion of the steps. He said the recommendation was not to create more work. Mr. Saccio said the bond oversight committee reviewed the work being done and made sure it was appropriate to the bonds. PWD would have to be involved in any process changes. Attachment B Council Member Schmid said it wasn’t written anywhere that Turner Construction oversees the invoices. Council Member Shepherd said Council did received detailed change order information. Mr. Saccio said that could be incorporated in the future. Council Member Shepherd said with approved procedures Staff has a burden of responsibility lifted from them. Yet they can be held accountable if a step is skipped. Mr. Perez said he couldn’t think of something in his department that didn’t have an elaborate procedure already. Having these procedures does mean that disciplinary action can be taken if they are not followed. MOTION PASSED: 3-1, Scharff no MOTION: Council Member Schmid moved seconded by Vice Mayor Yeh to recommend acceptance of Audit of the Use of Library Bond Proceeds with minutes to accompany the audit report when it goes to the full Council. MOTION PASSED: 3-1, Scharff no Attachment B CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011 The City Auditor’s Office recommends acceptance of the City Auditor’s Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011. At its meeting on December 6, 2011, the Finance Committee approved and unanimously recommended the City Council accept the report. The Finance Committee action minutes are included in this packet. Respectfully submitted, Jim Pelletier City Auditor ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011 (PDF) Attachment B: Finance Committee Meeting Action Minutes Excerpt (December 6, 2011)(PDF) Department Head:Jim Pelletier, City Auditor Updated: 2/15/2012 12:39 PM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR December 6, 2011 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011 RECOMMENDATION The City Auditor’s Office recommends the Finance Committee review and recommend to the City Council acceptance of the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011. SUMMARY OF RESULTS In accordance with the Municipal Code, the City Auditor prepares an annual work plan and issues quarterly reports to the City Council describing the status and progress towards completion of the work plan. This report provides the City Council with an update on the first quarter activities and summarizes our Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Work Plan activities. Information on the status of each assigned project is attached (pages A-1 through A-4). Completed Projects During the first quarter of FY 2012, the City Auditor’s Office completed the following reports: · SAP Security Audit (Issued October -2011) · Proposed FY 2012 Workplan (Issued October -2011) · Utilities Department Risk Assessment (Issued October -2011) · Audit of Purchasing Card Transactions (Issued September -2011) · City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary First Quarter Sales for January -March 2011 (Issued September -2011) · Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of June 30, 2011 (Issued September -2011) · Discussion and Recommendation on the Proposed Implementation Plan for the Employee Hotline (Issued July -2011) Attachment A Updated: 11/29/2011 2:25 PM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 In-process Projects The following projects were in-process as of September 30, 2011: · Audit of Library Bond Proceeds · Implementation of Employee-only Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline · Annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments Report · Human Resources Employee Benefits Audit Other Information · Over the past year, Michael Edmonds served as Acting and then Interim City Auditor and left City employment on October 25, 2011. · In July 2011, Ian Hagerman, Senior Performance Auditor, served as a team member in conducting the Association of Local Government Auditors’ Peer Review of the Audit Services Division of the City of Portland City Auditor. On behalf of the City Auditor’s Office, I would like to express my appreciation to City staff for their cooperation and assistance during our reviews throughout this past year. Respectfully submitted, Ian Hagerman Senior Performance Auditor ATTACHMENTS: ·Attachment A: Status of Audit Projects as of September 30, 2011 (PDF) Department Head:Ian Hagerman, Sr. Performance Auditor Attachment A Updated: 11/29/2011 2:25 PM by Deniz Tunc Page 3 Attachment A City Auditor’s Quarterly Report A – 1 As of September 30, 2011 Status of Audit Projects as of September 30, 2011 Audit Project Description and Preliminary Objectives Status Accomplishments Year-To-Date Target date for Items to be Completed AUDIT ADMINISTRATION, FOLLOW-UP AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES 1) Annual Audit Work Plan and Quarterly Status Reports – The Auditor’s Office submits quarterly reports to the City Council outlining project status and progress towards completing the assignments on this annual work plan. In process Annual work plan issued in October 2011 2) Annual Audit Recommendation Status Report – The Municipal Code requires the City Auditor to issue an annual report on the implementation status of recommendations from recently completed audits. We also meet with the departments involved during the year to discuss progress towards implementing open audit recommendations. In process The last report was issued in April 2011, and the Finance Committee provided direction that the next report should be for the period ending June 30, 2012. The Auditor’s Office will continue to meet with departments during the year to discuss progress towards implementing open audit recommendations. Target completion date: Fall 2012 3) Meeting Attendance – To facilitate internal communication and coordination of efforts, the City Auditor attends: a. City Manager’s weekly Executive Leadership Team, Agenda Planning meetings. b. Utility Risk Oversight and Coordinating Committee (UROCC) – Since issuance of our Assessment of Utility Risk Management Procedures in July 2002, the City Auditor has acted as an advisor to the UROCC. c. Design Team Steering Committee meetings. On-going On-going On-going The Interim City Auditor regularly attended weekly Executive Leadership Team meetings, Agenda Planning meetings, and UROCC meetings, and the new City Auditor will also regularly attend these meetings. One of the audit staff is a member of the Design Team Steering Committee which promotes creative problem solving through design thinking and collaboration. Attachment AAttachment A City Auditor’s Quarterly Report A – 2 As of September 30, 2011 Audit Project Description and Preliminary Objectives Status Accomplishments Year-To-Date Target date for Items to be Completed REVENUE AUDITS AND MONITORING 4) Sales and Use Tax Allocation Reviews – Sales and use tax represents about 14%, or $20.2 million, of the City’s projected General Fund revenue for fiscal year 2012. The Auditor’s Office contracts with MuniServices for quarterly sales and use tax recovery and information services, and we also conduct sales and use tax monitoring in-house. The purpose of this monitoring is to identify misallocations of local sales and use tax of companies doing business in Palo Alto. In addition, MuniServices prepares the quarterly sales and use tax information reports that are provided to the City Council as informational items. The contract with MuniServices continues through April 30, 2014. On-going In the first quarter of FY 2012, the City did not receive sales and use tax recoveries although there were potential misallocations from 46 companies (20 MuniServices and 26 City of Palo Alto) pending resolution by the State Board of Equalization. 5) Alternative Fuel Tax Credit Recoveries – As part of the Auditor’s Office continuous revenue monitoring efforts and findings from the Audit of Fleet Utilization and Replacement (April 2010), the Auditor’s Office initiated revenue recoveries from the Federal government’s alternative fuel tax program, which was originally in effect through December 31, 2009, and subsequently extended through December 31, 2011. On-going The Auditor’s Office worked with ASD, Utilities, and our revenue consultant to prepare and file claims for the alternative fuel tax credit. The Auditor’s Office will work with ASD and Utilities to prepare and file claims for calendar year 2011 in January 2012. Target completion date: January 2012 FINANCIAL AUDITS AND PROCEDURAL REVIEWS 6) Annual External Financial Audit (contracted audit service) – The City Charter requires that the City Council engage an independent certified public accounting firm to conduct the annual external audit. In process Results of the FY 2011 audit are expected to be presented to the Finance Committee in December 2011. Target completion date: December 2011 Attachment AAttachment A City Auditor’s Quarterly Report A – 3 As of September 30, 2011 Audit Project Description and Preliminary Objectives Status Accomplishments Year-To-Date Target date for Items to be Completed PERFORMANCE AUDITS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 7) Annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) Report In process The 10th annual SEA Report is in process. Target completion date: January 2012 8) Audit of Library Bond Proceeds – Through the 2008 voter-approved Measure N, the City issued general obligation bonds to rebuild the Mitchell Park Library and adjacent community center, and renovate the Main and Downtown libraries. This audit will evaluate controls for the use of the general obligation bond funds to ensure the funds are used efficiently and in compliance with federal regulations for the use of tax- exempt bond funds. In process Report writing in process. Draft report sent to management for response in October 2011. Target completion date: December 2011 9) Audit of Purchasing Card Transactions – The purpose of this audit is to determine the adequacy of controls over purchasing card transactions, and to assess compliance with existing guidelines and procedures. Completed Audit of Purchasing Card Transactions issued in September 2011. 10) Utilities Department Risk Assessment Completed In FY 2011, a Senior Performance Auditor position was added to the Auditor’s Office budget to provide on-going and continuous audits of Enterprise Fund activities. The Senior Performance Auditor worked with a utilities consultant to perform a risk assessment to identify areas of strength, as well as opportunities for improvement within each division of the Utilities Department. The risk assessment was completed in August 2011 and the results are incorporated into the FY 2012 work plan and will be used to identify audits to be included in future work plans. 11) SAP Security Audit – In planning the SAP audit, which was included in the City Auditor’s Fiscal Year 2011 Annual Audit work plan, the Auditor’s Office detected a significant SAP security vulnerability resulting from an unsecured system-provided SAP user account. The unsecured user account allowed the Auditor’s Office unrestricted access to sensitive and confidential information. This initial finding prompted an audit to assess controls required to secure SAP access. Completed The Auditor’s Office issued the SAP Security Audit in October 2011. Attachment AAttachment A City Auditor’s Quarterly Report A – 4 As of September 30, 2011 Audit Project Description and Preliminary Objectives Status Accomplishments Year-To-Date Target date for Items to be Completed 12) Human Resources Employee Benefits –This audit will review benefit oversight, costs and administration through the Human Resources Department. In process Preliminary survey phase in process Target completion date: TBD 13) Contract Oversight (NEW) – This audit will assess key oversight controls pertaining to City contracts, with a focus on pricing accuracy. Not started 14) Alarm Permitting Program (NEW) - The audit will assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the City’s alarm permitting ordinance. Not started 15) Grants Management (NEW) - The audit will assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the City’s grant management practices. Not started 16) Utilities Reserves (NEW) –This audit will assess compliance with existing reserve guidelines and compare the City’s reserve guidelines with other government-owned utilities. Not started 17) Utility Users Tax Revenues (NEW) - Utility Users Tax Revenues related to cell phone usage have dropped significantly in the past few years. For instance, Utility Users Tax Revenues from telephones dropped by $530,000 from FY 2010 to FY 2011. Accordingly, the Administrative Services Director has requested the Auditor’s Office to contract with a utility tax auditor to determine if the City is receiving all of the Utility Users Tax Revenues from cell phones that it is entitled. This item also ranked high on the Citywide Risk Assessment. Not started 18) Construction Process (NEW) – This audit was recommended by the Finance Committee and will review various construction projects as it relates to the bidding and change order process. The audit would assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the City’s construction management practices. Not started Attachment AAttachment A FINANCE COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES EXCERPT Special Meeting December 6, 2011 Roll Call Chairperson Scharff called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Scharff (Chair), Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Absent: Oral Communications None Agenda Items 3. Auditor’s Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011 MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Yeh, that the Finance Committee review and recommend to the City Council acceptance of the Auditors Office Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2011. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 9:36 pm. Attachment B CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR February 21, 2012 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept MGO’s Financial Statements and Letter The City Auditor’s Office recommends acceptance of Macias Gini & OConnell’s (MGO) Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2011 and Management Letter. At its meeting on December 14, 2011, the Finance Committee approved and unanimously recommended the City Council accept this report. The Finance Committee action minutes are included in this packet. Respectfully submitted, Jim Pelletier City Auditor ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: MGO's Financial Statements and Letter (PDF) Attachment B: Finance Committee Meeting Action Minutes Excerpt (December 14, 2011)(PDF) Department Head:Jim Pelletier, City Auditor Updated: 2/15/2012 12:37 PM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR December 14, 2011 The Honorable City Council Attention: Finance Committee Palo Alto, California Macias Gini & O’Connell’s Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2011 and Management Letter RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Finance Committee review and recommend to the City Council acceptance of the external audited financial statements and management letter. DISCUSSION The City Charter requires the City Council (through the City Auditor) to engage an independent certified public accounting firm to conduct the annual external audit and report the results of that audit in writing to the City Council. Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP (MGO), an accountancy corporation based in Sacramento, California, conducted the audit of the City’s financial statements as of June 30, 2011. The Independent Auditor’s Report (the “opinion letter”) and Single Audit Report (the audit of federal funds received by the City which includes the report on internal control over financial reporting and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 compliance requirements supplement) are included in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011. Macias Gini & O’Connell also completed the following reports for the City of Palo Alto, as attached: · Memorandum on Internal Control and Required Communications for the year ended June 30, 2011 (the “management letter”) -Attachment A · Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance with the Proposition 111 2010-2011 Appropriation Limit Increment (the “Gann limit letter”) -Attachment B · Public Improvement Corporation Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the year ended June 30, 2011 -Attachment C · Regional Water Quality Control Plant Financial Statements for the year ended June 30, 2011 -Attachment D · Cable TV Franchise Statements of Revenues and Expenditures for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 -Attachment E · Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto Basic Component Unit Financial Attachment A Updated: 12/8/2011 11:03 AM by Deniz Tunc Page 2 Statements for the year ended June 30, 2011 -Attachment F · General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund for year ended June 30, 2011 - Attachment G David Bullock from Macias Gini & O’Connell will be available at the December 14th Finance Committee meeting to answer questions. I would like to express appreciation to Macias Gini & O’Connell, and Laura Kuryk and her staff in the Administrative Services Department for their hard work and cooperation during the audit. Respectfully submitted, Ian Hagerman Senior Performance Auditor ATTACHMENTS: ·Attachment A: Memorandum on Internal Control and Required Communications (PDF) ·Attachment B: Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance with the Proposition 111 2010-2011 Appropriation Limit Increment (PDF) ·Attachment C: Public Improvement Corporation Basic Component Unit Financial Statements (PDF) ·Attachment D: Regional Water Quality Control Plant Financial Statements (PDF) ·Attachment E: Cable TV Franchise Statements of Revenues and Expenditures (PDF) ·Attachment F: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto Basic Component Unit Financial Statements (PDF) ·Attachmen G: General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund (PDF) Department Head:Ian Hagerman, Sr. Performance Auditor Attachment A Updated: 12/8/2011 11:03 AM by Deniz Tunc Page 3 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Table of Contents Page(s) Transmittal Letter ........................................................................................................................................... i Required Communications ............................................................................................................................ 1 Current Year Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 5 Status of Prior Year Comments .................................................................................................................... 9 Listing of Uncorrected Adjustments ........................................................................................................... 10 Attachment A i Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Palo Alto, California In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the City of Palo Alto, California (City) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, we considered the City’s internal controls over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the basic financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the City’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. We consider the deficiencies in City’s internal control identified in the accompanying summary of current year recommendations under items 2011-01 through 2011-08 to be significant deficiencies. Following this letter, we have included a report on communications with the Finance Committee (Committee) as required by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. This communication is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor and City Council, the Committee, management and others within the organization, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 1 REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS We have audited the financial statements of the City of Palo Alto as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011 and have issued our report thereon dated December 1, 2011. Professional auditing standards require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit. I. The Auditor’s Responsibility Under U.S. Generally Accepted Auditing Standards and OMB Circular A-133 As stated in our engagement letter dated May 10, 2011, our responsibility, as described by professional standards, is to express opinions about whether the financial statements prepared by management with your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or management of your responsibilities. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal controls over financial reporting. We also considered internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions is not an objective of our audit. Also in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, we examined, on a test basis, evidence about the City’s compliance with the types of compliance requirements described in the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement applicable to each of its major programs for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the City’s compliance with those requirements. While our audit will provide a reasonable basis for our opinion, it will not provide a legal determination on the City’s compliance with those requirements. As part of our audit, we considered the City’s internal control. Such considerations were solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such internal control. We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are, in our professional judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 2 REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS (Continued) II. Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements Our responsibility for other information in documents containing the City’s financial statements and our report thereon does not extend beyond financial information identified in our report, and we have no obligation to perform any procedures to corroborate other information contained in these documents. We, however, read the other information included in the City’s comprehensive annual financial report to determine whether any matters came to our attention that caused us to believe that such information, or its manner of presentation, is materially inconsistent with the information, or its manner of presentation, appearing in the basic financial statements. Nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that such information, or its manner of presentation, is materially inconsistent with the information, or its manner of presentation, appearing in the basic financial statements. With respect to the supplementary information accompanying the financial statements, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. III. Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated to you in our engagement letter dated May 10, 2011. IV. Significant Audit Findings Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the City’s basic financial statements. With the exception of the item described below, no significant changes were made to the basic financial statements during the year as a result of new accounting pronouncements. As described in Note 1(k) to the City’s basic financial statements, the City adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 3 REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS (Continued) The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:  Fair value of investments. The City’s investments are generally carried at fair value, which is defined as the amount that the City could reasonably expect to receive for an investment in a current sale between a willing buyer and a willing seller and is generally measured by quoted market prices.  Estimated allowance for losses on notes and loans receivable. The allowance for losses on notes and loans receivable was based on management’s estimate regarding the likelihood of collectability.  Useful life estimates for capital assets. The estimated useful lives of capital assets were based on management’s estimate of the economic life of its capital assets.  Accrued landfill closure/post-closure costs. The City has estimated, based on a study conducted by consultants, the closure/post-closure costs of the Palo Alto Landfill based on what it would cost to perform all currently mandated closure and post-closure care. Actual closure and post-closure care costs may be higher due to inflation variances, changes in technology, or changes in State or federal regulations.  Valuation of the net other postemployment benefits (OPEB) asset. The net OPEB asset is the amount of cumulative City contributions that exceeded the actuarially determined annual required contributions, which is based upon certain approved actuarial assumptions.  Annual required contributions to pension and other postemployment benefit plans. The City is required to contribute to its pension and OPEB plans at an actuarially determined rate and to measure these benefit costs based upon certain approved actuarial assumptions.  Claims loss reserve. The City is exposed to a variety of risks of loss due to general liability, workers’ compensation and other claims and records an estimate of these losses based on actuarial studies performed by third party actuaries. These studies are prepared based on the City’s prior claims history, which is used as a basis for extrapolating losses for known and incurred but not report claims. Actual loss experience may vary from these estimates. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the accounting estimates described above in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the City’s basic financial statements taken as a whole. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. The attached schedule summarizes uncorrected misstatements of the financial statements. Management has determined that their effects are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Required Communications For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 4 REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS (Continued) Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated December 1, 2011. Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Current Year Recommendations For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 5 2011-01 A Comprehensive Disaster Recovery Plan Has Not Been Fully Developed and Tested (Significant Deficiency) General computer controls should ensure that plans have been developed and documented to provide contingency for unforeseeable events, including the recovery of operational and financial data in the event of a disaster. The City, however, has not completed the development of a comprehensive disaster recovery plan. The current draft plan started development in 2008 and has yet to be completed. City’s IT management stated the prolonged plan development process was due to a lack of sufficient resources. The lack of a comprehensive plan that has been fully tested places the City at an increased risk of loss of financial data in the event of a disaster that affects the City’s server room. We recommend the City’s CIO (acting), working with the City Manager, should plan to budget for the resources necessary to complete the development of a comprehensive disaster recovery plan. Once the plan is completed, it should be fully tested to ensure the City’s financial data can be restored in a reasonable amount of time. Management’s Response: The City’s management agrees with this finding, which is consistent with other reports on the SAP/IT system. The IT Department was created by the City Manager as a stand alone department in the FY2012 budget. The Department was created, in part, to provide greater focus on IT priorities, such as security, among others. The IT Department will be lead by a new Chief Information Officer. The finding will be evaluated by the new IT Department as part of building a work plan for the future. 2011-02 The City’s IT Assets Are Exposed to an Active Water-Based Fire Suppression System (Significant Deficiency) General computer controls should ensure that IT assets are adequately protected from physical and environmental hazards. The City’s server room, however, still has an active water-based fire suppression system. This places the City’s IT assets at increased risk of damage should the system be activated or should a pipe rupture. We recommend the City CIO (acting), working with the City Manager, should research the feasibility of implementing a dry fire suppression system in the City’s server room. Alternately, the active water-based system could be replaced by a dry-pipe system. If it is determined that the systems could be implemented, the City should budget for the replacement of the water-based system. Should the system replacement be deemed infeasible, alternative mitigating controls should be implemented, such as the installation of high temperature sprinkler heads and the development of a comprehensive disaster recovery plan. Management’s Response: Same response as provided under finding no. 2011-01. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Current Year Recommendations For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 6 2011-03 A Comprehensive IT Risk Assessment Has Not Been Performed (Significant Deficiency) General computer controls over the access to programs and data should require that a mechanism or procedures be in place to identify and react to risks arising from internal and external sources. A comprehensive means to identify IT risks is through the periodic performance of IT risk assessments. The City, however, has not performed a formal comprehensive and independent IT risk assessment to help identify the risks to the delivery of IT services and the accuracy and integrity of the City’s financial and personnel data. We recommend the City’s CIO (acting) should plan and budget for an independent IT risk assessment to be performed on the department’s functions. The risk assessment should focus on identifying all of the possible risks to the City’s IT department, the delivery of IT services and the accuracy and integrity of the City’s financial and personnel data. The risk assessment should quantify the likelihood of an event, the impact of the event and the mitigating controls that would address the possible risk. The risk assessment should also include network penetration testing to ascertain the vulnerabilities of the City’s computer network from hacking attempts. Management’s Response: Same response as provided under finding no. 2011-01. 2011-04 City IT Department Does Not Have Oversight Over Non-Core Financial Applications (Significant Deficiency) The City has several applications that are used by the various departments. These include; Class, used by Parks and Recreation; Chameleon, used by Animal Services; Horizon, used by the Libraries; and Acella, used for Permitting. These applications are owned by the individual departments and not controlled nor managed by the City’s IT Department. Since management of the applications is decentralized, the individual applications may not adhere to best practices for application access (password configuration) or management of authorization profiles. This places the City’s network and financial data at increased risk of unauthorized access. We recommend the City’s Internal Auditor, working with the CIO (acting), should review the password configuration requirements being used in the City’s non-core financial applications. If it is found that the password requirements do not meet industry best practices shown in the table below, the password configuration settings within the applications should be updated, if possible. Account Setting Best Practices Password Length (Min.) 7-9 characters Expiration Period 30-60 days Account Lockout Threshold 3-5 invalid logon attempts will lock the account. Strong Passwords Required Yes Management’s Response: Same response as provided under finding no. 2011-01. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Current Year Recommendations For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 7 2011-05 City Firewalls Are Managed by a Single Person (Significant Deficiency) General computer controls require that logical security management be properly administered. The City’s firewalls, however, are accessible and configurable by mainly only one person within the IT Department. Although the City has additional staff that can assist with firewall activities, it does not have a single staff person that is a dedicated back up. This places the City’s network, application and data at increased risk should this person be unavailable for an extended period, or if the one person decided to lock all others out of the network. We recommend the CIO (acting) should either have at least one other IT staff or manager trained in the management of firewalls or have an outside consultant retained for these services. An additional secured account should also be created for firewall administration that could be used in the event the primary firewall administrator is unavailable for an extended period of time. Management’s Response: Same response as provided under finding no. 2011-01. 2011-06 City Has Not Performed PCI Data Security Standards Compliance Assessment (Significant Deficiency) The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) is a set of requirements designed to ensure that all entities that process, store or transmit credit card information maintain a secure environment. Entities that do not comply with PCI DSS may be subject to fines, card replacement costs, forensic audits, brand damage, etc., by the major credit card brands should a breach event occur. The City, however, has not performed a compliance assessment for PCI DSS. We recommend the City Manager, working with the CIO (acting) should have a PCI compliance audit conducted over the City’s payment card practices and security measures. Management’s Response: Same response as provided under finding no. 2011-01. 2011-07 City-wide Capital Asset Policies Are Outdated (Significant Deficiency) During the current year, the City purchased software in the amount of $232,696 and capitalized it as a nondepreciable asset under governmental-type activities. Given the constant evolution of technology, software typically has a useful life ranging from 5 to 20 years based on the expected duration and complexities of the system, rather than treating it as indefinite. Capitalizing software as nondepreciable seems to overstate the value of these intangible assets over time and would necessitate a large write-off when service utility is diminished or when it becomes obsolete. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Current Year Recommendations For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 8 2011-07 City-wide Capital Asset Policies Are Outdated (Continued) (Significant Deficiency) Furthermore, upon our review of capital assets, we observed that the City-wide capital asset policies currently in place have not been updated since 1996 for governmental funds and 2005 for enterprise funds. These policies should be updated to address current practices and the provisions of subsequently issued Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) guidance that may not be properly reflected in these dated policies. For instance, GASB issued Statement No. 34 in December 1999 that made revolutionary changes over the accounting and reporting of capital assets, including new provisions for infrastructure, and issued Statement No. 51 in June 2007 that provided accounting and financial reporting guidance for intangible assets, including internally generated computer software. We recommend that the City review and update the current capital asset policies for both governmental and enterprise funds to ensure the City is properly accounting and reporting for its capital assets under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Once the updated policies are in place, we also recommend the City conduct a review of its existing capital assets to ensure compliance with these policies. Management’s Response: The City’s management agrees with this finding and will be undertaking a comprehensive review of their existing capital asset policy. Once any necessary revisions are updated and approved, we will evaluate any impact on the capital asset balances. 2011-08 Accounting for Retention Payable (Significant Deficiency) During our search for unrecorded liabilities, which included an examination of disbursements issued subsequent to year-end, we observed that the City does not accrue a liability for retention amounts withheld from its payments to vendors. In total, we identified 7 payments within our sample of disbursements that contained retention amounts withheld totaling $322,871, which were not accrued as fund liabilities. While retention amounts may not be due and payable until some future date when project milestones are met to the City’s satisfaction, they are customarily recognized as a liability since the goods and/or services have been received. We recommend that the City review its current practices over accounting for retention payable to determine whether or not its liabilities are understated for amounts owed to vendors. At a minimum, the City should accumulate a total of retention amounts withheld to determine the significance of these amounts by opinion unit and, for governmental funds, whether or not the timing of payments would necessitate the recording of a fund liability in the current period. Management’s Response: The City’s management agrees with this finding and will be evaluating the options available in our existing system to record these liabilities. The results of the evaluation will determine how we can best implement this change from a practical perspective. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Status of Prior Year Comment For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 9 2010-01 Gas Services Charges to Electric Fund (Significant Deficiency) During the course of the audit, it was noted that the utility billing for the Gas Fund was not setup in the accounting software (BANNER) to record expenditures to the Electric Fund and revenues to the Gas Fund. COBUG, a 5-Megawatt backup generator powered by natural gas for power outage emergencies was purchased by the City a few years ago. The generator was owned by the Electric Fund but fueled by the Gas Fund. In November 2007, City intended to add the COBUG meter to a reading route of the Gas Fund and bill the Electric Fund using BANNER. However the set up process was not completed and the Electric Fund was not being billed by the Gas Fund for utility service for the last three fiscal years. The total unbilled amounts approximated $500,000. The City responded that the COBUG gas meter has been added to the meter reading route. The Gas Fund billed and received $453,266 from the Electric Fund for three prior years of service. All financial transactions are recorded and are current as of FY 2010 financial statements. Current Year Status: Corrected. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO List of Uncorrected Adjustments For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 10 #Fund Financial Statements Line item/Description Debit Credit 1 Capital Projects Fund Gain/Loss on Sale 183,343$ Capital Projects Fund Construction in Progress 183,343$ (To record the loss on capital asset due to termination of construction project for Public Safety Building) 2 Capital Projects Fund Capital Outlay 306,519 Capital Projects Fund Accounts Payable 306,519 (To record the retainage payable for capital outlay incurred in FY2011) 3 Various Funds Expenditures 692,774 Various Funds Accounts Payable 692,774 (To accrue expenses, that are individually below City's established threshold for accrual, incurred in FY2011 but paid after year-end through CalCard.) RevisedAttachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO Agreed-Upon Procedures Report for Appropriations Limit Calculation For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A 1 Honorable Mayor and the Members of the City Council, of City of Palo Alto, California Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet of the City of Palo Alto, California (City), for the year ended June 30, 2011. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Article XIIIB California Constitution Appropriations Limit Procedures Guidelines for California Counties), were performed solely to assist the City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City’s management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Worksheet. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: 1. We obtained the completed worksheets setting forth the calculations necessary to establish the City’s appropriations limit and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned worksheets to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet, we added last year’s limit to total adjustments, and compared the resulting amount to this year’s limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 3. We compared the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet to the worksheets described in No. 1 above. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 4. We compared the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. Attachment A 2 We were not engaged to, and did not conduct an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the Appropriations Limit Worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council and City management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 3 CITY OF PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA Appropriations Limit Worksheet For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Appropriations limit, fiscal year 2009-2010 116,380,638$ Adjustment factors: Population growth 1.44+100 100 1.0144 Inflation -2.54+100 100 0.9746 Appropriations limit, fiscal year 2010-2011 115,057,884$ Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor’s Report ................................................................................................................... 1 Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) .............................................................................. 3 Basic Financial Statements Government-wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets ...................................................................................................................... 5 Statement of Activities ....................................................................................................................... 6 Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance ............................................... 8 Notes to Basic Financial Statements ........................................................................................................ 9 Attachment A Attachment A 1 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report We have audited the accompanying basic financial statements of the governmental activities and the major fund of the Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation (Corporation), a component unit of the City of Palo Alto, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the governmental activities and the major fund of the Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation as of June 30, 2011, and the results of its operations for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. As discussed in Note 2(e) to the basic financial statements, effective July 1, 2010, the Corporation adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis as listed in the table of contents be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 2 This page left intentionally blank. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Management’s Discussion & Analysis (Unaudited) 3 The Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation (Corporation), a component unit of the City of Palo Alto (City), follows the provisions of Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 (GASB 34), Basic Financial Statements - and Management’s Discussion and Analysis - for State and Local Governments. The Corporation is controlled by the City of Palo Alto and was organized to assist the City in financing public improvements. The Corporation issues debt and turns the proceeds of the debt over to the City under lease agreements that provide a revenue source for the repayment of this debt. The Corporation has three debt issues and has turned the proceeds of these issues over to the City, which pledged certain lease payments as collateral for this debt as discussed in Note 4 to the financial statements. FISCAL 2011 FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS GASB 34 requires the issuance of government-wide financial statements as well as fund financial statements. The government-wide financial statements report the balance of the Corporation’s long-term debt issues while the individual fund statements do not. In fiscal year 2002, the Corporation issued its 2002A Civic Center Refinancing Certificates of Participation (COPs) in the amount of $3.5 million to refund its 1992 Civic Center Project COPs, reducing debt service requirements by $372 thousand and producing an accounting gain of $137 thousand. The Corporation also issued its 2002B Downtown Parking Improvements COPs in the amount of $3.6 million. In fiscal year 2005, a partial redemption was completed by placing excess construction and debt service reserve funds into an escrow account to defease $900 thousand of the 2002B Downtown Parking Improvements COPs. These issues, including the 1998 Golf Course Capital Improvements COPs, comprise the Corporation’s outstanding debt. Interest expense and other fiscal agent charges on these COP issues was $332 thousand for fiscal year 2011, a decrease of $37 thousand over the prior year. The interest for leases on the assets securing these COP issues was $297 thousand, a decrease of $78 thousand from the prior year. Program expenses exceeded lease revenues by $36 thousand, thereby resulting in a decrease in net assets of $19 thousand over the prior year. The Corporation ended fiscal year 2011 with total assets of $6.1 million, a decrease of $0.9 million from the prior year. Total assets consist of $1.2 million in cash and $4.9 million of leases receivable (recorded at net present value) from the City of Palo Alto. Total liabilities were $6.0 million, a decrease of $0.9 million from the prior year, and included $1.0 million of current liabilities as well as $5.0 million of long- term debt. At the fund level, the Corporation’s expenditures exceed its revenues by $18 thousand. As of June 30, 2011, the Corporation had one fund, the Debt Service Fund, which reported a $1.3 million fund balance, reflecting an $18 thousand decrease over the prior year. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Management’s Discussion & Analysis (Unaudited) 4 OVERVIEW OF THE CORPORATION’S BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Basic Financial Statements are in two parts: 1) Management’s discussion and analysis (this part), 2) The basic financial statements, which include the government-wide and the fund financial statements, along with the notes to these financial statements. The basic financial statements comprise the government-wide financial statements and the fund financial statements. These two sets of financial statements provide two different views of the Corporation’s financial activities and financial positions, both short-term and long-term. The government-wide financial statements provide a long-term view of the Corporation’s activities as a whole, and comprise the statement of net assets and the statement of activities. The statement of net assets provides information about the financial position of the Corporation as a whole, including all its long-term liabilities on the full accrual basis, similar to that used by corporations. The statement of activities provides information about all the Corporation’s revenues and expenses on the full-accrual basis, with the emphasis on measuring net revenues or expenses of the Corporation’s program. The statement of activities explains in detail the change in net assets for the year. The fund financial statements report the Corporation’s operations in more detail than the corporate-wide statements and focus primarily on the short-term activities of the debt service fund. Fund financial statements measure only current revenues and expenditures; current assets, liabilities and fund balances; and they exclude capital assets and long-term debt. Together, these statements are called the basic financial statements. DEBT ADMINISTRATION The Corporation issues debt in the form of Certificates of Participation (COPs) for future lease receipts from the City of Palo Alto. Legally, these COPs issues are the Corporation’s debt only; the City is liable only for the payment of the amounts set forth in the lease securing each COPs issue. The Corporation issued two COPs for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002, one of which was refunded by an earlier issue. ECONOMIC OUTLOOK AND MAJOR INITIATIVES The economy of the City of Palo Alto and its major initiatives for the coming year are discussed in detail in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. CONTACTING THE AGENCY’S FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT These Basic Financial Statements are intended to provide citizens, taxpayers, investors, and creditors with a general overview of the Agency’s finances. Questions about these Statements should be directed to the Finance Department of the City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, CA 94301. Attachment A Assets: Cash and investments held by trustee 1,267,828$ Investment in leases to City of Palo Alto 4,866,132 Total assets 6,133,960 Liabilities: Interest payable 104,805 Long-term debt: Due in one year 905,000 Due in more than one year 4,990,000 Total liabilities 5,999,805 Net Assets: Restricted for debt service 134,155$ PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to financial statements. 5 Attachment A Expenses: Interest and fiscal agent charges 332,375$ Program revenues: Interest on leases from City of Palo Alto 296,670 Net program expenses (35,705) General Revenues: Investment income 3,062 Miscellaneous revenue 14,086 Change in net assets (18,557) Net assets, beginning of the year 152,712 Net assets, end of the year 134,155$ PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Statement of Activities For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to financial statements. 6 Attachment A Assets: Cash and investments held by trustee 1,267,828$ Investment in leases to City of Palo Alto 4,866,132 Total assets 6,133,960$ Liabilities and Fund Balance: Liabilities: Deferred revenue 4,866,132 Total liabilities 4,866,132 Fund balance restricted for debt service 1,267,828 Total liabilities and fund balance 6,133,960$ Reconciliation of fund balance to net assets: Fund balance restricted for debt service 1,267,828$ Accrual adjustment to remove deferred revenue from the balance sheet 4,866,132 Some liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the the current period and therefore are not reported in the funds: Interest payable (104,805) Long-term debt due within one year (905,000) Long-term debt in more than one year (4,990,000) Net assets of governmental activities 134,155$ PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Balance Sheet June 30, 2011 Debt Service Fund See accompanying notes to financial statements. 7 Attachment A Revenues: Lease receipts from City of Palo Alto: Principal 882,426$ Interest 296,670 Investment income from cash and investments 3,062 Miscellaneous revenue 14,086 Total revenues 1,196,244 Expenditures: Debt service: Principal repayment 870,000 Interest and fiscal agent charges 344,570 Total expenditures 1,214,570 Net change in fund balance (18,326) Fund balance, beginning of the year 1,286,154 Fund balance, end of the year 1,267,828$ Reconciliation of net change in fund balance to net change in net assets: Net change in fund balances-total governmental funds (18,326)$ Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because: Repayment of bond principal is an expenditure in the governmental funds, but in the statement of net assets the repayment reduces long-term liabilities. 870,000 Some amounts reported in the statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances reflect the collection of an asset which are not includable as as revenues on the statement of activities. Change in deferred revenue (882,426) Change in interest payable 12,195 Change in net assets of governmental activities (18,557)$ PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Debt Service Fund See accompanying notes to financial statements. 8 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 9 NOTE 1 – DESCRIPTION OF REPORTING ENTITY The Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation (the Corporation) was incorporated in September 1983 under the General Nonprofit Corporation Law of the State of California to acquire, construct and lease capital improvement projects. The Corporation is exempt from federal income taxes under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Corporation provides financing of public capital improvements for the City through the issuance of Certificates of Participation (COPs), a form of debt which allows investors to participate in a stream of future lease payments. Proceeds from the COPs are used to construct projects which are leased to the City for lease payments which are sufficient in timing and amount to meet the debt service requirements of the COPs. The Corporation is an integral part of the City of Palo Alto. It primarily services the City and its governing body is composed of the City Council. Therefore, the financial data of the Corporation has also been included as a blended component unit within the City’s comprehensive annual financial report for the year ended June 30, 2011. NOTE 2 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (a) Basis of Presentation Government-wide Statements: The statement of net assets and the statement of activities include the financial activities of the Corporation. Eliminations have been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities. The statement of activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each function of the Corporation’s activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated with a program or function and, therefore, are clearly identifiable to a particular function. Program revenues include (a) charges paid by the recipients of goods or services offered by the programs, and (b) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular program. Revenues that are not classified as program revenues, including all taxes, are presented as general revenues. Fund Financial Statements: The fund financial statements provide information about the Corporation’s funds. Separate statements for each governmental fund are presented. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major individual funds, each of which is displayed in a separate column. (b) Major Funds Major funds are defined as funds that have either assets, liabilities, revenues or expenditures equal to ten percent of their fund-type total and five percent of the grand total. The Corporation has one fund which is reported as a major governmental fund in the accompanying financial statements: Debt Service Fund – This fund accounts for debt service payments on the Corporation’s long-term debt issues. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 10 NOTE 2 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued) (c) Investment in Leases Improvements financed by the Corporation are leased to the City for their entire estimated useful life and will become the City property at the conclusion of the lease. The Corporation therefore records the present value of the lease and considers the leased improvement to have been sold for this amount when leased. (d) Net Assets The government-wide financial statements utilize a net assets presentation. Net assets are categorized as restricted and unrestricted. Restricted Net Assets – This category presents external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors or laws or regulations of other governments and restrictions imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. (e) Fund Balances During the year ended June 30, 2011, the Corporation implemented GASB Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. The objective of this Statement is to enhance the usefulness of fund balance information by providing clearer fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied and by clarifying the existing governmental fund type definitions. This Statement establishes fund balance classifications that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to which a government is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of the resources reported in governmental funds. At June 30, 2011, the Corporation’s governmental funds’ fund balances include the following classifications: Restricted Fund Balance – includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by external resource providers, constitutionally or through enabling legislation. Restrictions may effectively be changed or lifted only with the consent of resource providers. (f) Estimates The preparation of basic financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 11 NOTE 3 – CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD BY TRUSTEE Under the provisions of the Corporation’s COP issues, a Trustee holds and invests the Corporation’s cash. (a) Interest Rate Risk Interest rate risk is the risk that a change in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an investment. Normally, the longer it takes an investment to reach maturity, the greater will be that investment’s sensitivity to changes in market rates. Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the Corporation’s investments to market interest rate fluctuations is provided by the following table that shows the distribution of the Corporation’s investments by maturity: Investment Type Amount Maturity Date California Asset Management Program 624,261$ 57 Days * U.S. Agency obligations: Federal National Mortgage Association 586,653 10/30/2012 Money Market Mutual Funds 13,914 28 Days * Total Investments held by Trustee 1,224,828$ * Maturity dates listed in number of days represents the weighted average maturity of the investment. California Asset Management Program - The City is a voluntary participant in the California Asset Management Program (CAMP). CAMP is an investment pool offered by the California Asset Management Trust (the Trust). The Trust is a joint powers authority and public agency created by the Declaration of Trust and established under the provisions of the California Joint Exercise of Powers Act (California Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., or the “Act”) for the purpose of exercising the common power of its Participants to invest certain proceeds of debt issues and surplus funds. CAMP’s investments are limited to investments permitted by subdivisions (a) to (n), inclusive, of Section 53601 of the California Government Code. The City reports its investments in CAMP at the fair value amounts provided by CAMP, which is the same as the value of the pool share. At June 30, 2011, fair value approximated cost. At June 30, 2011, these investments have an average maturity of 57 days. Money Market Mutual Funds are available for withdrawal on demand at June 30, 2011, and have an average maturity of 28 days. (b) Credit Risk Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the holder of the investment. This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization. The actual ratings as of June 30, 2011, for all U.S. Agency Obligations and Money Market Mutual Funds are Aaa as provided by Moody’s Investment Rating system. As an external investment pool, the California Asset Management Program was rated Aaam as of June 30, 2011. On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's lowered its long-term credit rating on debt of the U.S. government from “AAA” to “AA+.” This action affected Standard & Poor's view of U.S. public finance debt instruments that are directly or indirectly backed by the U.S. As a result, on August 8, 2011, Standard & Poor's lowered its long-term credit ratings of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises and public debt issues that have credit enhancement guaranteed by those government-sponsored enterprises to “AA+.” The credit downgrades relate to the credit risk associated with the City’s investments in U.S. Treasuries and U.S. Agency Securities. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 12 NOTE 3 – CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD BY TRUSTEE (continued) (c) Investment Policy The Corporation must maintain required amounts of cash and investments with trustees under the terms of certain debt issues. These funds are unexpended bond proceeds or are pledged as reserves to be used if the Corporation fails to meet its obligation under these debt issues. The California Government Code requires these funds to be invested in accordance with bond indentures or State statue. All these funds have been invested as permitted under the Code. The Investment Policy is described in detail in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized by the City’s Investment Policy. The table also identifies certain provisions of the City’s Investment Policy that address interest rate risk, credit risk and concentration of credit risk. The table addresses investments of debt proceeds held by bond trustee that are governed by the provisions of debt agreements of the City rather than by the general provisions of the City’s investment policy. Authorized Investment Type Maximum Maturity Minimum Credit Quality Maximum Percentage of Portfolio Maximum Investment In One Issuer U.S. Government Securities 10 years N/A No Limit No Limit U.S. Government Agencies 10 years N/A No Limit (A) No Limit Certificates of Deposit 10 years N/A 20% 10% of the par value of portfolio Bankers Acceptances 180 days N/A 30% $5 million Commercial Paper 270 days AAA 15% $3 million (B) Local Agency Investment Fund N/A N/A No Limit $50 million per account Short-Term Repurchase Agreements 1 year N/A No Limit No Limit City of Palo Alto Bonds N/A N/A No Limit No Limit Money Market Deposit Accounts N/A N/A No Limit 10% Mutual Funds (C) N/A N/A 20% 10% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 10 years N/A 10% $5 million Medium Term Corporate Notes 5 years AA 10% $5 million (A) Callable and multi-step securities are limited to no more than twenty percent of the par value of the portfolio, provided that: 1) the potential call dates are known at the time of purchase. 2) the interest rates at which they "step-up" are known at the time or purchase. 3) the entire face value of the security is redeemed at the call date (B) The lesser of $3 million or 10% of outstanding commercial paper of any one institution. Debt Agreements: (C ) Golf PIC COP 1998, University Avenue Parking Bond 2001 and University Avenue Parking Bond 2002 are allowed to invest in the California Asset Management Program. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 13 NOTE 4 – CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION The Corporation’s changes in long-term debt are presented below: Balance June 30, 2010 Retirements Balance June 30, 2011 Current Portion Governmental Activity Debt: Certificates of Participation 1998 Golf Course 4.00 - 5.00%, due 09/01/2018 4,060,000$ 370,000$ 3,690,000$ 385,000$ 2002A Civic Center Refinancing 2.00 - 4.00%, due 03/01/2012 795,000 390,000 405,000 405,000 2002B Downtown Parking Improvemnts 4.55 - 6.50%, due 03/01/2022 1,910,000 110,000 1,800,000 115,000 6,765,000$ 870,000$ 5,895,000$ 905,000$ In August 1998, the Corporation issued the Golf Course Capital Improvements and Refinancing Project Certificates of Participation, Series 1998, in the amount of $7.8 million to refund and subsequently retire the 1978 Golf Course Lease Revenue Bonds issued by the City through the Palo Alto Golf Course Corporation and to finance various improvements at the Palo Alto Public Golf Course, including upgrading five fairways and various traps, trees, and greens, constructing new storm drains facilities, replacing the existing irrigation system, upgrading the driving range, and installing new cart paths. Under the terms of the 1998 COPs, the Corporation transferred $473 thousand to an agent for the Golf Course Corporation which used the funds to retire the 1978 Bonds. On January 16, 2002, the Corporation issued the 2002A Civic Center Refinancing Certificates of Participation in the amount of $3.5 million to refund the City’s 1992 Civic Center Project Certificates of Participation. Principal payments for the 2002A COPs are due annually on March 1 and interest payments semi-annually on March 1 and September 1 and are payable from lease revenues from the City from available funds. During the year ended June 30, 2002, the 1992 Civic Center COPs were retired. On January 16, 2002, the Corporation issued the 2002B Downtown Parking Improvements Certificates of Participation in the amount of $3.6 million to finance the construction of certain improvements to the non-parking area contained in the City’s Bryant/Florence Garage complex. Principal payments are due annually on March 1 and interest payments semi-annually on March 1 and September 1 and are payable from lease revenues received from the City from available funds. On January 25, 2005, the City defeased $900 thousand of the 2002B Downtown Parking Improvements Certificates of Participation. The City placed $1.0 million in surplus cash from the Civic Center Refinancing and Downtown Parking Improvement Project Construction account in an irrevocable trust to provide for future debt payments. Accordingly, the trust account assets and the liability for the defeased Bonds are not included on the financial statements. The total defeased amount was paid off on March 1, 2011. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION (A Component Unit of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 14 NOTE 4 – CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (continued) The COPs are payable and secured by lease revenues received by the Public Improvement Corporation from any City General Fund revenue source. Principal and interest are payable semi-annually on March 1 and September 1. Future annual debt service on the COPs is expected to be provided by the lease receipts discussed above, and is shown below: For the Year Ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2012 905,000$ 305,559$ 1,210,559$ 2013 530,000 263,511 793,511 2014 555,000 235,509 790,509 2015 590,000 205,575 795,575 2016 620,000 173,275 793,275 2017-2021 2,475,000 376,900 2,851,900 2022 220,000 14,300 234,300 Total 5,895,000$ 1,574,629$ 7,469,629$ NOTE 5 – SUBSEQUENT EVENT Refinancing of the 2002A Golf Course Certificate of Participation On August 2, 2011, the City entered into a master lease-purchase agreement (the Agreement) with JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., whereby the proceeds together with the bond reserve fund were used to refund the Certificates of Participation, Series 1998 (Golf Course Improvements and Refinancing Project). The principal amount financed by the Agreement was $3.2 million and will be repaid at an interest rate of 2.49%. Semi-annual payments will be made through September 1, 2018. The City used its Fire Department rolling stock as the collateral in this Agreement. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Independent Auditor’s Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor’s Report ....................................................................................................................... 1 Statement of Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments ............................................................. 3 Statement of Quarterly Billings .................................................................................................................... 4 Notes to the Financial Statements ................................................................................................................. 5 Attachment A Attachment A 1 The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report We have audited the accompanying Statements of Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments and Quarterly Billings (financial statements) of the City of Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (Plant), a component unit of City of Palo Alto (City), for the year ended June 30, 2011. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over the Plant’s financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As described in Note 2, the financial statements referred to above were prepared for the purpose of complying with the provisions of the Basic Agreement between the City of Palo Alto, the City of Mountain View, and the City of Los Altos for the Acquisition, Construction and Maintenance of a Joint Sewer System dated October 10, 1968, and subsequent letters of agreement dated December 5, 1977, January 14, 1980, April 9, 1985, July 3, 1990, July 31, 1992, and March 16, 1998, and is not intended to be a presentation in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the net expenditures and net changes in commitments of the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, and its quarterly billings to the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos for the year ended June 30, 2011, on the basis of accounting described in Note 2. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor, Members of the City Council, management, and others within the City of Palo Alto, and the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Statement of Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 City of City of City of Total Mountain View Los Altos Palo Alto Direct Expenditures: Source control program 1,243,460$ 444,040$ 128,699$ 670,721$ Public outreach 121,526 43,397 12,578 65,551 Permitting and enforcement 1,037,386 284,782 16,927 735,677 Operations and maintenance 11,024,911 3,936,996 1,141,077 5,946,838 System improvement CIP (Note 3) 658,704 235,223 68,176 355,305 Total Direct Expenditures 14,085,987 4,944,438 1,367,457 7,774,092 Indirect Administrative Expenditures: Source control program 923,869 329,914 95,620 498,335 Public outreach 1,963 701 203 1,059 Permitting and enforcement 415,222 262,876 15,624 136,722 Operations and maintenance 1,899,041 678,147 196,550 1,024,344 Total Indirect Expenditures 3,240,095 1,271,638 307,998 1,660,460 Debt Service Expenditures: Refunding 1990 Series A Bonds 284,790 145,243 22,214 117,333 1999 Wastewater Treatment New Project 538,144 203,903 50,962 283,279 Total Debt Service Expenditures 822,934 349,146 73,176 400,612 Total Expenditures 18,149,017 6,565,221 1,748,631 9,835,165 Deduct Joint Systems Revenues (Note 5) (317,933) (113,534) (32,906) (171,493) Net Expenditures 17,831,084 6,451,687 1,715,725 9,663,672 Add Net Changes in Commitments (Note 1) 686,769 245,245 71,081 370,443 Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments Due from Members 18,517,853$ 6,696,932$ 1,786,806$ 10,034,115$ See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 3 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Statement of Quarterly Billings For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 City of City of Mountain View Los Altos Billings by Quarter, Beginning: July 1, 2010 1,774,241$ 532,046$ October 1, 2010 1,880,637 556,442 January 1, 2011 1,148,729 356,114 April 1, 2011 2,036,406 586,936 Total quarterly billings 6,840,013 2,031,538 Net expenditures and net changes in commitments 6,696,932 1,786,806 Excess of total billings over net expenditures and net changes in commitments 143,081$ 244,732$ See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 4 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 5 NOTE 1 – THE REPORTING ENTITY The Cities of Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos (the Members) participate jointly in the cost of maintaining and operating the Regional Water Quality Control Plant and related system (the Plant).The Members shared the original costs of acquisition and construction of the Plant in the same proportions as the allocation of capacity rights to them. The City of Palo Alto (the City) is the owner and administrator of the Plant. The Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos are entitled to use a portion of the capacity of the Plant for a period of 50 years as set forth in the Basic Agreement between the City of Palo Alto, the City of Mountain View and the City of Los Altos for Acquisition, Construction and Maintenance of a Joint Sewer System dated October 10, 1968 and subsequent letters of agreement dated December 5, 1977, January 14, 1980, April 9, 1985, July 3, 1990, July 31, 1992 and March 16, 1998. The original agreement, as amended, may terminate any time after 50 years provided that written notice of withdrawal is tendered ten years preceding the date of withdrawal. NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The Plant is an enterprise that is operated by the City and its operations are accounted for as an enterprise fund in the City’s basic financial statements. The accompanying financial statements are intended to present the Plant’s net expenditures and net changes in commitments and quarterly billings by the Plant to the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos pursuant to the agreement of the Members as described above and are not intended to be a complete presentation of the Plant’s financial position or results of operations. Additionally, the capital cost and the outstanding debt of the Plant are not presented in these statements but are presented in the basic financial statements of the City. Plant expenditures, commitments and joint system revenues, debt service and industrial waste compliance expenditures are shared by the Members based on agreed upon allocation percentages. The expenditures and commitments, including indirect administrative expenditures (see Note 3), are allocated to each of the Members based primarily on their respective percentages of the annual sewage flow and treatment needed for suspended solids, chemical oxygen demand and ammonia. Commitments represent operating encumbrances with suppliers for long-term projects, which have not yet been completed. Net changes in commitments represent commitments of $1,966,496 at June 30, 2011, less commitments of $1,279,727 at June 30, 2010. Revenues from services, fines and penalties are allocated to each of the Members in the same proportions as those of expenditures and commitments. Debt service payments are allocated based on percentages established at the time of bond issuance. Industrial waste compliance (Public Outreach and permitting and enforcement) charges are allocated to Members primarily based on upon the number of industries and efforts required to maintain compliance with sewage use ordinances and other EPA regulations. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Notes to the Financial Statements (continued) For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 6 NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The percentages used for the year ended June 30, 2011, to allocate expenditures, commitments and revenues were: City of City of City of Mountain View Los Altos Palo Alto Public outreach, source control program, operation and maintenance, system improvement CIP, commitments and joint system revenues 35.71%10.35%53.94% Debt Services Expenditures: Refunding 1990 Series A Bonds 51.00%7.80%41.20% 1999 Wastewater Treatment New Project 37.89%9.47%52.64% Permitting and enforcement 37.70%2.24%60.06% The City is allocated 53.94% of total usage of the treatment plant. The City does not fully utilize its percentage allocation, therefore, the City has entered into separate contracts to allocate portions its excess to other entities. Fiscal year 2011 allocations are as follows: East Palo Alto Sanitary District 6.80% Stanford University 6.80% Town of Los Altos Hills 1.14% Remaining City Percentages 39.20% Total 53.94% The agreement the City has with the above entities has no effect on the partnership agreement between the Members. Billings are made in advance and are based on the adopted budget for the plant and estimated sewage flow. Excess billings (over) under net expenditures and net changes in commitments are offset against the subsequent year payments during the second quarter of the subsequent fiscal year. NOTE 3 – SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT CIP (MINOR CAPITAL) The basic agreement between the Members, dated October 10, 1968, provides that the administrator of the Plant is responsible for capital additions. These capital additions should be for the replacement of obsolete or worn-out units, or minor capital additions to improve the efficiency of the Plant’s operations. Per an addendum to the agreement dated March 16, 1998, the Members agreed that capital additions should not exceed $1.9 million in 1998-99 (base year). For futures years, the base year amount will be adjusted annually based on increases to the Consumer Price Index-Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area. Actual System Improvement CIP expenditures amounted to $658,704 for fiscal year 2011. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Notes to the Financial Statements (continued) For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 7 NOTE 4 – INDIRECT ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURES Indirect expenditures include those costs allocated from the City’s General Fund administrative services, which supports all operating departments of the City. Other indirect expenses are administrative charges from the City’s Internal Services Funds. These allocations are applied on a uniform basis throughout the City. The allocations are in accordance with the subsequent letter of agreement dated April 9, 1985. NOTE 5 – DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES Debt service expenditures include principal repayments, interest expenses and amortization of bond discount reduced by any interest income earned from cash with fiscal agent, related to the 1999 Series A Bonds. In prior years, the City, City of Mountain View, City of Los Altos, Town of Los Altos Hills, East Palo Alto Sanitary District and Stanford University agreed to issue new bonds (1999 Series A Bonds) to finance the rehabilitation of the Wastewater Treatment System’s two sludge incinerators and to refund the existing 1990 Series A Bonds. 1999 Wastewater Refunding of Treatment 1990 Series A New Project Bonds Total City of Palo Alto 1,887,012$ 649,132$ 2,536,144$ City of Mountain View 1,873,660 1,324,228 3,197,888 City of Los Altos 468,292 202,529 670,821 East Palo Alto Sanitary District 377,798 308,987 686,785 Stanford University 260,107 106,457 366,564 Town of Los Altos Hills 78,131 5,193 83,324 Total 4,945,000$ 2,596,526$ 7,541,526$ As required by the Indenture, the City established a debt service reserve fund for the Bonds (the “Reserve Account”), with a minimum funding level requirement in the Reserve Account (the “Reserve Requirement”). At the time it issued the Bonds, the City satisfied the Reserve Requirement with a deposit into the Reserve Account of a surety bond (the “Surety Bond”) in the amount of $1,647,300 issued by Ambac Indemnity Corporation (renamed to Ambac Assurance Corporation in 1997). On November 9, 2010, Ambac Financial Group Inc. (Ambac Financial) filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Ambac Financial is a holding company whose affiliates provide financial guarantees and financial services to its customers. Ambac Indemnity Corporation, now known as Ambac Assurance Corporation, is a subsidiary of Ambac Financial. Ambac has issued a reserve fund surety bond of $1,647,300 that expires on June 1, 2024 and is on deposit in the Reserve Fund account securing the Bonds. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Notes to the Financial Statements (continued) For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 8 NOTE 5 – DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES (Continued) According to the Trust Agreement for these bonds, in the event that such surety bond for any reason terminates or expires, and the remaining amount on deposit in the Reserve Fund account is less than the required reserve, the City is to address such shortfall by delivering to the trustee a surety bond or a letter of credit meeting the criteria of a Qualified Reserve Facility under the Trust Agreement, or depositing cash to the General Account in up to twelve equal monthly installments. Information about Ambac Financial.is available on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q filed by Ambac Financial; the City refers to this information for reference only, and does not intend to incorporate any such information herein. The City is not certain about the effect of the bankruptcy proceedings, if any, on the Surety Bond. NOTE 6 – JOINT SYSTEM REVENUES The Plant’s joint system revenues for the year ended June 30, 2011 total $317,933. This consisted of $7,500 for salt water marsh services, $47,149 from the City’s Water Fund for lab services, $201,539 for septic tank hauling services and $61,745 in other revenues. NOTE 7 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS During fiscal year 2011, the Plant paid the City $2,217,514 for utility costs. Such costs are included in the Statement of Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments as source control program, permitting and enforcement, and operations and maintenance expenditures. Vehicle replacement charges of $26,066 were paid to the City’s Equipment Replacement Fund, which is included in the Statement of Net Expenditures and Net Changes in Commitments as operations and maintenance expenditures. Attachment A CABLE TV FRANCHISE Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenditures For the Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 Attachment A CABLE TV FRANCHISE Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor’s Report ....................................................................................................................... 1 Financial Statements: Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenditures ............................................................................. 2 Notes to the Financial Statements ........................................................................................................... 3 Attachment A 1 The Members of the Cable TV Franchise Independent Auditor’s Report We have audited the accompanying Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenditures of the Cable TV Franchise (Franchise) for the year ended December 31, 2010, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. The financial statements as of December 31, 2009, were audited by other auditors whose opinion dated October 22, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion on those statements. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis of designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Franchise’s internal control over the financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1 to the financial statements, the statements referred to above were prepared for the purpose of complying with the provisions of the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement signed on June 9, 2009, between the City of Palo Alto, the City of East Palo Alto, the City of Menlo Park, the County of San Mateo, the County of Santa Clara and the Town of Atherton, for the provision of cable television and video services, and are not intended to be a presentation in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the revenues and expenditures of the Franchise for the year ended December 31, 2010, on the basis of accounting described in Note 1. This report is intended for the information of the members, management, and others within the City of Palo Alto, the City of East Palo Alto, the City of Menlo Park, the County of San Mateo, the County of Santa Clara and the Town of Atherton. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 2010 2009 Revenues: Franchise fees $ 1,551,464 $ 1,451,778 Expenditures: Franchise administration 61,418 46,955 Consulting fees 14,384 7,953 Total expenditures 75,802 54,908 Net receipts $ 1,475,662 $ 1,396,870 Amount Percent Amount Percent Allocation of Net Receipts: City of Palo Alto $ 730,938 49.5% $ 688,238 49.3% City of Menlo Park 390,098 26.4% 364,636 26.1% City of East Palo Alto 141,683 9.6% 136,881 9.8% Town of Atherton 104,044 7.1% 100,961 7.2% County of Santa Clara 78,097 5.3% 76,287 5.5% County of San Mateo 30,802 2.1% 29,867 2.1% Total $ 1,475,662 100.0% $ 1,396,870 100.0% CABLE TV FRANCHISE Statements of Franchise Revenues and Expenditures For the Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 2010 2009 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 2 Attachment A CABLE TV FRANCHISE Notes to Financial Statements For the Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 3 NOTE 1 – JOINT OPERATING AGREEMENT AND BASIS OF ACCOUNTING In July 1983, a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement was entered into by and between the Cities of Palo Alto, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, the Counties of San Mateo and Santa Clara and the Town of Atherton (the “Members”) for the purpose of obtaining a state-of-the-art cable service for residents, businesses, and institutions, within each of their jurisdictions in the most efficient and economical manner possible. On August 9, 2000, the City of Palo Alto (the “City”), acting on behalf of the Members, signed a Franchise Agreement with TCI Cablevision of California, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T Broadband, third party contractor, which was granted a non-exclusive franchise to construct, operate, maintain and repair a cable television system within the Members jurisdictions. In 2002, the franchise agreement was transferred from AT&T Broadband to Comcast Corporation. TCI Cablevision of California, Inc. also signed an asset purchase agreement with Cable Communications Cooperative of Palo Alto, Inc. (CCCOPA), the former cable television system operator/owner, and acquired the system. In October 1988, a Joint Operating Agreement was formed by the Members in which the City was granted the power and the authority to administer and coordinate the activities of the Franchise and exercise the rights and responsibilities of the City pursuant to the Franchise. The activities are administered by the City and are accounted for as part of the Administrative Services Department within the General Fund of the City’s basic financial statements. The program is accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recorded when susceptible to accrual (both measurable and available) and expenditures are recognized when the liability is incurred. On January 1, 2007, the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act (DIVCA) went into effect. Under DIVCA, cable and video service franchises are now granted exclusively by the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) rather than by local franchising entities. On March 30, 2007, the Commission granted AT&T a statewide franchise. Comcast was allowed to seek a state franchise after January 1, 2008, when another state franchise holder (in this case AT&T) entered the local market. On January 2, 2008, the Commission granted Comcast a state franchise. On June 9, 2009, the Members approved an amended and restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, in substitution of the existing Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and the Joint Operating Agreement, to reflect changes in the law due to DIVCA and to continue to allow the City to administer the cable and video franchise enforcement and monitoring process for state franchise holders. The accompanying financial statements are intended to present the Franchise’s revenues and expenditures pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and are not intended to be a complete presentation of the Franchise’s financial position or results of operations. As compensation for services under the state franchise agreements, AT&T and Comcast pay annual franchise fees in an amount equal to 5% of annual gross revenues, taking into account a reasonable adjustment for bad debts. From these fees the City of Palo Alto is first reimbursed for out-of-pocket franchise administration costs. The remaining fees are distributed to each Member according to the percentage of revenues derived from the residents and businesses in each of the entities compared to revenues in total. Attachment A CABLE TV FRANCHISE Notes to Financial Statements For the Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 4 NOTE 2 – PRIOR FRANCHISE SETTLEMENTS A prior Franchise Agreement with CCCOPA was set to expire on March 24, 2001. On June 21, 1999, the City of Palo Alto hired a cable communications consultant and retained the services of a law firm to assist in the franchise renewal process. On July 31, 2000, CCCOPA reimbursed the City $185,000 toward the actual costs incurred as part of the franchise renewal efforts. On July 24, 2000, the City reached a settlement with CCCOPA in the amount of $220,000 to resolve outstanding claims resulting from CCCOPA’s alleged failure to fully perform under the prior Franchise Agreement. On November 22, 2004, the City reached a settlement agreement with Comcast regarding cable plant construction claims in the amount of $175,000. This money was to be used towards the institutional network connection costs. In 2006, the City conducted a franchise compliance audit performed by the City Auditor’s Office. A settlement was reached in the amount of $155,391. In addition, CCCOPA paid the City a $250,000 grant to use to acquire, install, and/or maintain equipment to be used in connection with an institutional network defined in the Franchise Agreement. These amounts have been deposited and are being held by the City and are earning interest. The City has since spend part of the settlements amount on various projects including installing and maintaining the institutional network equipment. As of December 31, 2010, remaining total amount on deposit, including $7,877 in interest receivable, was $906,514. Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Independent Auditor’s Reports, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, and Basic Financial Statements For The Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor’s Report ................................................................................................................... 1 Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) .............................................................................. 3 Basic Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets and Governmental Fund Balance Sheet .......................................................... 4 Statement of Activities and Governmental Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances ................................................................... 5 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance – Budget and Actual ..................................................................................................... 6 Notes to Basic Financial Statements ....................................................................................................... 7 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards ...................... 11 Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance of California Redevelopment Agencies and on Internal Control over Compliance .............................................. 13 Attachment A Attachment A 1 Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities and major fund of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto (Agency), a component unit of the City of Palo Alto (City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise the Agency’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Agency’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over the Agency’s financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities and major fund of the Agency for the year ended June 30, 2011, and the respective changes in financial position thereof, and the respective budgetary comparison for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. As discussed in Note 1(g) to the basic financial statements, effective July 1, 2010, the Agency adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. As discussed in Note 3 to the basic financial statements, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto passed Ordinance No. 5126 on September 6, 2011 dissolving the Agency effective October 7, 2011. Attachment A 2 In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 1, 2011, on our consideration of the internal control over the Agency’s financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis as listed in the table of contents be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by GASB, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 3 The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto (Agency), a component unit of the City of Palo Alto (City) was formed on July 9, 2001. As discussed in Note 3 to the basic financial statements, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 5126 on September 6, 2011, dissolving the Agency effective October 7, 2011. FISCAL 2011 FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS-AGENCY-WIDE BASIS AND FUND BASIS During fiscal year 2011, the Agency incurred costs in the amount of $10 thousand. The Agency received a transfer from the City in the amount of $10 thousand to fund these costs. As of June 30, 2011, the Agency had not yet adopted a project area nor received any tax increment revenues. OVERVIEW OF THE AGENCY’S BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Basic Financial statements are in two parts: 1) Management’s discussion and analysis (this part), 2) The basic financial statements, which include the government-wide and the fund financial statements, along with the notes to these financial statements. The Basic Financial Statements The basic financial statements comprise the government-wide financial statements and the fund financial activities and financial position-long-term and short-term. The government-wide financial statements provide a longer-term view of the Agency’s activities as a whole, and comprise the statement of net assets and the statement of activities. The statement of net assets provides information about the financial position if the Agency as a whole, including all its long- term liabilities on the full accrual basis, similar to that used by corporations. The statement of activities provides information about all the Agency’s revenues and all its expenses, also on the full accrual basis, with the emphasis on measuring net revenues or expenses of the Agency’s program. The statement of activities explains in detail the change in net assets for the year. The fund financial statements report the Agency’s operations in more detail that the Agency-wide statements and focus primarily on the short-term activities. The fund financial statements measure only current assets, liabilities and fund balances. Together, all these statements are now called the basic financial statements. CONTACTING THE AGENCY’S FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT These Basic Financial Statements are intended to provide citizens, taxpayers, investors, and creditors with a general overview of the Agency’s finances. Questions about these Statements should be directed to the Finance Department of the City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, CA 94301. Attachment A Governmental Redevelopment Activities - General Statement of Fund Adjustments Net Assets Assets: Cash and investments -$ -$ -$ Liabilities: Accounts payable -$ - - Fund balances/net assets: Fund balances: Unassigned - - - Total liabilities and fund balances -$ Net assets: Unrestricted - - Total net assets -$ -$ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Statement of Net Assets and Governmental Fund Balance Sheet June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 4 Attachment A Redevelopment General Statement of Fund Adjustments Activities Expenditures/expenses: Community development: Planning and community reimbursements to the City of Palo Alto 9,978$ -$ 9,978$ General revenues: Intergovernmental revenues from the City of Palo Alto 9,978 - 9,978 Change in fund balances/net assets - - - Fund balances/net assets, Beginning of year - - - End of year -$ -$ -$ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Statement of Activities and Governmental Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 5 Attachment A Variance with Budgeted Amounts Final Budget Actual Positive Original Final Amounts (Negative) Revenues: Intergovernmental revenues from the City of Palo Alto 8,500$ 8,500$ 9,978$ 1,478$ Expenditures: Community development: Planning and community reimbursements to the City of Palo Alto 8,500 8,500 9,978 (1,478) Net change in fund balances -$ -$ - -$ Fund balance, beginning of year - Fund balance, end of year -$ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Redevelopment General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to the financial statements. 6 Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 7 NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (a) Organization and Purpose The Redevelopment Agency (Agency) of the City of Palo Alto was created on July 9, 2001, under the provisions of the Redevelopment Law (California Health and Safety Code). The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (City) serves as the governing body of the Agency and the City Manager serves as the Executive Director. On September 19, 2001, the Edgewood Redevelopment Project Area (Edgewood Plaza) was designated as a survey area and the process for the adoption of the redevelopment plan was initiated. The redevelopment plan for Edgewood Plaza was not ultimately adopted by the City Council. The City has not designated any other redevelopment project areas for revitalization. The Agency is an integral part of the City and, accordingly, the accompanying financial statements are included as a blended component unit of the basic financial statements prepared by the City. A component unit is a separate governmental unit, agency or nonprofit corporation which, when combined with all other component units, constitutes the reporting entity as defined in the City’s basic financial statements. On September 6, 2011, pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 33140 the City Council of the City of Palo Alto passed Ordinance No. 5126 dissolving the Agency, effective October 7, 2011 (see Note 3). (b) Financial Statement Presentation The Agency’s basic financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the acknowledged standard setting body for establishing accounting and financial reporting standards followed by governmental entities in the United States of America. These standards require that the financial statements described below be presented. Government-wide Statements: The statement of net assets and the statement of activities include the financial activities of the overall Agency government. Eliminations have been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities. The statement of activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each function of the Agency’s governmental activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated with a program or function and, therefore, are clearly identifiable to a particular function. Program revenues include (a) charges paid by the recipients of goods or services offered by the programs, (b) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational needs of a particular program and (c) fees, grants and contributions that are restricted to financing the acquisition or construction of capital assets. Revenues that are not classified as program revenues, including all taxes, are presented as general revenues. Fund Financial Statements: The fund financial statements provide information about the Agency. The Agency considers the Redevelopment Agency General Fund to be a major fund. Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 8 NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) (c) Major Funds Major funds are defined as funds that have either assets, liabilities, revenues or expenditures/expenses equal to ten percent of their fund-type total and five percent of the grand total. Major funds are identified and presented separately in the fund financial statements. The Agency reported the following major governmental fund in the accompanying financial statements: Redevelopment General Fund - This fund accounts for the activities of establishing and administering the Redevelopment Agency. (d) Basis of Accounting The Agency-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the full accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred, regardless of when the related cash flow takes place. Governmental funds are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when measurable and available. The Agency considers all revenues reported in the governmental funds to be available if the revenues are collected within sixty days after year-end. Expenditures are recorded when the related fund liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on general long-term debt, claims and judgments, and compensated absences, which are recognized as expenditures in governmental funds. Proceeds of general long-term debt and acquisitions under capital leases are reported as other financing sources. Non-exchange transactions, in which the Agency gives or receives value without directly receiving or giving equal value in exchange, include property taxes, grants, entitlements, and donations. On an accrual basis, revenue from property taxes is recognized in the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied. Revenue from grants, entitlements, and donations is recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements have been satisfied. Other revenues susceptible to accrual include taxes, intergovernmental revenues, interest and charges for services. (e) Budgets and Budgetary Accounting Budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Budget amounts in the financial statements are as originally adopted, or as amended by the Board. Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device. Encumbrance accounting is employed as an extension of formal budgetary integration in all funds. Under encumbrance accounting, purchase orders, contracts and other commitments for the expenditure or monies are recorded in order to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation. Encumbrances outstanding at year end are reported as reservations of fund balances since they do not constitute expenditures or liabilities and are reappropriated in the following year. Attachment A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 9 NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) (f) Net Assets Net assets are the excess of all the Agency’s assets over all its liabilities. Net assets, which are determined only at the Agency-wide level, were zero at June 30, 2011. (g) Fund Balances During the year ended June 30, 2011, the Agency implemented GASB Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. The objective to this Statement is to enhance the usefulness of fund balance information by providing clearer fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied and by clarifying the existing governmental fund type definitions. This Statement establishes fund balance classifications that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to which a government is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of the resources reported in governmental funds. There was no fund balance at June 30, 2011. NOTE 2 – TRANSACTIONS WITH THE CITY During fiscal year 2001-02, the City established the Redevelopment Agency. The Agency and the City have an agreement whereby the City will advance funds to the Agency in support of startup and formation costs. However, the interfund advances have no specific repayment date. Generally accepted accounting principles require that such amounts as well as the repayments be treated as transfers in the year made. NOTE 3 – DISSOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY In June 2011, the California legislature adopted Assembly Bill 1x 26 (“AB1x 26” or the “Dissolution Bill”) and Assembly Bill 1x 27 (“AB1x 27” or the “Continuation Bill”). The Dissolution Bill immediately suspends all new redevelopment activities and incurrence of indebtedness, and dissolves redevelopment agencies effective October 1, 2011 that do not otherwise “opt-in” under the Continuation Bill. In response to the newly enacted legislation, the City concluded that the Agency has not identified a qualifying redevelopment project area and has not conducted any redevelopment activities, including redeveloping or acquiring land, entering into contracts, issuing bonds or incurring housing obligations, since its formation. As a result, pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 33140 the City Council of the City of Palo Alto adopted Ordinance No. 5126 on September 6, 2011 to dissolve the Agency effective October 7, 2011. The League of California Cities and the California Redevelopment Association (CRA) filed a lawsuit on July 18, 2011 on behalf of cities, counties and redevelopment agencies petitioning the California Supreme Court to overturn Assembly Bills X1 26 and 27 on the grounds that these bills violate the California Constitution. On August 11, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued a stay of all of Assembly Bill X1 27 and most of Assembly Bill X1 26. However, the Agency decided to continue with the dissolution regardless of the outcome of the California Supreme Court decision. Attachment A 10 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Attachment A 11 Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities and major fund of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto (Agency), a component unit of the City of Palo Alto (City), California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise the Agency’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated December 1, 2011. Our report includes explanatory paragraphs indicating that the Agency adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions and indicating that the Agency dissolved, effective October 7, 2011. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control over Financial Reporting Management of the Agency is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting related to the Agency as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting related to the Agency. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting related to the Agency. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Agency’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Attachment A 12 Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Agency’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Governing Board of the Agency, management, pass-through entities, and the State Controller’s Office and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 13 Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance of California Redevelopment Agencies and on Internal Control over Compliance Compliance We have audited the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Palo Alto’s (Agency) compliance with the requirements specified in the State of California’s Guidelines for Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies issued by the State Controller’s Office, applicable to the Agency’s statutory requirements identified below for the year ended June 30, 2011. Compliance with the requirements referred to above is the responsibility of the Agency’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Agency’s compliance based on our audit. We conducted our compliance audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the State of California’s Guidelines for Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies (Guidelines), issued by the State Controller’s Office, as interpreted in the Auditing Procedures for Accomplishing Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies, August 2011, issued by the Governmental Accounting and Auditing Committee of the California Society of Certified Public Accountants. Those standards and the Guidelines require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above that could have a material effect on the statutory requirements listed below occurred. An audit includes examining on a test basis, evidence about the Agency’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of the Agency’s compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, the Agency complied, in all material respects, with the compliance requirements referred to above that are applicable to the statutory requirements of the Agency for the year ended June 30, 2011. Internal Control over Compliance Management of the Agency is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance and with the compliance requirements referred to above. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Agency’s internal control over compliance to determine the auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Agency’s internal control over compliance. Attachment A 14 A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect and correct, noncompliance on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a compliance requirement will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control over compliance. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Governing Board of the Agency, management, and the State Controller’s Office and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Independent Auditor’s Reports, Financial Statements, and Independent Accountant’s Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 Attachment A Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor’s Report ................................................................................................................... 1 Basic Financial Statements: Balance Sheet ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance .................................................... 4 Notes to Basic Financial Statements ....................................................................................................... 5 Other Reports: Report On Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance And Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed In Accordance With Government Auditing Standards .............................................................. 9 Independent Accountant’s Report on Compliance with Measure N ........................................................... 11 Status of Current Year and Prior Year Findings ......................................................................................... 13 Attachment A Attachment A 1 The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Palo Alto, California Independent Auditor’s Report We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund, a fund of the City of Palo Alto (City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis of designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over the Fund’s financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 2(a) to the financial statements, the financial statements of the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position of only that portion of the governmental activities and the nonmajor governmental funds of the City that is attributable to the activities of the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the City as of June 30, 2011 and the changes in its financial position for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund as of June 30, 2011, and the changes in financial position thereof for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. As discussed in Note 2(c) to the financial statements, as of June 30, 2011, the City adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. Attachment A 2 In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 1, 2011 on our consideration of the City’s internal control over the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund’s financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of the City’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. Management has omitted the management’s discussion and analysis that accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require to be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such missing information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the GASB who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. Our opinion on the basic financial statements is not affected by this missing information. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A Assets: Restricted cash and investments (Note 3) with City Treasury - CAMP 40,329,115$ Trustee 37,877 Interest receivable 137,623 Total assets 40,504,615$ Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 4,542,456$ Fund balances: Restricted for Capital Projects 35,962,159 Total liabilities and fund balances 40,504,615$ CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Balance Sheet June 30, 2011 See accompanying notes to financial statements. 3 Attachment A Revenues: Interest on cash and investments 144,377$ Expenditures: Capital outlay: Downtown Library 3,097,417 Mitchell Park Library and Community Center 14,231,580 Main Library New Construction and Improvements 690,965 Temporary Facility 141,677 Total capital outlay 18,161,639 Debt service: Costs of issuance, discounts and fees 101,350 Other Fees 26,023 Total expenditures 18,289,012 Net change in fund balance (18,144,635) Fund balance, beginning of the year 54,106,794 Fund balance, end of year 35,962,159$ Changes in Fund Balance For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and See accompanying notes to financial statements. 4 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to the Financial Statements For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 5 NOTE 1 – BACKGROUND On November 4, 2008, more than two thirds of registered voters of the City of Palo Alto (City) approved Measure N and authorized the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds not to exceed $76,000,000 to be used to construct a new energy-efficient Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, expand and renovate the Main Library, and renovate the Downtown Library. Funds will also be used to provide additional space to expand library collections, add new children’s and group program areas, replace outdated lighting, provide modern ventilation and air conditioning systems and ensure seismic safety and enhance disabled access. On June 9, 2010, the City issued General Obligation Bonds, Election of 2008, Series 2010A (Library Bonds) to finance the costs of constructing a new energy efficient, environmentally friendly Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, renovating and expanding Main Library, and renovating the Downtown Library, including enhancements at all three facilities for seismic safety and disabled access, expanded space for library collections, meeting and study areas, and new air conditioning, ventilation and lighting systems (the “Project”). Proceeds from the Library Bonds included par of $55,305,000 and a premium on issue of $3,766,208 for a total of $59,071,208. The Bonds are the first of two series of bonds to be sold and issued under the Authorization to finance a portion of the Project. As of June 30, 2011, $20,695,000, of the Authorization remains unissued. Specific projects approved by Council to be funded by the Library Bonds are as follows: Amended Budget Expenditures Not Charged to Bond Proceeds Cumulative Bond Eligible Expenditures Encumbrances Outstanding Project Balance Remaining Downtown Library 5,212,000$ 318,307$ 3,678,350$ 725,048$ 808,602$ Mitchell Park Library and Community Center 49,152,752 619,165 17,822,048 21,891,802 9,438,902 Main Library New Construction and Improvements 1,850,000 78,252 690,965 1,102,693 56,342 Temporary Facility 645,000 148,061 504,728 23,862 116,410 Total 56,859,752$ 1,163,785$ 22,696,091$ 23,743,405$ 10,420,256$ Project As of June 30, 2011 Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to the Financial Statements For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 6 NOTE 2 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (a) Basis of Presentation The accompanying financial statements present only the financial position and the changes in financial position of the General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund (Fund) and do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the City’s financial position as of June 30, 2011, and the changes in its financial position for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. A capital projects fund (governmental fund) is used to account for the City’s General Obligation Bond Projects activities. Capital projects funds are used to account for financial resources (e.g., bond proceeds and investment income) that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditures for capital outlays, including the acquisition of land or acquisition and construction of major governmental facilities. This fund is a set of self-balancing accounts which comprise its assets, liabilities, fund balance, revenues and expenditures. (b) Basis of Accounting Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized. The projects are accounted for in a governmental fund type, and the modified accrual basis of accounting is used. Under the modified accrual basis, revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available as net current assets. Expenditures are recognized when they are incurred. (c) Fund Balance In June 2011, the City adopted the provisions of Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. GASB Statement No. 54 outlines the requirement to report the fund balance for governmental funds in specific classifications (nonspendable, restricted, committed, assigned and unassigned), which create a hierarchy primarily based on the extent to which the City is bound to the constraints of the specific purposes for which funds can be spent. The Fund only has restricted fund balance at June 30, 2011. Restricted fund balance includes amounts when constraints placed on use of resources are either: (1) externally imposed by creditors (such as through debt covenants), grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments; or (2) imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. The City will spend the most restricted dollars in accordance with restrictions imposed before less restricted resources in the following order: (a) committed; (b) assigned and (c) unassigned. (d) Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results may differ from those estimates. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to the Financial Statements For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 7 NOTE 3 – RESTRICTED CASH AND INVESTMENTS The Fund’s investments are carried at fair value, as required by generally accepted accounting principles. The Fund adjusts the carrying value of its investments to reflect their fair value at each fiscal year end, and it includes the effects of these adjustments in revenues for that fiscal year. (a) Project Funds Investment Policy Pursuant to terms of the Trust Agreement, bond proceeds to be used for project costs were remitted to and are maintained by the City as agent for the Bondholders. The City’s Investment Policy allows it to invest in a variety of types of investments subject to maturity maximums, concentration limitations, and minimum credit quality requirements. Allowed investment types include U.S. government securities, U.S., government agency securities, certificates of deposit, money market mutual funds, banker’s acceptances, commercial paper, the Local Agency Investment Fund, medium term corporate notes, state of California municipal agencies and city bonds. (b) Interest Rate Risk Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an investment. Normally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the sensitivity of its fair value to changes in market interest rates. Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the Fund’s investments to market interest rate fluctuations is provided by the following table that shows the distribution of the Fund’s investments by maturity: Investment Type Amount Maturity Date California Asset Management Program 17,648,792$ 57 Days * U.S. Agency obligations: Federal Home Loan Bond Global Bonds 17,669,433 7/27/2011 Federal Home Loan Bond Notes 5,010,890 1/9/2012 Cash held with U.S. Bank 37,877 N/A Total Cash and Investments held by Trustee 40,366,992$ * 57 days represents weighted average maturity of investment pool. (c) California Asset Management Program CAMP is an investment pool offered by the California Asset Management Trust (the Trust). The Trust is a joint powers authority and public agency created by the Declaration of Trust and established under the provisions of the California Joint Exercise of Powers Act (California Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., or the “Act”) for the purpose of exercising the common power of its Participants to invest certain proceeds of debt issues and surplus funds. The Pool’s investments are limited to investments permitted by subdivisions (a) to (n), inclusive, of Section 53601 of the California Government Code. The Fund reports its investments in CAMP at the fair value amounts provided by CAMP, which is the same as the value of the pool share. At June 30, 2011, these investments had an average maturity of 57 days, were rated AAA and amounted to $17.6 million. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund of the City of Palo Alto) Notes to the Financial Statements For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 8 NOTE 3 – RESTRICTED CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued) (d) Credit Risk Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the holder of the investment. This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization. The actual ratings as of June 30, 2011, for all U.S. Agency Obligations and Money Market Mutual Funds are Aaa as provided by Moody’s Investors Services. As an external investment pool, the California Asset Management Program was rated Aaam as of June 30, 2011. On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's lowered its long-term credit rating on debt of the U.S. government from “AAA” to “AA+.” This action affected Standard & Poor's view of U.S. public finance debt instruments that are directly or indirectly backed by the U.S. As a result, on August 8, 2011, Standard & Poor's lowered its long-term credit ratings of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises and public debt issues that have credit enhancement guaranteed by those government-sponsored enterprises to “AA+.” The credit downgrades relate to the credit risk associated with the City’s investments in U.S. Treasuries and U.S. Agency Securities. (e) Permitted Investments with Trustee The Fund must maintain funds to be used for costs of issuance on the Bonds with a Trustee under the terms of the Bond Trust agreement. These funds are normally held in cash or invested in money market funds, which are a permitted investment under the Trust agreement, and amounted to $38 thousand as of June 30, 2011. Attachment A 9 The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Palo Alto, California Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards We have audited the financial statements of the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund, a fund of the City of Palo Alto, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, and have issued our report thereon dated December 1, 2011. Our report includes an explanatory paragraph indicating that the City adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions and an explanatory paragraph describing management’s omission of the management’s discussion and analysis required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control over Financial Reporting Management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City of Palo Alto General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance and other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Attachment A 10 This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, the Oversight Committee, the City Auditor and the City’s management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 11 The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Palo Alto, California Independent Accountant’s Report on Compliance with Measure N We have examined the City of Palo Alto’s (City) compliance with certain provisions of Measure N for the year ended June 30, 2011, as follows: a) Proceeds from the sale of the Bonds were used only for the purposes specified in Measure N. b) Proceeds for the Bonds were deposited into a Library/Community Center Project Construction Fund held by the City; and c) The Administrative Services Director of the City filed an annual report with the City Council commencing not later than November 1, 2010, containing pertinent information regarding the amount of funds collected and expended, as well as the status of the Library/Community Center project listed in the Measure. Management is responsible for the City’s compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the City’s compliance based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the City’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the City’s compliance with specified requirements. In our opinion, the City complied, in all material respects, with the aforementioned requirements for the year ended June 30, 2011. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, the Oversight Committee, the City Auditor and the City’s management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California December 1, 2011 Attachment A 12 This page left intentionally blank. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (A Fund to the City of Palo Alto) Status of Current Year and Prior Year Findings For the Year Ended June 30, 2011 13 Current Year Findings: No matters were noted. Status of Prior Year Findings: FY2010 Comment 10-01 Annual Reporting Condition The City did not submit an annual report, which is required to contain pertinent information regarding the amount of funds collected and expended as well as the status of the Library Projects approved in Measure N. Recommendation Administrative Services Director should prepare and file the report annually with Council. Status Corrected. The City submitted a separate report on November 16, 2010 for the prior year report and submitted its FY2010-11 annual report to the City Council on November 1, 2011. Attachment A FINANCE COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES EXCERPT Special Meeting December 14, 2011 Roll Call Chairperson Scharff called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Scharff (Chair), Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh (arrived at 7:41) Absent: Oral Communications None Agenda Items 1. Macias Gini & O’Connell’s Audit of the City of Palo Alto’s Financial Statements as of June 30, 2011 and Management Letter. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid, that the Finance Committee recommend to the City Council acceptance of the External Audited Financial Statements and Management Letter. MOTION PASSED: 3-0, Yeh Absent ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 8:55 pm. Attachment B City of Palo Alto (ID # 2499) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 1 (ID # 2499) Summary Title: Resolution for William Berry Title: Adoption of a Resolution Expressing Appreciation to William Berry Upon Completion of His Term as a Utilities Advisory Commissioner From:City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Attachments: ·William Berry Resolution (DOC) Prepared By:Marites Ward, Administrative Assistant Department Head:Valerie Fong, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO WILLIAM BERRY UPON THE COMPLETION OF HIS TERM AS A UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSIONER WHEREAS,William (Bill) Berry has served as a Commissioner on the Utilities Advisory Commission from July 27, 2009 through January 6, 2012;and WHEREAS,Bill Berry has provided dedicated service to the residents and businesses of this community through review of Utilities policies and practices employing his extensive knowledge of public service and Utilities matters;and WHEREAS,Bill’s interest in Utilities matters and active participation on the Commission brought additional depth and insight to Commission deliberations;and WHEREAS, Bill ably assisted the Utilities in the development of the Utilities 10-year Energy Efficiency Plan, the Utilities Strategic Plan, the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan,the Gas Utility Long-term Plan, and the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan; and WHEREAS,Bill, as a participant on the UAC’s budget subcommittee, provided substantial review of the proposed Utilities operating and capital budgets; and WHEREAS, of particular note, Bill expended significant personal time researching and facilitating efforts with staff to develop a reasoned, thorough and useful Utilities Strategic Plan;and WHEREAS,Bill’s consideration of concerns raised by the public, and his willingness to listen to different points of view resulted in joint recommendations by staff and the Commission to the City Council that were adopted by the Council; and WHEREAS, Bill diligently incorporated Council directions and priorities in his guidance on utilities matters;and WHEREAS, Bill was able to apply his considerable financial experience gained notably while working for a large water agency and as a consultant for public water and energy agencies to his responsibilities advising the Council and illuminating issues involving utility policy; and WHEREAS, Bill used humor, patience, a sharp eye and a taste for French Fries to help achieve the City’s numerous Utilities accomplishments during his tenure;and WHEREAS,the City of Palo Alto desires to recognize the meritorious service of Bill Berry. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby commends the outstanding public service of Bill Berry and records its appreciation as well as the appreciation of the citizens of this community for the service and contribution rendered during his terms on the Utilities Advisory Commission. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: February 21, 2012 ATTEST:APPROVED: ___________________________________________City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ ______________________City Attorney City Manager City of Palo Alto (ID # 2491) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 3 (ID # 2491) Summary Title: Downtown Post Office Sale Public Hearing Title: Public Meeting for Presentation from U.S. Postal Service to Discuss Process for Disposition and Relocation of Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue From:City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing for the representatives of the U.S. Postal Service to make a presentation on the potential disposition of the Post Office site at 380 Hamilton Avenue, allow for public comment and provide Council questions and feedback to the USPS. The purpose of the meeting is for the US Postal Service to make a record of public comment on its disposition and relocation plans and consider public and the City’s comments in its subsequent decisions. Executive Summary On December 25, 2011, the US Postal Service (USPS) contacted the City by letter, expressing a wish to down-size their operation at the Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto. After meeting with staff, the first public step in this process is a public meeting to allow the community to comment on the proposal to dispose of the property. The USPS expects a follow- up comment period of 15 days, and to make the site available for sale sometime in May. Background On December 25, 2011, the US Postal Service (USPS) contacted the City by letter, expressing a wish to down-size their operation at the Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto. The reasons USPS cited for disposal of the property are: the reduction in mail volume driven by a sluggish economy; and changes in customer behavior which indicate the continued migration to electronic communications. In the letter USPS noted that they must follow a specific process in disposal of a property. After meeting with staff, the first public step in this process is a public meeting to allow the community to comment on the proposal to dispose of the property. Discussion Representatives of the USPS, including Diana Alvarado, Real Estate Manager, James Wigdel, Communications, and Palo Alto Post Master Dean Maeda, met with City staff on January 18, 2012. At that meeting the process for disposing of the property at 380 Hamilton Avenue was February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 3 (ID # 2491) discussed. The USPS representatives provided staff with a written summary of the process. The key steps in the process include: ·A presentation about the availability of the property and a public hearing before the City Council within 45 days of their initial meeting with the City. ·A 15 day public comment period following the public meeting. ·A determination by USPS whether to proceed with the project to dispose of the property. ·Placing the property on the market shortly after May 15, 2012. ·A competitive bid process, with the objective of an all cash, as-is sale, without contingencies. USPS will be represented locally by a real estate agent with CB Richard Ellis. ·Review of the bids and selection of the “best” bid by the Asset Manager in Washington D.C. ·Preference to retain 3,000 to 3,500 sq. ft. in the existing building for postal services, thus avoiding having to relocate the service elsewhere in the downtown area. Staff met again with the USPS for a tour of the site on Tuesday, February 7th, and the Mayor and City Manager then met with USPS representatives to get more information about the process that USPS would use in disposal of the site. The Mayor and City Manager then met with USPS representatives on February 15th to understand and outline the process for the public meeting. Presentation To begin their disposal process for the post office building and site USPS must make a presentation to the local community. ·Ms. Alvarado (USPS) requested that a City Council meeting was the best way to get community and local official input and asked that USPS be placed on the City Council’s agenda. This meeting was scheduled for the February 21, 2012, Council meeting. ·About 15 days before the Council meeting, USPS sent notification of the meeting by regular mail to all mail recipients in Palo Alto. Notices were also posted on local post office sites. ·At the Council meeting, USPS representatives expect to make a 20 minute presentation and take comments from the public and Council. ·The public comment period on the proposed USPS action to dispose of the Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue will be open for 15 days following the hearing. ·After the public comment period, USPS will then decide how the project is to proceed. Key Facts about the Post Office site at 380 Hamilton Avenue Staff has reviewed the facts available about the present property and structure. At the meeting on January 18, 2012, Ms. Alvarado added the information that there is a full, useable basement under the first floor. According to her, this brings the building’s total square footage to 20,000 sq. ft. She also acknowledged that since the building is on the National Register of Historic February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 3 (ID # 2491) Places (# 81000175), USPS would follow the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) guidelines in the review of the sale. She indicated that because of its historic status the building would not be demolished. For a collection of available information on the property please see the attached Fact Sheet. Next Steps The USPS will allow a 15-day comment period for additional public input following the Council hearing. Staff expects USPS to put the site up for sale on a competitive basis on or after May 15, 2012. Staff will meet with Council subsequent to the hearing to determine what actions, if any, the City might wish to take in advance of or subsequent to the sale of the site. Attachments: ·Attachment A: Letter from Diana K. Alvarado, USPS dated December 26, 2011 (PDF) ·Attachment B: Fact Sheet, Palo Alto Post Office, 380 Hamilton Avenue (PDF) ·Attachment C: Community Relations Regulations for United States Postal Service Facilities Projects, 2nd Edition, May 1999 (PDF) Prepared By:Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager Department Head:Curtis Williams, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager PACIFIC FACILITIES SERVICE OFFICE d UNITEIJJSTIJTES . Pt1JSTIJLSERVICE December 26, 2011 The Honorable Mayor Espinosa and Vice Mayor Yeh 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Mayor Esponosa and Vice Mayor Yeh: Despite significant cost reductions, the Postal Service continues to experience a net loss. Economic drivers that generate mail volume continue to reflect the sluggish economy, and changes in customer behavior indicate the ongoing migration of electronic communications. In an effort to control and cut costs, an optimization study has been recently approved by the Pacific Area Vice President of Operations to "right size" our current operation located at 380 Hamilton Avenue to a smaller building (location to be determined) within the city limits of Palo Alto. The new facility will house retail services within the 94301 ZIP Code area. The Postal Service is bound by the Community Relations Regulations contained in the Code of Federal Regulations which is based on 39 CFR 241.4. We must follow a specific process whenever relocating a retail operation in order to keep the governing officals and the public apprised of our project progress. The first step in the process is to meet with the governing official to review the project requirements. . The Postal Service wishes to work in partnership with your community. Therefore, we ask your assistance and cooperation to discuss this project as soon as possible. If you or your designee could contact me at (650) 615-7202 or email diana.alvarado@ usps.gov to set up a meeting, it will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your participation in this process and we look forward to working with you and your staff as this project develops. Sincerely, Diana K. Alvarado I alManager, Property Management Pacific Facilities Service Office 395 Oyster Point Blvd., Suite 225 South San Francisco, CA 94080-0300 650-615·7202 office I 650·823·8597 cell diana.alvarado@ usps.gov 395 OYSTER POINT BOULEVARD, SUITE 225 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-0300 ((650) 615·7202 U.S. POST OFFICE (380 Hamilton Ave.) FACT SHEET Project: Palo Alto Post Office Address: 380 Hamilton,Avenue (94301) Location Map and Aerial/Zoning Map: Attached APN: 120-16-002 Assessed Valuation: N/A Site size (net): 32,700SF Structure built: 1932 Seismic Classification: Structure is not on the Palo Alto Seismic Hazard Category list. Structure Footprint: 20,000 sq.ft.' includes a full basement Floor Area Ratio: 0.35 Parking spaces on-site (paved, uncovered): Currently striped: 20; Parking Assessment District identified: 18; maximum possible with curb cut adjustment: 28. Parking Assessment District requirement: Downtown Parking Assessment District use requirement: 1/250 sq.ft.: 46 parking spaces. With 18 parking spaces provided on-site, the site's parking assessment was for 28 parking spaces or an assessment of $140,364.28. Because the property was owned by the Federal government, the City of Palo Alto paid the site's assessment as a general benefit under Proposition 218. Traffic and Circulation: The signal at Gilman and Hamilton is a part of current signal upgrade project and will be replaced in the next two months. Object of the signalization project is to achieve better coordination among three existing signals on Hamilton. Removal of the mail island in front of the Post Office would improve circulation in the area and on street parking could be restored. There may no longer be a need for the VTA stop across the street if the Post Office use leaves. On street parking could be restored on the north side of the street. ' Square footage provided by the USPS. The Assessment District used the figure of 11,531 sq.ft. based on the footprint of the building. U.S. Post Office Fact Sheet Page 2 Site Zoning: Special Purpose (PF, OS, and AC) Districts (Chapter 18.28) Public Facilities District (PF) Permitted uses limited to governmental, public utility, educational, community service or recreational facilities. Conditional uses include accessory and support uses; educational, religious and assembly uses; administrative office services for non-profit organizations; recreational uses; residential care facilities using existing structures; day care centers. Adjacent zoning: To north, east, south and west, zoning is: CD-C (P) Downtown Commercial District (CS 18.18.050) with pedestrian shopping combining district (P) (CS 18.30(B)) and Public Facilities. Adjacent public parking lots are zoned PF. Permitted uses in CD(C) include retail and some service uses, office, education, religious and assembly, multiple family as part of mixed use, financial services and hotels. Conditional uses include drive in/take out services, public/quasi-public facility uses, and recreational uses, general business services, parking as a principal use, and auto service stations. Pedestrian Shopping Combining District (P) (overlay zone) fosters the continuity of retail stores and applies to any pedestrian frontage (streets this corner lot). This overlay limits vehicular access across sidewalks. Adjacent public parking lots to the north, east, west and south of the Post Office site are zoned PF. General Plan Designation: Land Use Designation: Regional/Community Commercial Historic Status: Category 1 in the Palo Alto Historic Inventory (Downtown Post Office) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Resource Number 81000175. Palo Alto Historic Preservation requirements (CS 16.49): Post Office building is classified Category 1: "Exceptional building" which has had either no exterior modifications or such minor ones that the overall appearance of the building is in its original character. (CS 16.49.020) The municipal code provides criteria for review of changes to structures defined as historic in the downtown area (CS 16.49.050) and specifies findings for the demolition of such structures identified (CS 16.49.060). U.S. Post Office Fact Sheet Page 3 The municipal code requires that, in the downtown area, shall be maintained and preserved against decay and deterioration by their owners. (CS 16.49.080). Enforcement provisions are included in the code (CS 16.49.080). Attachments: 1. Site location map. 380 Hamilton Avenue 2. Aerial and Zoning Map, 380 Hamilton Avenue 3. Historical Background Information with pictures, 380 Hamilton Avenue Final: February 6, 2012 Lanning Chateau All Saints Episcopal Church Chase Bank Post Office 94301 AT&T Prolific Oven Palo Alto Sport Shop Lot D Lot G Lot EHAMILTON A V E N U E GIL M A N ST R E ET W A V E RLE Y S TR E ET B R YA N T S T R E V E N U E W A V E RLE Y S T R EET H A MILT O N A Parcel Report for APN: Net Lot Size: Max Floor Area : Max LotCoverage : Zone: Zone %: Minimum Setbacks: Front: Rear: Interior Side(s): Street Side: SpecialSetbacks: Substandard: Flag Lot: Distance between sidewalk and pl: (as measured on map) Easements: UnderlyingLot Lines: Land Use Designation: Land Use Designation %: Parking District: Flood Zone: LOMA: Homer/EmersonCorridor Frontage: Historic Status: Cottage: Max Heightto Ridge: Near CreekFeature: Airport Influence Area: This map is a product of theCity of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. 0' 113' (U S P S S i t e ) CITY O F PALO A L TO IN C O RP ORAT E D CALIFORN IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f AP RIL 16 1 894 120-16-002 32,700 sf Cannot assess for this zone. Cannot assess for this zone. PF 100 Cannot assess for this zone. CC 100 University Ave X no Cannot assess for this zone. Cannot assess for this zone. Cannot assess for this zone. Cannot assess for this zone. 38 0 H a m i l t o n A v e Cannot assess for this zone. Category 1; On the NRHP (DowntownPost Office) no no no Cannot assess for this zone. no Cannot assess for this zone. no The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2012 City of Palo Alto no rrivera, 2012-02-06 10:46:34 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) 427-453 643 635 635 620 180 624 628 632 636 640 644 617 621 171-195 203 642640636200 630 616 208 228 220 240-248 201 209 215 2255 229 231 611-623 625-631 538- 542 552548546 230-238 734 23 721 702- 730 220-244 701 755 757 771 762- 776 740-746 250 275 270 255 741 265 724 730 651 221-225 227 668 707 235 514 278 274 0 250 545 540 300 310 301 581 533 535 537 261 267 518-526 32- 536 530-536 337 339 323317 353 355 367 431 436426 #1-7 390 375 416- 424 338 340 560 345 321 325 315 529 285 555 650 636628 1-12 628 A-E 385 365 375 380 345 664 325 650-654 661 635 300 690 675 555541-549 533 535- 539 318-324 326 352 439-4 9425 415-419 405403 453 461 383 460 502 510 526 540 499 467 459 439 425 555 400 436-452 456 379 370-374 376 380-382 384-396 550-552 364 360 423 432 428 635 446 430 400 745 7 706 385 744 734724-730720 712 704 360 351 315 737 332 300 653 -681 683685 512 501 619609605 8 482 486 496 610 630 455 400 651-687 470 759 22 483A - F 751 727 733 350 325 3 413 - 419 457-467 469-471 473-481 454 729 A-D 733-743 24-828 328 425 565 585 595 276 516 698 247 372 558 #200-202 558 #C & D 808 435433 421 727 A-C 739 260 642 375 530 643 700 423 611 484 508 756 - 760 257 4 539 312 651 443 445 4 335 218 640-646 506 541 PC-2967D-C P) RM-30 AMF(MUO) PF 3872 PF PC-2130 PF CD-C (P) CD-C(P) PC-3007 PC-3974 PF PC-4195 RM- 40 CD-C(GF)(P) RM-40 PFAMF DHS PF S(P) PC-44 M O N A STREET B R Y A N T STREET S H AMILTON A VEN UE E M E RSO N STREET H AMILTON A VE N UE GIL M A N STREET W A V E RLE Y STREET BRY A NT STR EET FO REST A V EN U E FO REST A VEN U E BRY A NT STREET R A M O N A ST REET R A M O N A STREET E NCE STREET ERLEY STR EET U NIVERSIT Y A V EN U E U NIV ER W A VE RLEY S T REET H A MILTO N A V E N UE C O W PER STREET FOREST A V E N UE W A VERLEY STR EET BRY A NT ST H O M ER A V E N UE LA NE 39 LA N E 6 EAST LANE 20 EAST L A N 20 W EST LA N E 21 W EST L A NE 11 W EST CEN TEN NIA L W ALK D O W N This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend abc Zone District Labels Zone Districts USPS - 380 Hamilton Avenue 0' 200' 380 Hamilton Ave(USPS Site)Zoning Districtsand2006 Aerial Photos CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2012 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2012-02-06 11:05:19usps cw air zone (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) US Post Office Description: The building is an Early California Style of Architecture designed by Birge Clark in1932. It is located on a three quarter of an acre lot and designated as Category 1 on the City's Historic Inventory. The site is zoned as a Public Facility and this significant building is listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The building was built and designed to be purposefully operated as a post office in downtown Palo Alto from the very beginning and has been functioning for over eight decades. Birge Clark, together with his father, A.B. Clark, first designed the Lou Henry Hoover House located on Stanford campus. In order to build a first large post office in Palo Alto, which could satisfy all the postal needs of the community, Clark and his father took the request and blueprints to Washington D.C. It is believed that they were chosen as architects for the Post Office building because of their success with Hoover House. This attractive building has a prominent arcade frontage, red tiled roof with wrought iron grillwork both inside and outside and a sn100th stucco finish on its exterior. When the post office at 380 Hamilton Ave. opened, it became the first building to be designed specifically for this use and with its current zoning designation as Public Facility, the applicants would have to request a zone change and work with the City of Palo Alto's planning department for further improvements and change of use. The historic integrity and appreciation for this building could be further enhanced by continuing to utilize the use that would be beneficial to the community since it has been a prominent public facility for so many years. I ! I US POST OFFICE –IMAGES regulations for U.s. Postal Service Facilities Projects 2nd Edition I May 1 999 With an effective date of October 5, 1998, the Postal Service published its new Community relations policy: Expansion, Relocation, Construction of New Post Offices. The rule, which adds a new section 241.4 to 39 CFR, was published in the September 2, 1998, edition of the Federal Register. This is a major policy change that will have a long-term impact on the way the Postal Service acquires new or expanded facilities. Major procedural changes place greater emphasis on facility expansion before consideration is given to relocation or, finally, new construction. There are also lengthened time periods between various stages of the project process and a requirement to attend at least one public meeting. A major addition is an appeal process for the community and local officials to voice objections to decisions. COMMUNITY RELATIONS REGULATIONS Contents Purpose 2 Applicability 2 Exemption to Procedures 2 Project Examples 2 Public Meeting 2 Flowchart of Project Action 3 Time Periods 4 Appeals Process 4 Planning, Zoning, Building Codes 4 Regulation (39 CFR Part 241) 7 Description of Standard Letters (1 through 4) 9 Format of Appeals Letter 18 FSO Addresses 19 Map of Facilities SeNice Offices (FSO) 20 NEW COMMUNITY RELATIONS POLICY & PROCEDURES Expansion l Relocation, Construction of New Post Offices Purpose These enhanced procedures of our Community Relations rule assure increased opportunities for local oHicials and communities that may be impacted by certain facility projects to express their views con- cerning a project and have them considered prior to any final decision. Paramount in any facility action, as described below, is that our first consideration will be expansion, second is relocation to another existing building, and last, is new construction. Applicability The following procedural action steps confonn to our new rule entitled Expansion, Relocation, Construction of New Post OHices (Effective 10-5-98). It is applica- ble to all customer service facilities whenever the project is for expansion, relocation to another existing building. or new construction (owned or leased). A customer service facility is defined as a facility that mainly oHers services to the general public such as counter service, postal boxes, and other general retail services typically associated with a main post office, downtown finance unit, station, branch, and so forth. Exemption to Procedures Procedures are not applicable to the following proj- ects and situations: • Non-Customer Service Facility -meaning a facility used mainly as a processing and distribution cen- ter, cdr mail facility, carrier annex, or any other type facility or space not offering retail customer services. • Emergency Space -defined as space acquired as a res.ult of earthquakes, floods, fire, lease termina- tions, safety factors, environmental causes, or other factors that would force an immediate relo- catio:l from an existing facility. (See SPECIAL NOTE) • Temporary Space -defined as space used for special events, holidays, overtlow business, and so fonh, (See SPECIAL NOTE) 2 • Repairs and Alterations -projects that do not expand the footprint of the space such as painting, repairs, replacement, or upgrade 01 the facility or its equipment, paving, striping, or other repairs to the parking areas, and landscaping. SPECIAL NOTE: Emergency or temporary space is limited to a maximum of 180 days. Any additional time periods of up to 180 days each must be approved by the Vice President, Facilities. If it is later decided to convert emergency or temporary space into a permanent situation, these procedures will be applicable in the conversion. Project Examples The following hypothetical situations are oHered to give the FSO an idea of other unique projects where these procedures will apply: • Facility in a strip center and FSO is tasked to lease additional interior workroom area from the adjoining vacant space. Using best judgment, it is nol unreasonable to allow a local Postmaster to conduct the public hearing on "small" expansion or known. presumably non-controversial projects such as this one. postmaster should officially seek a postponement of the project if it becomes controversial. • Expansion of a parking lot to provide additional maneuvering area and/or more parking. Again, this may also be a type of project the local post- master could handle. Again, 11 the project should become controversial, the public meeting discus- sion should be officially postponed and returned for further handling by the FSO. • Consolidation 01 carriers or a relocation of the carrier function to a new Carrier Annex if the remaining retail space will be moved to another location. (Procedures do not apply if there is no change in location of the existing retail space.) • Creation of a new customer service facility in an area not previously represented by a postal facility. Public Meeting It is now mandatory to attend or conduct atleasl one public hearing so that the pioject can be openly Community Relation s Regulations FACILITY PROJECT FLOWCHART District prepares community contact letter and forwards 10 FSO wtth request for Real Estale action FSO makes appointment Ie· meet local offic als. dates lelt8~ and advises CRC & GR of meeting date FSO & district representative meet 10CGI officials and leave dated community contact Iletter. Schedules project for pulJfic meeting I Mend public meetinglsj / ./-0so evaluates /' comments and decides '" how project will proceed (expanSion or alternate Quarterslne7' Advertisement for alternate quarters/new site ----.......---.-.-----_______ Site review > ~_ committee meeting --~ Send IGN letter of ranked sites and advise local officials of all sites ---_ ..... ::::::::---Site solected .... ~ ..... I RES notifies [ocal officials ---' Project proceeds II ~ ~ . __ c_OP_Y_of_C_Om_r1_,'_un_iiy_C_o_nt_ac_t----' '" _ letter to CRG & GR I CRG drafts press releas~~ DIs1rict asks CRG 10 Issue J dated news release. CRG sends copy to RES, district, postmaster. a~~~_~._ ...,.. II I Advise jessor ot meeting Expansion Copy to eRC and G~ Postmaster isslJes all subscQue,,' news releases wf1h CRe guidance ] GR f1oH1ies appropriate members of congress I~CRC consults with district on issuance of news release CRG consults with district on Issuance of nev.rs release GR notifies appropriate members of congress 3 described to the community and local officials. There are three options in attending or conducting a public hearing: 1. At the time of meeting with local oHicials, request that the project be placed on the town meeting agenda for presentation and discussion. 2. If a town meeting is not planned within the next 60 days, or the seat of local government is quite distant from the community, the Postal Service may arrange its own local public meeting as a convenience to the community. 3. If there is no local building or location (church, school. grange hall, post oHice, etc.) in which to conduct a postal meeting, the FSO may distribute notification cards to all affected customers seekw ing comments to the project. This option is only available with the specific prior approval of the Vice President, Facilities. Time Periods There are new and quite specific time periods in the policy and procedure that must be followed without exception. These time periods are as follows: • Minimum 7-day waiting period for initial meeting or hearing after meeting with local officials and advertising the time, date and location of the meeting. • Minimum 15-day period after the public meeting (or the last public meeting if more than one is scheduled) to take into account the views expressed by the community members and offi- cials before deciding whether to consider (or reconsider) expansion or to advertise for existing buildings and sites. Notify local oHicials in writing of deCision and post a copy of the letter at the local post oHice. • Minimum 30-day wait before advertising for exist- ing building and sites (Such advertisement will be for sites and existing buildings and the preferred area will include the downtown area). • Minirr.um 60-day wait after sending IGN letter and adviSing local oHicials of sites before any decision is ma,je to select a specific site. • Minimum 30-day wait after adviSing local officials of sel ected site. Appeals Process There are three decision points in the process as shown on the flowchart on page 3. 4 Local officials may appeal at any of the three points and the community may appeal at two points in the process as shown: • Decision to expand or advertise. -Local officials & community. • Decision of Site Review Committee meeting. - Local officials & community • Decision to select a specific site. -Local officials. Final appeal for local officials and the community at any decision point is to the Vice President, Facilities. Planning, Zoning, Building Codes The new policy is to comply with local planning and zoning requirements and building codes so long as doing so is consistent with prudent business prac- tices and unique postal requirements. Please read Part 241.4.7f of the policy very carefully. The point here is to seek a working relationship with local oHi- cials and avoid the big govemment image that may result from using confrontational phrases such as "USPS only voluntarily complies" or "USPS has sov- ereign immunity". Look for ways to comply rather than ways to avoid local requirements. Never hesitate to contact field counsel for consultation on these mat- ters. The following action steps coincide with the Facility Project Flowchart on page 3. District prepares community contact letter and forwards to FSO with request for real estate action. For the FSO, this is the start of the facility project. It can be a request for expansion, relocation, or new construction (NCUNCO). The District should also for- ward a copy of the undated Community Contact Letter to the Area CRC who, in tum, forwards it to the appropriate Government Relations representative. Check with the District representative and confinn that they will forward the letters. In some situations, this action can be an FSO responsibility. FSO makes appontment to meet local officials, dates community contact letter, and advises CRC & GR of meeting date. FSO schedules an appointment to meet local officials in conjunction with the District representative. Once that date is known, FSO will advise CRC & GR of meeting date and District representative should request CRC to issue its press release, as appropri- ate. Again, depending on the Area or District wishes, FSO may make all or a portion of these arrange- Community Relations Regulations ments with CRC. The point is that close coordination between the FSO, District, and CRC at the beginning of the project is critical in gauging the community's sensitivity to the project and the future role the -District, CRC or GR will play later as events unfold. FSO & District representatives meet local officials and leave dated communrty contact letter. Schedule project for public meeting. This meeting is important to establish that the USPS plans to work in partnership as part of the infrastruc- ture of the community and as a good neighbor to the general public served by the facility. Advise local offi- cials that we would like to be on a future town meet- ing agenda so we can further describe to the general public the process for decision making in the project. Stress that we are looking at all options to enhance operations either by expansion of the existing facility, relocation to another building or lastly, new construc- tion. Solicit local officials for any ideas, comments, or support for the project, but advise them that no deci- sion on options to meet expansion needs will be made until after the public meeting and review of the feedback we receive at and after the meeting. Wait i3. minimum of 7 days before attending or con- ducting a public hearing. This should provide suffi- cien1 time to place a public advertisement and have the Postmaster post a notice of the hearing at the local post office. Also, advise the lessor by letter of the date and time for the public hearing. Attend public meeting(s). If the proiect appears controversial, you may want to include the CRC representative at the meeting. Othelwise, you and the District representative should be at all public meetings to describe the need for more space and the contemplated project (expan- sion,'relocation, new construction; in that order) and to answer operational and real estate questions. Also, if it is known at this time that expansion is simply not possible (lessor reclaiming facility at end of lease term, street-bound facility, no adjacent land, etc), you shoUld be prepared to explain why expansion is ruled out as an alternative. It is important to advise at the meeting that USPS will wait at least 15 days before deciding whether to con- sider/reconsider expansion or to advertise for build~ ings and Sites, and that a letter will be sent to local officials, advising of that decision, with a copy posted at the local post office. Any comments 1hat the public wishes to make on the project should be addressed to the FSO. It is essential to explain that once local oHicials and the general public are advised of the final decision, anyone may appeal the decision to the FSO with a final appeal to the Vice President, Facilities. Suggestion: Depending on circumstances, it is a good idea to ask the town to adopt a resolution in support of the project or at least to obtain a copy of the town minutes reflecting the reception given the Postal Service's presentation. FSO evalutes comments and decides how project will proceed. (Expansion or Alternate Quarters/ new site) This section is pretty much self-explanatory. If expan~ sion is possible consult with District & CRC for nec- essary news release. as appropriate, advise local officials in writing of the decision and post a copy at the post office. The project may proceed as a normal expansion project without further delay or appeal. if an advertisement for buildings and sites is the final decision, wait a minimum of 30 days for any com- ments or appeals from the community. Evaluate com- ments and proceed as appropriate. Advertisement for Alternate QUarters/new sites. Advertise for buildings and sites in accordance with existing postal procedures. Be sure to include the downtown area of the existing facility in the preferred area. Send a copy of the advertisement to CRe and, as necessary. to GR. Site Review Committee Meeting. Self-explanatory and in accordance with existing pro- cedures. Send IGN letter of ranked sites and advise local officals of all sites. Send the standard IGN letter of all ranked sites. Also advise local officials by letter of ranked sites with a short explanation of why other sites were not select- ed and post a copy of the letter at the local post oHice. Wait a minimum of 30 days before taking irrev~ ocable action to select a specific site. With the IGN notification period. this time period is automatically expanded to 60 days (90 days in the National Capital Region). Procedures can become somewhat awkward at this stage. Let's suppose there is only one site. Obviously, you don't want to lose any negotiating leverage if. for example, the site is not controlled at a reasonable price. You may delay notifying local oHi- cials and the public until due diligence is completed or it is comfortable to divulge its location. At that pOint, it is possible to move forward in the process and notify local officials under SITE SELECTED and 5 RES NOTIFIES LOCAL OFFICIALS categories. 8e sure to copy CAC & GR with the selected site. In another example. suppose we plan to occupy existing space in a building that is currently a busi- ness run by the owner with 15 employees. It is the only site available and the owner plans to dose the business and lease the space to the Postal Service. Owner may request that the location not be divulged for fear of upseNing the employees at the wrong time . Ordinarily, the localion would be identified to local officials without exception. Such situations must be handled tactfully and on a case by case basis. You may wish to seek counsel's advice before proceed- ing. In accordance with policy, al some point the site 6 must be identified prior to any irrevocable commit- ment to acquire it. Site selected. Sel f·e xpla na tory. RES notifies local officials. Once a final site is identified, advise local officials in writing of the location and ask for any comments regarding the choice within the nex1 30 days. Take no action to acquire/lease the final site until this 30-day time period has expired. Project proceeds. Community Relations procedures are now completed. Community Aelallons Reoulalions Tile Postal Service adopts the following anlendnlent to U.S. Title 39 CFR Part 241 . Part 241-[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 241 contin- ues to read as follows: Authority: 39 U.S.C. 401. 2. Effective October 5, 1998, 39 CFR part 241 is amended by revising § 241.4, to read as follows: § 24'1.4 Expansion. relocation l and construc- tion of post offices. (a) Application. (1) This section applies when the USPS contem- plates anyone of the fonowing projects with respect to a customer seNice facility: expansion, relocation to another existing building, or new construction, except when the project is to meet an emergency requirement or for temporary use. Emergency situations include, but are not limited to, earthquakes, floods, fire, lease terminations, safety factors, environmental causes, or any other actions that would force an immediate relocation from an existing facility. Temporary relocation of space is used or, but not limited to, holidays, spe- cial events, or for overflow business. Use of emergency and temporary space will be limited to 180 days in duration. Any additional incremental time periods of up to 180 days each must be approved by the Vice President, Facilities. (2) This section does not apply when the project under consideration is limited to repair and alter- ations, such as- (i) Painting; (ii) Repairs; (iii) Replacement or upgrade of structural or functional elements of a postal building or its equipment; (iv) Paving, striping, or other repair of parking areas; (\I) Landscaping. (b) Purpose. The purpose of the procedures required by this sec- tion is to assure increased opportunities for members of the communities who may be affected by certain USPS facility projects along with local officials, to convey their views concerning the contemplated proj- ect and have them considered prior to any final deci- sion to expand, relocate to another existing building, or construct a new building that is owned or leased. (c) Expansion, relocation, new construction. When a need is identified that will require the expan- sion, relocation, or new construction of a customer seNice facility, postal representatives responsible for the project will take the following steps in accordance with the time schedule shown: (1) Personally visit one or more of the highest rank- ing local public officials (generally individuals holding elective office). During the visit, the postal representatives will- (i) Identify the need and fully describe the proj- ect that is under consideration to meet it, explain the process by which the Postal Service will solicit and consider input from the affected community, and solicit a work- ing partnership with the community officials for the success of the project. (ii) Emphasize that in meeting a need for increased space, the first priority is to expand the existing facility; the second pri- ority is to find an existing building in the same area as the current facility; and the third option is to build on a new site; all within the downtown area, if possible. (iii) Ask that the Postal SeNice presentation of the project be placed on the regular agen- da of a public meeting of hearing. If no such meeting is planned within the next 60 days or the agenda of a planned meeting cannot accommodate the project. the USPS will schedule its own public hearing concerning the project. and will advertise the meeting or hearing in a local general circulation news- paper. (iv) Give the local oHicials a letter describing the intended project. (2) Notify the lessor of the affected facility of the proj- ect. in writing. (3) Send an initial news release to local communica- tions media. 7 (4) (i) Post in the public lobby of the affected post oHices a copy of the letter given to local offi- cials, or the news release, or, space permit- ting, both. If such information is available at the time, include in the posting a public notice of the date, time, and location of a public meeting or hearing at least 7 days prior to the meeting or hearing. (ii) Except as provided in this paragraph, attend, or conduct, one or more public hear- ings to describe the project to the communi- ty. invite questions, solicit written comment, and describe the process by which commu- nity input will be considered. If it is believed at the time that the existing facility is not able to be expanded or that expansion is impracticable, disclose that fact and the rea- sons supporting that belief. If, during the public meting or hearing process, a new development should occur to allow for an expansion of the existing facility, the Postal Service will make a good faith effort in pur- suing this alternative. Under exceptional cir- cumstances that would prevent postal repre- sentatives from attending a public meeting or conducting a postal hearing on the planned project within a reasonable time, and subject to approval of the Vice President, Facilities, the Postal Service may distribute a notification card to all affected customers, seeking their comments or other feedback. An example of exceptional cir- cumstances would be a project in a sparsely populated area remote from the seat of local government or any forum where a postal conducted meeting could be held. (iii) At any public meeting or hearing, advise local officials and the community of their appeal rights and the process by which an appeal can be made. Information provided must include time limitations and an address for the appeal. (5) Rel/iew comments and notify local oHicials of decision. Not less than 15 days alter the date of the most recent public meeting, or after receipt of notification cards, make a decision that takes into account community input and is consistent with postal objectives (e.g., expansion, relocation to another building, or construction of a newly '8 owned or leased facility), and notify local officials in writing. This notification must include informa- tion on the availability and terms of review under paragraph (c)(6) of this section. At the same time post a copy of the notification letter in the local ' post oHice for the community. Take no action on the decision for at least 30 days following notifica- tion of loca! officials and the community. (6) Within the lime period identified in paragraph (c)(5) of this section, any person may request in writing that the decision be reviewed by the Vice President, Facilities, at Postal Service Headquarters. No particular format is required for requesting review, but the request must be in writ- ing and identify the post office or location aHected; and should identify the decision objected to, and state the reasons for the objection. The Vice President, Facilities, will obtain the views of the decision maker, review relevant parts of the project file, and if necessary request more information from the appellant. Upon review of the facts, the Facilities Vice President, or a representative, will issue a written determination, if possible, within 15 days. In no event will the Postal Service take action on the decision being reviewed until 15 days follow- ing issuance of the final review determination. If the determination on review is to set aside the deci- sion, the project process will retum to the public hearing stage of paragraph (C)(4) of this section. (7) Advertise for sites and existing buildings, in accordance with existing postal procedures. (d) Discontinuance of post offices; historic preservation. (1) It is the policy of the Postal Service, by virtue of Board of Govemors Resolution No. 82-7, to com- ply with Section 106 of the general proviSions of the National Historic Preservation Act 16 U.S.C. 470. et seq., Executive Order 12072, and Executive Order 13006. Therefore, any facility project that will have an effect on cultural resources will be undertaken in accordance with that policy. (2) Any action involving the closing or other discon- tinuance of a post office shall be undertaken only in accordance with 39 U.S.C. 404(b) and 39 CFR 243.1. In the event a facility action is subject to both this section, and either the NHPA or the post office discontinuance requirements, all comment periods and other public partiCipation mailers shall be governed by those statutes. Community Relations Regulations Ce) Site selection. (1) When the de~ision is to advertise f~r sites and existing buildIngs, and after such sItes have been identified, advise local oHicials in writing of all con- tending sites, and with respect to all sites not selected, provide an explanation. This notice will advise local officials, and the community, that no decision to select a site will be made for a mini- mum of 30 days, and that comments or discus- sions of all sites are solicited. Post a copy of this letter in the lobby of the affected post office for public notice. (2)Once a specific site is then selected, notify local oHicials in writing of the selection decision. (3) Take no final action to acquire or lease the select- ed site for 30 days following the notification in parag raph (e )(2) of this section. (f) Planning, zoning, building codes. In carrying out customer service facilities projects, it is the policy of the Postal Service to comply with local planning and zoning requirements and building codes consistent with prudent business practices and uniquB postal requirements. In order to promote a partnership with local officials and assure confor- mance with local building codes, plans and drawings will bB sent to the appropriate building department or other oHicials for review. Where payment of fees is normally required of private entities, the Postal Service will give local public officials written notice of any timely, written objections or recommendations that it does not plan to adopt or implement. (g) Continuing communication. During construction, whether renovation or new con- struction, the postmaster should keep local oHicials and the community informed via letters and news releases. The postmaster and other postal oHicials should plan, conduc,t and invite the community and local officials to any "grand opening," as appropriate. Stanley F. Mires Chief Counsell Legislative. 9 ~ommunity Relations Regulations Standardized Letters Since ~he Community Relations regulations (CRR) became eHective lasl October, we have seen a drop in the number 01 real estate conflicts with local com- munities. In a continuing effort to make it easier for Facilities employees to complete the CRR proce- dures, we have created a set of standard letters to be sent to local ofiicials at particular points in the process. We expect all Real Estate specialists to use these leHers in the form provided, and to make changes only to the correct addressee (Mayor: City Manager, Supervisor, etc.) or the project-specific data as indi- cated. The bold print in each form letter indicates where such additions are to be made. Five of the enclosed standard letters (#1, 2, 2A, 3, & 4) are to be used in the CRR process beginning after the manda- tory public meeting has taken place. The sixth letter enclosed is for responding to any letters recerved as part of the CRR appeals procedure. A description of each is as follows: 10 #1 STANDARD LEITER (EXPANSION) - Fifteen days after the public meeting, the Postal Service may make its decision whether to expand, relocate, or construct a new facility. If the decision is expansion of the existing facility, this letter is sent to the ranking local official. The proj- ect can then proceed without further CRR require- ments. "Public meeting" may be correct unless it is called a "town meeting" or some other term panicular to the locale. Date is obvious. Any town should be changed to reflect the actual facility name, i.e., if it's called the Norris station or brarlch, call it the "Norris Station, in Anytown" (not necessary to include state name). Bold print beginning with by "obtaining adjacent property [or] by expanding the existing space," should be modified to briefly, but clearly, describe how the facility will be expanded. SELECT APPROPRIATE OFFICE is the local office or department thai the FSO will work with as .clans and drawings are prepared. 1\ lets the mayor know the Postal Service will continue to keep the town apprised of the expansion project. #2 STANDARD LETTER, (RELOCATION -NEW CONSTRUCTION) -AHer the public meeling, use this letter if the decision is to relocate rather than expand. The explanation as to why expan- sion Is not possible should be brief but must be stated clearly. Since this latter is also sent to the Postmaster to post on the bulletin board for a 30- day period. it is important that it be limited to one page in length. Postmaster should be shown as a flCC" on the letter. It lets the mayor know the com- munity is also being advised. The letter also con- tains a notice of appeal rights and tells the reader how 10 make an appeal. CCR requires a 1S-day turnaround for responses to appeals. An interim response is acceptable but the letter should iden- tify by what date the respondent can expect a final reply. #2A STANDARD LETTER (RELOCATION - SPLIT OPERATION WITH RETENTION OF RETAIL UNIT) -Use this letter when the existing location is to be retained but the carrier function will be relocated to another building or a new car- rier annex will be constructed. Also, note thai this letier is only one page long and advises the post- master to post the letter for 30 days as required in the CRR. #3 STANDARD LETTER -(FOR USE AFTER SITES ARE REVIEWED AND RANKED) -This letter is pretty much self-explanatory. You may revise it slightly if advertisement was for a split operation that used #2A Standard Letter. Again, the letter is limited to one page in length and asks the postmaster to post it for 30 days. On the second page of the letter, list the ranked sites and provide a brief summary of the reasons for the non-selection of each site in that group. The formal ~or this listing is at the FSO's discre- tion. SPECIAL NOTE: The flowchart for community relations compliance process provided to you lasl fall shows a 60-day time/rame while the CRR is for 30 days. This is not in error. These standard letters will use the CRR timeframe (30 days) but the flowchart time period (60 days) follows our normal 60-day tlmeframe for the IGN lelier. #4 STANDARD LEITER (FINAL SITE SELEC- TION) -This letter is addressed to the local offi- cial and advises which site has been selected for the new facility. Note that the postmaster must be sent a copy of the Jetter, but the postmaster is not required to post it Communit'} Relations Regulations FORMAT FOR RESPONSE TO APPEAL LET- TERS -An appeal may be made by either local officials or members of the community at the tol- lowing decision points in the CRR: 1. decision to adver1ise 2. when sites have been identitied 3. final site selecflon The first two opportunities are available both to local officials and to the community at large. The third opportunity for appeal is available only to local offi- cials. The FSO, as a representative of the Vice President, Facilities, will respond to all appeal lelters. Please use the enclosed sample format. Make certain the "cc~ to the Facilities Vice President is shown at the bottom of all letters, and fOrNard copies of each letter 10 my oHice. Kindly ensure all Real Estate Specialists receive a copy of this memo for their individual use. I will expect full compliance in the use of these standard letters. If you have any questions, contact John Sorenson at (703) 526-2782. 11 12 1 STANDARD LETTER for use after the public meeting (EXPANSION) (Date -15 days after public meeting) ---.------------~----------------------~------------------------ (Date) The Honorable J. Q. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345-0123 Dear Mayor Public: This is a follow up to the recent (public meeting~), held on (date), regarding postal plans to expand operations at the (Anytown) Post Office. Postal regulations require that we keep your office advised as we consider expansion or relocation of the present office. Based on current infonnation available, we believe that the existing location can be retained and enlarged to meet our future operational requirements (SELECT ONE OR BOTH -by obtaining adjacent property at a reasonable price, or by expanding the existing space). As plans and drawings are prepared, we will seek the assistance of your (SELECT APPROPRIATE OFFICE -planning & zoning department, planning department, building department, etc.) for continued input on this important project. Please contact me at (123/456-7890) if you have any questions. Sincerely, (RES) cc: bcc: * Postmaster District Manager Corporate Relations (others as necessary) as applicable to state Community Relations Regulations :! STANDARD LETfER for IJse after the public meeting (RELOCATJON -NEW CONSTRUCTION) (Date -15 days after public meeting) -,-------------------------------------------------------------~ (Date) The Honorable J. Q. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345-0123 Dear Mayor Public: This is a follow up to the recent (public meeting*) held on (date), regarding postal plans to expand operations at the (Anytown) Post Office. Postal regulations require that we keep your office and the local community advised as we consider expansion or reloca- tion of the present office. Due to a lack of (available land adjacent to the existing facility/available space to reconfigure the interior of the facility), the existing location cannot be expanded to meet future operational requirements. Therefore, this alternative must be eliminated from fur- ther consideration. In the near future, we plan to advertise for both an existing building and a sit~ to construct a new facility. If we find that an existing building is not suitable, then we will construct a new facility. In compliance with existing postal regulations. your office or any member of the com- munity may object to this decision within the next 30 days. Your letter should be direct- ed to Vice President, Facilities, and addressed to my attention at the address shown in this letter. A response will be provided within 15 days. Sincerely, (RES) cc: bcc: .. Postmaster -NOTICE -please date stamp and post in public lobby for 30 days then return to me. District Manager Corporate Relations (others as necessary) as applicable to state 13 14 2,1 STANDARD LEDER for use after the public meeting (RELOCATION -SPLIT OPERATION WITH RETENTION OF RETAIL UNln (Date -15 days after public meeting) (Date) The Honorable J.Q. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345-0123 Dear Mayor Public: This is a tollow up to the recent (public meeting·) held on (date), regarding postal plans to expand operations at the (Anytown) Post Office. Postal regulations require that we keep your office and the local community advised as we consider expansion or reloca- tion ot the present office. Based on current information available, we believe the existing location can be retained as the customer and retail service facility if it is possible to move the carrier operations out of this facility and to another location. In the near future, we plan to advertise for both an existing building and a site to construct a new carrier facility. If we cannot find an existing building that is suitable, then we will construct a new facility. In compfiance with existing postal regulations, your office or any member of the com- munity, may appeal this decision within the next 30 days. Your letter should be directed to Vice President, Facilities, and addressed to my attention at the address shown in this letter. A response will be provided within 15 days. Sincerely, (RES) cc: Postmaster -NOTICE -please date stamp and post in public lobby for 30 days then return to me. bcc: District Manager Corporate Relations (others as necessary) as applicable to state Communily Relations Regulations 3 STANDARD LETTER for IJse after sites are reviewed and ranked (Date) The Honorable J. Q. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345~0123 Dear Mayor Public: In my last letter dated (date), I advised that the Postal Service planned to advertise for existing buildings and sites that could serve as the new (Anytown) Post Office (or Carrier Annex, if #2A letter is used). Based on the results of the advertisement, the enclosed list of properties was reviewed by our Site Review Committee as possible locations. This list also includes properties looked at and rejected for various reasons as noted. The listing of possible sites is not in any particular order. In compliance with postal regulations, any member of the community or your office, may offer written comments on any of these properties within the next 30 days. Letters should be directed to Vice President, Facilities, and addressed to my attention at the address shown in this letter. A response will be provided within 15 days. Sincerely, (RES) Enclosure cc: Postmaster ~ NOTICE -Please date stamp and post in public lobby for 30 days then retum to me. bcc: District Manager Corporate Relations (others as necessary) 15 16 (3 Sample Letter -continued) -----------~---~------~-~-----~------~--~---------------------- SITI=S CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. SITES REJECTED FROM FURTHER REVIEW 1 . Reason for rejection 2. Reason for rejection 3. Reason for rejection 4. Reason for rejection 5. Reason for rejection Community Relations Regulations 4 STANDARD LETTER final site selection (RELOCATION -NEW CONSTRUCTION) (Date -30 days after site review letter) --------------~----------------~------------------------------- (Date) The Honorable J. Q. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345-0123 Dear Mayor Public: This is wri~en as a follow up to my previous letter dated (date) concerning selection of a new location for the new (Anytown) Post Office. After reviewing other sites, the Postal Service has decided to select the property locat- ed at (Location). We believe this new site will provide the community with an upgraded, modern facility that offers a safe working environment for our employees and a level of service expected by our customers. As provided in postal regulations, your office may offer comments to the selected loca- tion within the next 30 days. Comments should be directed to Vice President, Facilities, and addressed to my attention at the address shown in this letter. A response will be provided within 15 days. Sincerely, (RES) cc: Postmaster bcc: District Manager Corporate Relations (others as necessary) 17 LEITER FORMAT for use in responding to appeal letters (Date -within 15 days of incoming letter) -----~--~~--------~-~-----~------~-----------~---~------------- (Date) The Honorable J. O. Public Mayor, City of Anytown PO Box 123 Anytown, USA 12345-6789 (or) Mr. (or) Ms. L. Brown 101 MainSt. Anytown, USA 12345-0123 Dear Mayor Public:(or)Dear Mr. (or) Ms. Brown: I have been asked by Vice President, Facilities, to respond to the issues raised in your recent letter concerning the Anytown Post Office. (Your response to the issues.) Thank you for taking the time to address this important project. Please call me or (Project Manager) at (phone) if you have any questions. Sincerely, FSO Manager cc: Vice President, Facilities (others as appropriate) 18 Community Relations Reg ulations FACILITIES SERVICE OFFICES Facilities 4301 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 300 Arlington, VA 22203-1861 FAX: (703) 526-2701 Facilities Headquarters Field Units Atlanta Facilities Service Office Chicago Facilities Service Office Columbia Facilities Service Office Dallas Facilities Service Office DC Metro Service Office Denver Facilities Service Office Greensboro Facilities Service Office Kansas City Facilities Service Office rvemphis Facilities Service Office New York Facilities Service Office Pacific Facilities Service Office Windsor Facilities Service Office (770) 454-0640 FAX: (770) 454-0608 (312) 669-5933 FAX: (312) 669-5959 (410) 997-6247 FAX: (410) 997-6260 (214) 819-7250 FAX: (214) 819-7201 (410) 884-1812 FAX: (410) 884·1850 (303) 220-6510 FAX: (303) 220-6552 (336) 665-2800 FAX: (336) 665-2865 (913) 261-2400 FAX: (913) 831-4202 (901) 747-7330 FAX: (901) 747-7444 (201) 714-5424 FAX: (201) 217-1109 (650) 615-7227 FAX: (650) 61 5-7 218 (860) 285-7170 FAX: (860) 285-1287 19 ~I Alaska HawaiI * Faciltiy SeNice Offices (FSOs) "* Major Facilities Office (MFO) '* DC Melro Office FSOs Atlanta, GA Chicago,IL Columbia, MD Dallas, TX Denver, CO Greensboro, NC Kansas City, MO New York, NY San Bruno, CA Windsor, CT MFO Memphis, TN Puerto Rico ~ ("") I ---1 m Cf) City of Palo Alto (ID # 2510) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 9 (ID # 2510) Summary Title: SB375 Update Title: Update Regarding Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and Regional Housing Needs Methodology, Determination of Designations for Priority Development Areas, and Authorization for Letter Regarding One Bay Area Transportation Grant Criteria From:City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Direct staff not to request the VTA designation of the El Camino Real Corridor and/or Downtown as Planned Development Areas (PDAs), consistent with the recommendations of the Planning and Transportation Commission and the Regional Housing Mandate Committee; 2) Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter (Attachment A) to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) regarding the One Bay Area Transportation Grant criteria; and 3) Provide input regarding the City’s approach to the proposed Alternative Scenarios being considered for the Bay Area’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SB375), including directing staff and the Regional Housing Mandate Committee to prepare a letter to ABAG and MTC for Council approval on the Consent Calendar of March 5; and 4)Confirm Council support to retain economic consultant assistance (up to $25,000) as input to the letter and subsequent analysis of the Draft Preferred Land Use Scenario. Executive Summary The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have prepared regional Alternative Land Use Scenarios to accommodate almost 1 million new jobs and 770,000 new housing units in the Bay Area through the year 2040. This planning effort is intended to implement Senate Bill 375, which expects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by supporting higher intensity development near transit along with substantial increases in transportation investments. Those scenarios would anticipate as many as 25,000 new jobs and 12,500 new housing units in the City of Palo Alto over that time period. The Council and its Regional Housing Mandate Committee are considering the City’s response to these proposals and how to best coordinate with other cities and agencies throughout the region. Staff is working with the Committee and consultants to develop February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 9 (ID # 2510) information for the response, particularly relative to the excessively high jobs and housing projections and the minimal greenhouse gas benefits to be achieved. Staff requests input from the Council as to 1) whether to designate the El Camino Real Corridor and/or Downtown as “priority development areas” (PDAs), similar to the one that exists for the California Avenue/Fry’s area, and 2) how to respond to the MTC proposed One Bay Area Transportation Grant proposal, which focuses transportation investments in PDAs in cities that accommodate high levels of housing. Background On December 9, 2011, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) released information about the Alternative Scenarios. This information evaluates the five scenarios relative to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, and against a series of performance criteria established by the agencies. A presentation outlining that information is included as Attachment C. The City’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee has met twice since that date, most recently as its initial meeting as a “standing” committee on January 26, 2012, to review this information, as well as to consider issues regarding the proposed One Bay Area Transportation Grant criteria and potential designation of the El Camino Real corridor and Downtown as Priority Development Areas (PDAs). The Planning and Transportation Commission also considered these issues at its February 8th meeting. Discussion This report is intended to provide an update to the Council on these regional planning efforts. The Council is specifically asked to a) make a recommendation on whether the City should designate the Downtown and/or El Camino Real areas as Planned Development Areas, b) direct staff to respond to MTC regarding the updated One Bay Area Transportation Grant, and c) direct staff and the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee to prepare a response to the Alternatives Scenario for Council approval on March 5. Designation of Planned Development Areas The thrust of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is to plan most of the growth from 2010-2040 to be located in “Planned Development Areas (PDAs)” within the region, areas that typically would accommodate higher intensity development near transit stations or corridors. The City of Palo Alto has designated the California Avenue area as a PDA. Additionally, the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) indicated that all of El Camino Real and areas around transit stations, including both California Avenue and Downtown, should be considered for such designation. As the Alternative Scenarios have been developed, ABAG and MTC have included these areas (and many others in other cities) as “Growth Opportunity Areas (GOAs),” but not as official PDAs. Growth has been allocated to these GOAs under the scenarios to try to achieve a 70% allocation to transit proximate areas. February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 9 (ID # 2510) The One Bay Area Grant Transportation Program proposed by MTC would direct most transportation funding to PDAs (but not GOAs). As a result, transportation grants would not likely be available for the City in the next round (2013-15) of funding, except for the California Avenue PDA. ABAG is accepting requests from cities, however, to designate that GOAs become PDAs and therefore become eligible for grant funding (see discussion below on the One Bay Area Grants criteria). The guidelines for application require a process that is fairly complicated and may take considerable staff time. ABAG indicates, however, that all that is needed for a VTA-nominated area to be included is a resolution of a City Council to accept that designation, in this case for the El Camino Real corridor through Palo Alto. Staff believes that the designation for El Camino would generally be appropriate and would help the City to obtain funds for improvements, such as for the Charleston/Arastradero/El Camino intersection, and little work would be required to apply, primarily preparing a resolution for Council adoption. Staff is concerned, however, that the resolution that would in some way imply that the City concurs with the allocation of housing and jobs specified by any of the alternatives for the corridor, and there is no assurance that the agencies would not direct even further growth to the corridor based on such designation (while the opposite may be true if not designated). Staff believes that there is likely to be little need for transportation grants for Downtown, other than perhaps at the Transit Center, which is likely to remain under consideration as it serves a regional purpose, not specific to Palo Alto. The downside concern about these designations is that such an action could bring even further increases in housing and jobs allocations to these areas. Staff does not believe this is likely to be the case, because ABAG and MTC have already treated them like PDAs in the alternative distributions. There is some likelihood, however, that if these areas are not designated, those figures would be reduced. The housing allocations to each of the City’s PDAs and GOAs are listed in Attachment E as follows (ranges of the three primary intensity scenarios) through 2040: ·California Avenue: 798 –2,362 households ·University Avenue/Downtown: 1,250 –3,595 households ·El Camino Real: 1,565 –5,384 households The Planning and Transportation Commission and the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee have both recommended that the City not request designation of either the El Camino Real Corridor or Downtown as PDAs. The draft minutes of the PTC and Committee and included as Attachments L and M, respectively. The staff reports to the two bodies are not attached, but are very similar to this report and are available online. One Bay Area Transportation Grant Criteria On November 7, 2011, Council approved a letter to the MTC noting the City’s concerns and objections regarding the proposed One Bay Area Transportation Grant Criteria. In particular, the City suggested: a) that a certified Housing Element should not be prerequisite to eligibility for transportation grants, and b) that some of the criteria (complete streets, housing programs, etc.) were vague and should be clarified and simplified. On January 13, 2012, MTC issued a response and revised recommendations (Attachment B). The agency agreed to simplify some of February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 9 (ID # 2510) the requirements, though still somewhat vague, but has retained the prerequisite to obtain a “certified” Housing Element from the State as eligibility for grant funding. The letter also indicates that a city would need to provide a “nonbinding letter of intent” that it will make a good faith effort to implement the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) through its housing element and zoning. These two stipulations remain objectionable to staff (and, we believe, to many other cities). The “certified” housing element provision assumes some level of acquiescence to the levels of housing allocations outlined in the Alternative Scenarios of the SCS (which has not yet been determined), and vests tremendous authority to the State’s Housing and Community Development (HCD) Department to determine the fate of transportation funding. ABAG has noted that, at least for the upcoming (2013-2015) cycle of grants, the housing element compliance would be for the current (2007-2014) planning period (72% of ABAG region cities currently have compliant housing elements, though Palo Alto does not). The “statement of intent” is also problematic, particularly since no one knows what consistency with the SCS will mean. ABAG and MTC note that this commitment will not be required until the Preferred Scenario has undergone extensive review, but staff is concerned that the request for projects pursuant to the grant program will be issued in the summer of fall of this year, ahead of any adoption of a final plan. Staff has drafted a response (Attachment A) from Council to the MTC Board continuing to object to these provisions. The Santa Clara County Association of Planning Officials is also preparing a letter as an entity to MTC with similar objections. Response to Alternative Land Use Scenarios Attachment C outlines in presentation form (by ABAG) the status of the alternative scenarios process and the regional agencies’ recent evaluation of the effectiveness of the various alternative scenarios regarding GHG emissions reductions. Attachment D provides a tabular summary of the evaluation, as well as the effectiveness of each in addressing a number of other environmental, transportation, and social criteria. Attachment E shows the impacts of the five scenarios on each city and county in the Bay Area, as well as a county-by-county summary. Attachment E further breaks down the Santa Clara County numbers to provide specifics for the City of Palo Alto, indicating projections for the California Avenue, Downtown, and El Camino areas of focus, and implying that any other development slated for Palo Alto would be outside of those boundaries. As staff determined in the Initial Vision Scenario, a considerable amount of the proposed intensity under most scenarios would need to fall in areas typified by single- family residential development or already built out business parks, with less than desirable access to transit. Staff has commented on a form provided by ABAG for responses in the next couple of weeks. We noted the highly unrealistic expectations of these scenarios, although the “Outward Growth” option is considerably more attainable regarding housing allocations. The form, however, was too general to be meaningful. The agencies expect to present a draft “Preferred Scenario” to their joint planning committee on March 9th. The scenario will become the basis for a draft Sustainable Communities Strategy for the region. The Preferred Scenario is likely to be released in May and then would be open to comment from all jurisdictions and the public February 21, 2012 Page 5 of 9 (ID # 2510) through the end of the year. A final SCS plan is expected to be adopted in early 2013. Staff believes that, while not necessary, the City should provide comments to ABAG and MTC prior to the March 9th date if possible. The comments would focus on: a) the regional demographic and employment forecasts; and b) the minimal impacts of the alternatives on greenhouse gas emission reductions. a.Regional Demographic and Employment Forecasts The Council’s “Regional Housing Mandate” Committee (which also includes one member of the PAUSD Board) continues to question the basis for ABAG’s estimate of Bay Area jobs and housing needs. ABAG has estimated that the region will accommodate approximately 33,000 new jobs per year through 2040, as compared to only 10,000 jobs per year that have been created over the past 20 years. Housing need is then estimated as a function of the jobs projection (ABAG’s methodology is included in Attachment I). Councilmember Schmid’s analysis of the excessive jobs and housing growth projections is included as Attachment H. On February 7, 2012, staff attended a session at ABAG regarding the demographic and economic projections, presented by three economists, one of which was Steven Levy of Palo Alto and Stanford. Mr. Levy’s slide presentation is included as Attachment G. He spoke to the national jobs projection and the Bay Area region’s portion over time, and his reasoning that the region would do well over the next 30 years, based on its prominent role in economic sectors (technology, health care, entertainment, etc.) that will be leaders in job growth. The other speakers focused on the housing issue, including an indication that the housing numbers will be reduced by approximately 70,000 units regionwide to reflect the inventory of foreclosed homes. Staff continues to believe, however,that the projections are “aspirational” rather than realistic, and that a Sustainable Communities Scenario should not be based on unrealistic expectations that will make it less likely to achieve the desired goals. Staff has retained an economic consultant (see below) to help compile this information into a letter to ABAG and MTC. b.Greenhouse Gas Reductions The ABAG/MTC analysis of the Alternative Scenarios outlined in Attachments C (page 8) and D indicates that the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions expected by the three primary Alternative Scenarios range from 9.4% (Core Concentration) to 7.9% (Outward Growth) through 2040, all well shy of the 15% target for the SCS. The agencies also estimated that a combination of transportation policy initiatives (driving behavior, bicycle/pedestrian networks, vanpools, electric vehicle strategies, telecommuting, parking pricing, etc.) could provide approximately 6.5% additional emissions reductions, generally making up the gap for any of the land use alternatives. Additionally, the extent of GHG emission reductions expected from the land use scenarios is close to negligible in terms of compliance with the State’s AB32 emission reduction goals. Attachment K is a chart, prepared by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) staff, which indicates that only 4% of the AB32 goals are addressed by SB375 (see below discussion regarding the CCTA letter). Staff believes that the differences between the three land February 21, 2012 Page 6 of 9 (ID # 2510) use scenarios (1.5%) is not significant and certainly not worth the cost and consternation associated with substantial changes in city and county land use control. c.Response by Contra Costa Transportation Authority The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) has prepared a letter to ABAG and MTC (staff report and letter included as Attachment J) that focuses on the two issues (projections and GHG emission reductions) of particular concern to Palo Alto. Staff notes that the CCTA letter (and one of the attached letters from a city) references the analysis of Councilmember Schmid regarding the demographic and economic projections. The letter also addresses a number of area-specific concerns within that county that are not of particular relevance to Palo Alto. EPS Consultants, Inc. provided support to CCTA staff in reviewing the ABAG and MTC information and preparing the letter to the agencies, including the GHG emissions reductions chart included as Attachment K. Staff has retained EPS to assist Palo Alto and has invited them to participate in the meeting with the Regional Housing Mandate Committee on February 23rd. While initially operating under subcontract to MGroup, the City’s consultant for the SCS/SB375 project, staff believes it will be necessary to provide further funding to produce the letter in a timely manner and to assist with follow-up regarding the more specific impacts on Palo Alto. Staff recommends that Council support to allocate $25,000 for this consultant assistance. Staff will attempt to shift work priorities and funding to accommodate this expense now, but will then need to provide an additional amount in the FY2012 budget to address deferred priorities. d.City of Palo Alto Response Staff anticipates that, at Council direction, a letter to ABAG and MTC could be prepared in time for the March 5, 2012 Council meeting, after review by the Regional Housing Mandate Committee (RHMC), to be provided to the agencies ahead of their meeting on March 9th. Many of the elements of the CCTA letter could form the basis for a City of Palo Alto letter.It is unlikely that the Planning and Transportation Commission could review the letter in a timely way, though staff will try to provide it to them and at least will involve Commissioner Fineberg, who has been appointed a liaison to the RHMC. Staff expects that the letter will, at a minimum, include the following topics: ·Emphasis on the City’s policies and accomplishments regarding transit-oriented development, affordable housing and transportation efforts; ·The overstatement of projected jobs and housing producing unrealistic scenarios; ·The minimal difference in the greenhouse gas emissions benefits between the land use scenarios and the costs associated with significant land use changes; ·A recommendation to consider an alternative scenario with lower projections, in conjunction with transportation policy initiatives, and leaving flexibility for local jurisdictions to provide further means of reducing land use/transportation related emissions. Staff also expects to present the City’s letter to the other cities in Santa Clara County and to VTA staff at the March 7th Planning Directors’ meeting, and to request formal support from interested agencies, if not the group as a whole. Staff is encouraged by the letter and communications that we’ve had with the CCTA staff, and also recently with the Transportation February 21, 2012 Page 7 of 9 (ID # 2510) Authority of Marin, and hope that other cities, counties and transportation agencies will begin to speak out more about concerns similar to Palo Alto’s. Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) The RHNA Housing Methodology Committee has not met in a few months and will not meet again until March 8, 2012. Councilmember Scharff is a member of that group. It appears likely that the Committee will suggest that the RHNA figures be established to relate directly to the Preferred SCS Alternative housing figures, i.e., 1/3 of the total for each of three 8-year planning periods. However, it also appears that there may be a considerable reduction in housing needs, at least for the first housing planning period (2015-2022), given the economy. Staff has also requested of ABAG and the Committee that Stanford campus housing be excluded from the City’s total. For the 2007-2014 planning period, this request was made after numbers were already near final, and only a concerted effort by the City in cooperation with the County and Stanford resulted in a reduction of over 600 units from the City’s allocation. The County has also made a similar request that such an adjustment be made up front in this process prior to draft numbers being distributed to cities and counties, which is currently scheduled for May. Public and Political Outreach Staff has developed a draft issues paper (Attachment L) regarding this subject, and expects to supplement the information with input from the economic consultant. The Council and staff will then coordinate with other local elected officials and State legislators to develop a strategy for responses to fundamental assumptions regarding the regional planning effort. The Committee has directed staff to work with other cities and agencies to determine if similar support exists to provide a coalition of jurisdictions to make such a request through State legislators. The PAUSD will participate in the Committee meetings, though a member has not yet been appointed (Bob Golton attended the last meeting, however). The Planning and Transportation Commission has appointed Susan Fineberg as a liaison to the Council Committee to coordinate efforts of the PTC on this issue. ABAG and MTC have sponsored recent public workshops, purportedly to review the Alternative Scenarios. However, the sessions have been largely disrupted by some “no-government, property rights” advocates so that they have not been productive. Staff has attended two of the workshops (and Commissioner Keller attended one) and found that, even without the disruption, the materials presented were not focused enough to stimulate meaningful input. Staff has recently sent MTC “virtual workshop” materials to Palo Alto Neighborhoods and other community members, though the survey is very generalized in nature, with few specifics about the alternative scenarios or the impacts on specific cities. Other contact points and methods are welcomed by staff to extend outreach about the planning effort. Next Steps Staff will continue to work with the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee, Council as a whole, and the Planning and Transportation Commission to coordinate a City and countywide or broader response to the Alternative Scenarios outlined by ABAG and MTC, with a target of February 21, 2012 Page 8 of 9 (ID # 2510) March 5th to return to Council with a draft letter to the agencies. The regional agencies plan to present a “Preferred Scenario” to the ABAG/MTC committee on March 9th, and the committee is scheduled to release a draft “Preferred Scenario” by May. It appears that the RHNA process will result in draft allocations concurrent with the Preferred Scenario release. Policy Implications The input and outcome of the Sustainable Communities Strategy relate directly to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, zoning, and transportation policies, so that a key objective of the City is to assure that the regional plan continues to allow for implementation of those goals, policies, and codes. Resource Impacts Staff, in particular the Planning Director (approximately 20 hours per month) and one Senior Planner (approximately 12 hours per month), is spending considerable time following the many meetings and activities associated with the Sustainable Communities Strategy and the One Bay Area Transportation Grant process. Staff has used M-Group, a local planning group, to prepare some materials and provide outreach to other agencies, under a $25,000 contract authorized by Council. Staff foresees the need for an additional $25,000 for economic consultant services to provide input to the City’s response to the Alternative Scenarios and follow-up regarding the specific impacts and options for the City. That funding would need to be accommodated by rearranging current work priorities, and then addressing deferred tasks in the FY2012 budget. Environmental Review No environmental review is necessary by the City. An Environmental Impact Report is expected to be prepared by ABAG and MTC once a Preferred Scenario is outlined. Attachments: ·Attachment A: Draft Letter to MTC re: One Bay Area Grant (PDF) ·Attachment B: One_Bay_Area_Grant_Update_01.13.2012 (PDF) ·Attachment C: Alternative Scenarios Presentation_ABAG_December.2011 (PDF) ·Attachment D: Scenario Analysis Overview (PDF) ·Attachment E: SCS All Scenarios Comparison: All Cities(PDF) ·Attachment F: SCS All Scenarios Comparison: CITY OF PALO ALTO (PDF) ·Attachment G: Steven Levy_Feb_7.2012_Presentation (PDF) ·Attachment H: Councilmember Schmid_Demographic Forecasting in California_11.03.2011 (PDF) ·Attachment I: November 1, 2010 Memo Re: ABAG Employment Forecasting Model (PDF) ·Attachment J: Contra Costa Transportation Authority Board Letter_02.01.2012 (PDF) ·Attachment K: GHG Reduction Chart_CCTA (PDF) ·Attachment L: Key Issues Paper -January 25, 2012 (PDF) February 21, 2012 Page 9 of 9 (ID # 2510) ·Attachment M: February 8, 2012 Planning and Transportation Commission Draft Excerpt Minutes (PDF) ·Attachment N: January 26, 2012 Regional Housing Mandate Committee Draft Minutes (PDF) Prepared By:Curtis Williams, Director Department Head:Curtis Williams,Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager DRAFT February 23, 2012 Adrienne Tissier, Chair and Commission Members Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 Re: One Bay Area Grant Proposal Dear Chair Tissier and Commission Members: Thank you for the opportunity for the City of Palo Alto to provide input to the updated (January 13, 2012) version of the One Bay Area Grant program proposed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).As you may know, the City of Palo Alto has a strong record of leadership in providing facilities and programs to encourage alternative transportation options, often in partnership with MTC, the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), and the Joint Powers Board of Caltrain. The proposed One Bay Area Grant program criteria, however, would significantly deter the City of Palo Alto (and other cities) from advancing such programs and projects in the future, contrary to the intent of the One Bay Area planning and transportation goals. Two provisions of the program criteria, however,are highly objectionable and should be modified to assure that innovative and effective transportation programs may be proposed by local jurisdictions and remain eligible for funding: 1.Housing Element Prerequisite: Requiring a “certified”Housing Element as prerequisite to eligibility is problematic and premature. Certification of a Housing Element involves many complexities and is subject to a highly discretionary approval process by a State agency (the Department of Housing and Community Development)that is often not responsive to local concerns. Such a requirement would vest a tremendous amount of authority with HCD to determine the fate of a city’s or county’s transportation funds. Further,the Regional Housing Needs Allocation will be based on a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that has not yet been approved, so it is inappropriate to require compliance with a process that has not been finalized and the implications of which are unknown. The City of Palo Alto requests that Housing Element certification be eliminated as a prerequisite to grant funding, and that either no connection to the Housing Element be required or at most that it be limited to “approval” of a Housing Element, rather than HCD “certification.” MTC: One Bay Area Grant Page 2 2 2.Non-binding Resolution of Intent: The proposed prerequisites now include a “non- binding resolution of intent” to align a city’s RHNA, PDAs, and zoning consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). Such a resolution is again premature, given that the SCS will not be adopted until early 2013, while the grant application process will be underway later this year. The City of Palo Alto suggests that such a guideline be postponed until the next cycle of funding, at which time all cities, counties and CMAs will better understand the implications of a resolution. Alternatively, MTC should allow the CMAs to work with their respective jurisdictions to satisfy that there is substantial consistency between a city’s or county’s policies and regulations and the objectives of the SCS. The City of Palo Alto continues to support the program’s Complete Streets policy approach (with further guidance) and the focus of transportation investments in PDAs. We do, however, strongly recommend that transportation investments should be targeted to Growth Opportunity Areas (GOAs) as well, since these areas also are proximate to transit and typically are linked to PDAs in some fashion (particularly for the El Camino Real corridor in Palo Alto). Without the availability of grant funding, resources will not be available to implement important programs and projects of benefit to the City and the region. Many of the City’s past projects have been examples of MTC’s support for innovation and leadership in transportation, including: ·Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan: The City is completing its updated plan to accommodate enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs, and to elevate the City’s Bicycle-Friendly Community status from Gold to Platinum level. ·Stanford Avenue/El Camino Real Intersection Improvements: The City has recently completed improvements at this intersection to enhance safety for pedestrians and cyclists, including children who use the intersection as a route to school, and to upgrade the aesthetic qualities of the intersection and of El Camino Real. We expect the project will serve as a template for improving intersections throughout the Grand Boulevard corridor. ·Safe Routes to School: The City’s Safe Routes to School program has resulted in a phenomenal increase in school children bicycling and walking to school over the past decade. In the 2011 fiscal year, City staff coordinated 140 in-class bike and pedestrian safety education programs in 12 elementary schools, reaching 4,250 students. Recent surveys of how children usually get to elementary school showed an average of 42% choosing to walk, bike or skate to school, compared to a national average of only 13% (figures for middle schools and high schools are even greater). A recent grant will allow the City to prepare Safe Routes maps for every elementary school in the city as well as to expand our education curriculum into middle schools and to adults. ·Traffic Calming on Residential Arterials: The City has an ambitious traffic calming program along “residential arterials”in efforts to support our Safe Routes to School program. In particular, the Charleston Road-Arastradero Road Corridor project has provided substantial safety improvements and selective lane reductions to enhance bicycling and walking while maintaining efficient levels of vehicle throughput similar to those prior to the traffic calming improvements. MTC: One Bay Area Grant Page 3 3 ·Bike Parking Corrals: The City has recently installed the first green “bicycle parking corral” in the Bay Area, providing for up to 10 bicycle parking spaces in a highly visible, signed on-street area in downtown,replacing one vehicle parking space. Up to a dozen more such installations are planned in the downtown and California Avenue areas. ·California Avenue Streetscape Improvements: A pending grant would support the substantial upgrade of California Avenue to a more pedestrian and bicycle-friendly roadway, incorporating “complete street” principles, and also enhancing access to the California Avenue Caltrain station. ·Local Shuttles: The City, with some support from the Caltrain JPB,offers local shuttle services for commuters, school children, seniors and others between points of interest within the city. These shuttles further reduce the need for single-occupant vehicle trips and reduce traffic congestion and parking needs. Thank you for your consideration of these issues and suggestions. The City of Palo Alto hopes to remain at the forefront of continuing efforts to facilitate programs to encourage transit, bicycle, and pedestrian use in the Bay Area, and believes it is essential that the One Bay Area Grant process support those efforts as outlined above. If you have questions, please feel free to contact Curtis Williams, the City’s Director of Planning and Community Environment, at (650) 329-2321 or curtis.williams@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Yiaweh Yeh Mayor City of Palo Alto cc:City Council Planning and Transportation Commission James Keene, City Manager Ezra Rapport, ABAG Steve Heminger, MTC John Ristow, VTA BayArea =a TO: MTC Planning Committee 1 ABAG Administrative Committee FR: Deputy Executive Director, Policy, MTC Executive Director, ABAG II DATE: 1113 /2012 RE: Update on Proposed OneBayArea Grant -Cycle 2 STP/CMAQ Funding Background The OneBayArea Grant (OBAG) represents a significant step toward integrating the region's federal transportation program and its land-use and housing policies by: • Rewardingjurisdictions that accept housing allocations and produce housing with additional transportation dollars. • Supporting the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for the Bay Area by promoting transportation investments in priority development areas (PDAs) and by initiating a pilot program in the North Bay Counties that will support open space preservation in priority conservation areas (PCAs). • Increasing funding levels and eliminating program silos for greater local investment flexibility. Staff presented the OneBayArea Grant proposal to the MTC Planning Committee 1 ABAG Administrative Committee on July 8, 2011. At that meeting, the committee directed that staff release the proposal for public review. That initial proposal can be downloaded from the MTC website at http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/onebayarea/. Since then MTC has received numerous comment letters from stakeholders, transportation agencies and local jurisdictions. Staff has given presentations to the Bay Area Partnership working groups, Policy Advisory Council, ABAG Executive Board, ABAG Planning Committee, Regional Advisory Working Group, and the Regional Bicycle Working Group, as well as at various workshops in conjunction with the Plan Bay Area development. Stakeholder Response to OBAG Proposal Attachment A lists the comtnent letters received to date. The letters are available at the website referenced above with numbering consistent with the comment reference numbers in the attachment. Overa 11, the comments are supporti ve of several key elements of the program proposa I, including greater program flexibility, increased funding subject to local priority-setting, and financial rewards for accepting Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) commitments. Comments Requesting Material Changes to Initial OBAG Proposal: 1. Priority Development Areas: There is support for lowering the proposed requirement that 70% of funding to each county be used to fund projects in PDAs, and providing more flexibility with respect to the use of these funds, particularly for counties with relatively few existing PDAs. In contrast, several stakeholder groups and the MTC Policy Advisory Council support retaining the 70% requirement. Because many noted that project benefits to PDAs are not just from those Planning Committee Memo -Update on Proposed OneBayArea Grant Page 2 of 4 projects funded directly within the PDA limits, comment letters recommended allowing projects that support or provide benefit to PDAs count towards the PDA requirements. There were requests to exempt certain OBAG program eligibility categories from the PDA requirements, such as streets and roads rehabilitation, regional bicycle, and Safe Routes to School. A reason cited was that transportation needs do not always align geographically with PDAs. 2. Priority Conservation Areas: Some comments cal.1 for expanding the eligible use of PCA funding beyond planning purposes in order to fund capital projects such as farm-to-market and open space access needs. Additional comments call for expanding the regional pilot program eligibility beyond the four North Bay counties. 3. Low Income Housing and Protections for Communities of Concern: Comments recommend modifying the OBAG funding formula to reward jurisdictions that zone for or produce low income housing units. In addition, some stakeholders also cited the need for policies that will prevent displacement of low-income residents, which was noted as a potentially unintended outcome of new housing and transportation investments in PDAs. 4. Performance and Accountabi lity: In the areas of performance and accountabil ity, many comments asked for more flexibility, such as reasonable progress toward, instead offinal approval of, required policy actions, in the first round of OBAG funding. The reason cited was limited time and staff resources to enact new policies in the timeframe proposed. 5. Regional Program: We received requests to continue funding the Safe Routes to School Program (SR2S) as a regional program within the Climate Initiatives Program since the implementation of SR2S at the county level is uneven throughout the region. Recommended Program Revisions As a result of the input received and continued regional agency dialogue, staff recommends that the Committee consider significant revisions to the July 8, 20 II proposal, as outlined in the presentation slides (Attachment B) and explained more fully below. Staff proposes to increase the OneBayArea Grant from the initial $211 million funding level to $250 million. The increase comprises $39 million in federal funds, with $3 million directed specifically to preserve the "hold harmless" provision for Marin, Napa and Solano Counties, after accounting for Cycle I planning and SR2S funds. The funding distribution is also revised to reflect the formula changes discussed below to reward jurisdictions for very-low and low-income housing units. Attachment C provides the revised funding levels and distribution amounts. I. Priority Development Areas • Increase PDA Flexibility: Staff recommends reducing the requirement that at least 70% of investments be directed to the PDAs to 50% for the four North Bay counties (Marin, Napa, Solano, and Sonoma) as there are relatively fewer PDA opportunities in these counties. Further, staff recommends that for all counties a project outside of a PDA count towards the PDA minimum if it directly connects to or provides proximate access to a PDA. However, staff does not recommend exempting certain programs or using different formulas to address any single program investment as this would run counter to the flexibility of the OneBayArea grant. • Strengthen Planning Integration: While an entire county is rewarded ftnancial Iy if its individual jurisdictions accept housing to meet RHNA targets, there is a need to ensure that RHNA, PDAs, and supporting zoning policies are effectively aligned. Therefore, staff PlalU1ing Committee Memo -Update on Proposed OneBayArea Grant Page 3 of 4 recommends that all jurisdictions receiving OBAG funding be required to pass a non-binding resolution of intent to align these three elements. Staff also recommends that CMAs prepare and adopt a PDA development strategy to guide transportation investments that are supportive of PDAs. Specific requirements will be developed as part of the next round of planning agreements between MTC and the CMAs. • Clarify Eligibility for Programs: Staff is proposing to clarify that both pedestrian and all bicycle facilities would be eligible for OBAG funding and CMA planning costs would partially count towards PDA targets (50% or 70%), in line with its PDA funding requirement. 2. Pll0rity Conservation Areas (PCAs) • Focus on North Bay through Competitive Pilot Program: Staff recommends that the $5 million pilot program continue to be limited to the North Bay Counties and be conducted as a regional competitive program. However, eligibility would be expanded from planning to land / easement acquisition, farm-to-market capital projects, and open space access projects. • Leverage Additional Funding: A priority for these funds should be to paxtner with state agencies and private foundations to leverage outside funds for these projects, particularly for land acquisition and open space access. ABAG and MTC would pursue these leveraging opportunities. 3. Low-Income/Workforce Housing • Reward counties for low-income/workforce housing production: Staff recommends revising the funding formula to recognize the importance of planning for and producing very low and/or low-income housing by directing 25% in total, or 50% of the housing share, to very low and low-income housing production and RHNA share. 4. Performance and Accountability • Streamline Requirements: Staff recommends streamlining the performance and accountability requirements in recognition of the considerable lead time required to implement these requirements. Jurisdictions will need to be in compliance with the Complete Streets Act of2008 by July 1,2013 to be eligible for OBAG funds. Staff will work with jurisdictions to develop a strategy for meeting this timeline that considers individual jurisdiction's general plan update schedules. MTC will also revise its Complete Streets Policy to ensure that public review and input for projects occurs early enough to better inform CMA project selection. • Retain Housing Element Requirement: Staff recommends no change to the proposal that a jurisdiction be required to have its general plan housing element adopted and approved by HCD for 2007-14 RHNA prior to July 1,2013. Attachment D summarizes current compliance, with 72% of Bay Area jurisdictions already meeting this requirement. 5. Regional Programs: Within the Climate Initiatives program, the SR2S Program would be continued as a regional program with $10 million being distributed to the counties to be used only for that purpose. Staff proposes that the remaining $10 million be used for electric vehicle infrastructure and other climate strategies. Staff is also proposing a new regional $30 million pilot Transit Performance Initiative Program to implement transit supportive investments in major transit corridors. Finally, within the regional TLC Program, $15 million would be directed to PDA planning grants with a special focus on selected PDAs with greater potential for residential displacement, and to develop and implement community risk reduction plans. Planning Committee Memo -Update on Proposed OneBayArea Grant Page 4 of 4 Next Steps Based on the Committee's direction at this meeting, staff will modify the proposal and return to the Committee in March 2012 to present the draft program policies. The Commission will then consider approval of the final OneBayArea Grant Program in May 2012. Throughout this process, staff will continue to seek further feedback from stakeholder and technical working groups. The OBAG development schedule will continue to be coordinated with the activities leading to approval of the Plan Bay Area preferred alternative which are italicized in the schedule below: an ay OBAG/PI B A rea D eve opment S h d I c e u e • Outreach / Define preferred scenario • Joint Planning I ABAG Administrative Committee to review initial January 2012 responses and potential revisions to address major comments for the One Bay Area Grant • Release guidance for applying project pelformance assessment results to the February 2012 Plan Bay Area investment strategy • Release revised Draft Cycle2 One Bay Area Grant proposal March 2012 • Release preliminary preferred scenario for Plan Bay Area (includes investment strategy) • Commission Approves Cycle 2 One Bay Area Grant May 2012 • MTC / ABAG approves preferred scenario for Plan Bay Area Ann Flemer Attachments J:\COMMITTE\Planning Committee\20 12\JanuaryI2\One Bay Area Grant\OneBayArea Granl.doc Scenario Results MTC Planning Committee and ABAG Administrative Committee December 9, 2011 Where we are in the SCS process:  Adopted Performance Targets (Jan 2011)  Approved Scenario Definitions (July 2011)  Reviewed Project Performance Results (Nov 2011)  Develop Scenario Details/Test Target Results (Dec 2011)  Public Workshops/Tradeoff Discussions (Jan 2012)  Develop/Approve Preferred SCS (Feb – May 2012)  Release/Adopt SCS/SCS EIR (Nov 2012 – Apr 2013) 2 Five Scenarios 1. Initial Vision  Transportation 2035 2. Core Concentration  Core Transit Capacity 3. Focused Growth  Core Transit Capacity 4. Constrained Core Concen.  Core Transit Capacity 5. Outward Growth  Transportation 2035 All scenarios focus growth as compared to past trends There is no business as usual scenario Performance target results highlight areas where policy is needed 3 Land Use Scenarios 4 1 Initial Vision Scenario – As defined in Spring 2011 2 Core Concentration – Concentrates housing and job growth at selected Priority Development Areas (PDAs) along the core transit network. 3 Focused Growth – Recognizes the potential of PDAs throughout the region with an emphasis on major transit corridors. 4 Constrained Core Concentration – Concentrates housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network. 5 Outward Growth – Higher levels of growth in inland areas of the Bay Area; closer to past trends. Examples of Significant Projects Tested Roadway Regional Express Lanes Network Freeway Performance Initiative San Mateo and Santa Clara ITS Fremont-Union City East-West Connector I-680/Rt 4 Interchange Impvts. + SR-4 Widening Marin-Sonoma Narrows Stage 2 Jameson Canyon Impvts. Phase 2 SR-29 HOV Lanes + BRT New SR-152 Alignment I-80 Auxiliary Lanes (Airbase to I-680) Transit AC Transit Grand Mac-Arthur BRT Irvington BART Infill Station Alameda-Oakland BRT + Transit Access Impvts. AC Transit East Bay BRT I-680 Express Bus Frequency Impvts. Caltrain 6-Train Service + Electrification (SF to Tamien) Van Ness Ave. BRT SMART (San Rafael-Larkspur) BART Extension from Berryessa to San Jose/Santa Clara Fairfield/Vacaville Capitol Corridor Station Transportation 2035 Network 5 Starts with the 2010 transit and roadway network Keeps investment levels for maintenance, transit and roadway expansion, and bike/pedestrian at roughly same levels as in T2035 Tests T2035 projects proposed to be carried over into Plan Bay Area Considers project performance assessment results Examples of Significant Projects Tested (includes most T2035 Network projects) Roadway SR-84/I-680 Interchange Impvts + SR-84 Widening Bay Bridge Contraflow Lane US-101 HOV Lanes (Whipple Ave to Cesar Chavez St) Transit BART Metro Program Dumbarton Corridor Express Bus BART Bay Fair Connection BART to Livermore Phase 1 Golden Gate Ferry Service Frequency Impvts. SFMTA Transit Effectiveness Better Market Street Geneva Ave BRT and Southern Intermodal Terminal Parkmerced Light Rail Corridor Oakdale Caltrain Station SamTrans El Camino BRT VTA El Camino BRT Service Frequency Impvts. on AC Transit, Muni, ferries, BART, and Caltrain Pricing Congestion Pricing Pilot (NE Quadrant) Treasure Island Congestion Pricing Core Capacity Transit Network 6 Starts with the 2010 transit and roadway network Keeps T2035 investment levels for maintenance and bike/pedestrian, but reduces roadway expansion and boosts core capacity transit service Tests most T2035 Network projects and includes a 46 percent increase in transit frequency impvts. from 2010 network (at a total 28-year operating and capital cost of $53 billion) Not financially constrained due to cost of transit frequency impvts. exceeding available revenue Only $15 billion of the needed $53 billion is available ($10 billion in operating efficiencies per TSP and $5 billion in new revenue) Considers project performance assessment results SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets The Air Resources Board established per capita reduction targets for passenger vehicle and light- duty truck emissions relative to a 2005 baseline (excludes vehicle or clean fuel regulations) Bay Area’s target for 2020 is a 7 percent reduction Bay Area’s target for 2035 is a 15 percent reduction 7 8 Each of the five scenarios exceeds the 2020 target. The year 2035 result exceeds, in each scenario, the year 2020 result. The last time we spoke … Year 2035, Current Regional Plans: -10.6 percent Year 2035, Initial Vision Scenario: -11.6 percent And now … Year 2035, Initial Vision Scenario: -8.2 percent Model version 0.1 instead of version 0.0 (~2 pct points) Additional 100,000 employed residents (~1 pct point) Transit network built from 2010 rather than 2005 (~¼ pct point) No headway improvements made to transit network (~¼ pct point) Minor differences in roadway and transit capital projects 9 10 Scenario Population Households Employed Residents Jobs Year 2010 7,150,000 2,610,000 3,150,000 3,270,000 (1) Year 2035, Initial Vision 9,430,000 3,570,000 4,310,000 4,490,000 (2) Year 2035, Core Concentration 9,180,000 3,470,000 4,270,000 4,490,000 (3) Year 2035, Focused Growth 8,980,000 3,280,000 3,860,000 4,100,000 (4) Year 2035, Constrained Core Concentration 8,980,000 3,280,000 3,860,000 4,100,000 (5) Year 2035, Outward Growth 8,980,000 3,280,000 3,860,000 4,100,000 Why is there so little variation among GHG emission reductions? Q: 11 Workers travel more than non- workers. Because a larger share of the population works in scenarios 1 & 2, the GHG per capita number is misleadingly low relative to scenarios 3, 4, & 5. The GHG per worker metric illuminates these differences. 12 Q: What is the impact of transport? T-2035 network performs slightly worse on GHG relative to the no build Core capacity network performs slightly better on GHG relative to the no build 1.The Bay Area has a mature transportation system that we are investing heavily to maintain.  Do not expect to see dramatic shifts, even with large expenses on transit frequency improvements 2.Generally speaking, the greenhouse gas emissions subject to this analysis are a function of … … the amount of passenger vehicle travel; and, … the speed of the traveling vehicles.  Roadway projects can relieve heavy congestion, which is good for GHG, but also allow vehicles to travel at faster speeds, which can be bad for GHG. 13 14 Generally speaking, vehicles perform optimally at around 45 mph and perform well between 30 and 60 mph. 15 In Scenario 2, transit boardings increase by over 100 percent relative to 2005. 16 But transit, along with the other non-automobile travel modes, are still expected to be utilized for less than 20 percent of all trips. Initiative Per-Capita CO2 Emissions Reductions (2035) Smart Driving Campaign1 (changing driver behavior to improve fuel economy; ~$27 m over 5 yrs) 1.4% Bicycle Network (build out of the regional bike network; ~$2,200 m over 28 yrs) 0.5% Safe Routes to Schools/ Pedestrian Network (expansion of the SR2S and a continued TLC program; $500 m over 5 yrs) 0.3% Vanpool Incentives (significant increase in the monetary incentive; ~$37 m over 10 yrs) 0.9% Electric Vehicle Strategy (consumer incentives, education, and charger installations to accelerate EV adoption; ~$170 m over 10 yrs) 1.0% Commuter Benefit Ordinance (mandatory pre-tax transit passes or employer operated shuttles; admin cost) 0.3% Telecommuting (no specific policies identified at this time) 1.4% Parking Pricing (modest pricing throughout the region with higher pricing near transit; meter & enforcement cost) 0.7% TOTAL 6.5% Policy Initiatives 17 1Source: Sivak, M., and Schoettle, B., "Eco-Driving: Strategic, Tactical, and Operational Decisions of the Driver that Improve Vehicle Fuel Economy", UMTRI-2011-34, August 2011 18 Target Performance: Scenarios 1 2 3a 3b 3c 4 5 TARGET GOAL BEST RESULT WORST RESULT Carbon Dioxide (CO2) per capita -15% -9% -8% Adequate Housing 100% 100% 98% Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (premature deaths due to emissions) -10% -32% -23% Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) (tons of particulate emissions; includes road dust) -30% -13% -6% Particulates in CARE Communities (achieve greater reductions) Yes Collisions (fatalities & injuries) -50% +18% +26% Active Transport (time spent walking/biking) +70% +20% +10% 19 6 7 8 9a 9b 10a 10b 10c TARGET GOAL BEST RESULT WORST RESULT Open Space/Ag. Preservation (development within urban footprint) 100% 98% 90% Low-Income H+T Affordability (for households less than $60,000) -10% -4% +9% Gross Regional Product (GRP) +90% +134% +113% Non-Auto Mode Share 26% 20% 18% VMT per capita -10% -7% -5% Local Road Maintenance (PCI) +19% +5% +5% Highway Maintenance (distressed lane-miles) -63% +30% +30% Transit Maintenance (assets past their useful life) -100% +138% +138% 20 Bay Area Economic Forecast: 2035 Gross Regional Product (in billions) $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Year 2035 Initial Vision (Scenario 1) $1,126 $1,142 $1,036 $1,039 $1,038 Year 2035 Core Concentration (Scenario 2) Year 2035 Focused Growth (Scenario 3) Year 2035 Constrained Core Conc. (Scenario 4) Year 2035 Outward Growth (Scenario 5) TARGET 90% GROWTH $487 Year 2005 21 Equity Analysis: Overview 1 2 3 4 5 MEASURE POPULATION BASE- YEAR BEST RESULT WORST RESULT Housing + Transportation Affordability % of income spent HH < $30K 77% +10% +12% HH > $30K 41% +6% +6% Displacement Risk rent-burdened households at risk for displacement from future growth COC n/a 30% 40% REMAINDER n/a 7% 10% VMT Density Daily VMT on major roads COC n/a 2,800 3,100 REMAINDER n/a 1,000 1,100 Non-Commute Travel Time COC 12 +3% +6% REMAINDER 13 +2% +5% Commute Time COC 25 +8% +12% REMAINDER 27 +2% +6% 1.Land use patterns with higher levels of focused growth in the region’s core tend to perform better. 2.Performance varies only slightly across scenarios because all of the scenarios represent different approaches to focused growth. 3.Transportation policy is critical to building complete communities. However, the transportation scenarios have little direct impact on GHG reduction regionwide. 4.We will likely need to assess further land use, transportation-related, and other policy measures to meet the GHG and other targets. 5.Equity Analysis  Scenario assessment identifies areas that require further regional and local policy consideration. 22 Key Takeaways Next Steps  Adopted Performance Targets (Jan 2011)  Approved Scenario Definitions (July 2011)  Reviewed Project Performance Results (Nov 2011)  Developed Scenario Details/Tested Target Results (Dec 2011)  Public Workshops/Tradeoff Discussions (Jan 2012)  Develop/Approve Preferred SCS (Feb – May 2012)  Release/Adopt SCS/SCS EIR (Nov 2012 – Apr 2013) 23 HOW WERE THE SCENARIOS DEFINED AND HOW DO THEY DIFFER? In June 2011, MTC and ABAG approved five alternative Plan Bay Area land use and transportation scenarios for evaluation and testing to demonstrate how the region might achieve a set of performance targets for the environment, the economy and social equity (see inside for details). These scenarios place varying degrees of growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs), which are defined as land near public transit that local officials have determined to be most suitable for development. Likewise, the scenarios recognize Priority Conservation Areas, places local officials have deemed worth keeping undeveloped for farm land, parks or open space. The first two scenarios assume stronger economic growth and financial resources, along with a higher level of housing growth to meet forecasted demand. The remaining three scenarios fall somewhat short of meeting future housing demand but reflect input received from local jurisdictions on the level of growth they think can reasonably be accommodated. SCENARIO ANALYSIS1. Reduce per-capita CO2 emissions from cars and light-duty trucks by 15% SB 375 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to set targets for reducing emissions from cars and light-duty trucks. CARB adopted this target for use in Plan Bay Area; the target results are based on a measurement of pounds of carbon dioxide emissions from passenger vehicles for a typical weekday, on a per-person basis. 2. House 100% of the region’s projected 25-year growth by income level (very-low, low, moderate, above-moderate) without displacing current low-income residents SB 375 requires regions to plan for housing all projected population growth, by income level, to prevent growth in in-commuting. This target’s results reflect the percentage of year 2035 total housing demand that can be accommodated in the nine-county Bay Area. Only the first two scenarios are able to meet this target, as they assumed higher in-region population levels. In the other three scenarios, some households must live outside the Bay Area (particularly in the San Joaquin County) and commute into the region for employment. 3a. Reduce premature deaths from exposure to fine particulates (PM2.5) by 10% The Bay Area currently does not meet the federal standard for fine particulate matter, which is extremely hazardous to health. The targeted reduction for PM2.5 reflects the expected benefit from meeting the federal standard. This target’s performance was assessed by Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) staff; their analysis considers the impacts of fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions, as well as NOx emissions that produce secondary PM2.5. Note that all direct PM2.5 emissions from vehicles were considered, but road dust and brake/tire wear were not included. 3b. Reduce coarse particulate emissions (PM10) by 30% The Bay Area currently does not attain the state standard for coarse particulate matter. The targeted reduction for PM10 is consistent with the reduction needed to meet the state standard and achieve key health benefits. The target results reflect tailpipe emissions and road dust from all vehicles, but do not include coarse particulates from brake and tire wear. 3c. Achieve greater particulate emission reductions in highly impacted areas A “Yes” rating for this target means that highly impacted areas achieve greater reductions in particulate emissions than the rest of the region. The target assessment identified CARE communities as “highly impacted areas”; CARE communities are defined by BAAQMD as lower-income communities in the Bay Area with high levels of particulate emissions from roads and ports. 4. Reduce by 50% the number of injuries and fatalities from all collisions (including bike and pedestrian) This target is adapted from the State’s 2006 Strategic Highway Safety Plan and reflects core goals of improving safety and reducing driving. The target measures the total number of individuals injured or killed in traffic collisions, regardless of transport mode. 5. Increase the average daily time walking or biking per person for transportation by 70% (for an average of 15 minutes per person per day) This target relates directly to U.S. Surgeon General’s guidelines on physical activity, for the purposes of lowering risk of chronic disease and increasing life expectancy. The target results are based on the average time spent walking or biking on a typical weekday, only for transportation purposes (i.e. does not include recreational walking or biking). 6. Direct all non-agricultural development (100%) within the urban footprint (existing urban development and urban growth boundaries) SB 375 requires consideration of open space and natural resource protection, which supports accommodating new housing and commercial development within existing areas of urban growth. The intent of this target is to support infill development while protecting the Bay Area’s agriculture and open space lands. By focusing on areas with existing urban development, as well as areas specifically selected for future growth by local governments, the target seeks to avoid both excess sprawl and elimination of key resource lands. The target results are based on the percentage of total housing units located within the year 2010 urban footprint (defined as existing areas of development, as well as areas within existing urban growth boundaries). 7. Decrease by 10% the share of low-income and lower- middle income residents’ household income consumed by transportation and housing This target aims to bring Bay Area housing and transportation costs in line with the national average, as the region’s costs are currently significantly higher than the rest of the country. The target focuses on cost impacts for low-income and lower-middle income residents (with household income less than $60,000 in year 2000 dollars). 8. Increase gross regional product (GRP) by 90% — an average annual growth rate of approximately 2% (in current dollars) This target is a key indication of the region’s commitment to advance Plan Bay Area in a manner that supports economic growth and competitiveness. Growth patterns and transportation investments in the scenarios affect travel time, cost and reliability. The Plan Bay Area Economic Impact Assessment, developed by consultant Cambridge Systematics, reflects on the cost of on-the-clock travel and access to labor, suppliers, and markets. Any resulting increases in productivity make the region more competitive for attracting new businesses and jobs; this increases employment and wages, which are also reflected in the GRP target. 9a. Increase non-auto mode share by 10% Mode share can be interpreted as the percent of trips made by a particular travel mode (walk, bike, drive, etc.); this target reflects the Plan Bay Area goal of reducing trips made using automobiles. The target benefits from service and infrastructure improvements for the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. The numeric target shown in the table reflects the resulting 10% mode share increase from the forecasted 2005 non-auto mode share of 16%. This updated target language has been proposed to replace the previously adopted non-auto travel time reduction target. 9b. Decrease automobile vehicle miles traveled per capita by 10% Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita reflect both the total number of auto trips and the average distance of auto trips; this target would be supported by increased transit service, more opportunities for active transportation, and reduced travel distances between origins and destinations. Given significant traffic congestion in the region, it is critical to reduce VMT per person. The target results are based on model output for total auto vehicle miles traveled and are adjusted based on the total population for the relevant scenario. 10a. Increase local road pavement condition index (PCI) to 75 or better The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) reflects the quality of the roadway surface – the more cracks and potholes form, the lower the Pavement Condition Index. The target reflects a goal of reaching a state of good repair on local roadways, which form the backbone of the transportation network in Priority Development Areas (i.e. key areas for focused growth in the Plan). 10b. Decrease distressed lane-miles of state highways to less than 10% of total lane-miles This target’s performance is based on anticipated state funding for highway maintenance. The region must maintain the existing highway infrastructure in order to support the goals of Plan Bay Area. 10c. Reduce share of transit assets exceeding their useful life to 0% This target reflects a goal of replacing all transit assets on-time (i.e. at the end of their useful life); failure to do so would result in unreliable transit service. As frequent, reliable transit service is critical to support focused growth, this target reflects the need to maintain existing transit service in a state of good repair. This updated target language has been proposed to replace the previously adopted average transit asset age target. 2 1 Initial Vision Core Concentration 3 Focused Growth 4 ConstrainedCore Concentration 5 OutwardGrowth Housing and job growth is concentrated in the PDAs, based on local land use priorities, available transit service, and access to jobs. The scanario is based on input from local jurisdictions on the level of growth they can reasonably accommodate given resources, local plans, and community support. 70 percent of the housing would be accommodated in PDAs. More than half of job growth is expected to occur in the region’s 10 largest cities. Housing and job growth is concentrated in locations that are served by frequent transit services and within a 45-minute transit commute of Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose. Also identifies several “game changers,” or places with capacity for a high level of growth if coupled with supportive policies and resources. These areas include the Tasman Corridor in Santa Clara County, lands east of Oakland Airport to the Coliseum, the Concord Naval Weapons Station, and the San Francisco Eastern Waterfront, among others. Overall, 72 percent of the housing and 61 percent of the job growth is expected within the PDAs. Distributes growth most evenly throughout the region’s transit corridors and job centers, focusing most household and job growth within the PDAs. 70 percent of the housing production and around 55 percent of the employment growth would be accommodated within PDAs. Provides more housing near transit stations and more local services in existing downtown areas and neighborhood centers. Places more household and job growth in those PDAs situated along several transit corridors ringing the Bay in San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, and in portions of Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Some 79 percent of the housing production and 58 percent of the employment growth would be accommodated within PDAs. By concentrating more growth in the major downtowns and along key transit corridors, this scenario goes even further than the Focused Growth scenario in trying to maximize the use of the core transit network and provide access to jobs and services to most of the population. Closer to recent development trends, places more growth in the cities and PDAs in the inland areas away from the Bay than those considered in the Focused Growth or the Constrained Core Concentration scenarios. Most housing and employment growth would still be accommodated in areas closest to the Bay, but with clusters of jobs and housing in key transit- served locations in the inland areas away from the Bay. Some 67 percent of housing production and 53 percent of employment growth would be in PDAs. While increased use of public transit would be limited in inland areas, some shorter commutes could be expected as jobs are created closer to residential communities. Transportation 2035 Plan Network – Investment strategy in MTC’s adopted long-range transportation plan. Core Capacity Transit Network – Increases transit service frequency along the core transit network Core Capacity Transit Network – See description above. Core Capacity Transit Network – See description above. Transportation 2035 Plan Network – See description above. SCENARIOS LAND USE PATTERN TRANSPORTATION NETWORK WHAT ARE THE TARGETS AND HOW ARE THEY MEASURED? -8% -8% -9% -9% -8% -23% -27% -32% -32% -31% -6% -9% -13% -13% -11% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +15% +20% +14% +15% +10% 100% 100% 98% 98% 98% 98%131% 92%134% 92%113% 92%113% 113%90% 19% 20% 19% 19% 18% +30% +30% +30% +30% +30% +138% +138% +138% +138% +138% +26% +23% +19% +18% +20% -4% +8% +9% +9% +9% -6% -6% -6% -7% -5% 1 2 3 4 5 Initial Vision Core Concentration Focused Growth ConstrainedCore Concentration OutwardGrowth CLIMATE PROTECTION ADEQUATE HOUSING HEALTHY & SAFE COMMUNITIES OPEN SPACE & AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION EQUITABLE ACCESS ECONOMIC VITALITY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Reduce CO2 emissions per person from cars and light- duty trucks House projected regional growth Reduce premature deaths from exposure to fine particulate emissions Reduce coarse particulate emissions Achieve greater particulate emissions reduction in highly- impacted areas Reduce injuries and fatalities from all collisions Increase the average daily time walking or biking per person Direct new non- agricultural development within urban footprint Increase Gross Regional Product (GRP) Increase non-auto mode share Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per person Improve local road pavement condition index (PCI) Reduce share of distressed state highway lane-miles Reduce share of transit assets exceeding their useful life TARGETS SCORECARD -15%100%-10%-30%Yes -50%+70%100%-10%+90%26%-10%+19%-63%-100%NUMERIC GOALS* SCENARIOS TARGETSScenarios were assessed to determine their impacts on the Bay Area. This table shows how each scenario performs with regard to the adopted Plan Bay Area performance targets. * Percent changes reflect differences between 2005 and 2035 conditions.** Alternate target used.Target results shown with white stripes signify that result is going in the wrong direction with respect to the adopted target. DECEMBER 2011 1 2 3a 3b 3c 4 5 6 7 8 9a 9b 10a 10b 10c**** Reduce housing and transporta- tion costs as share of low-income households’ budgets 0 0 0 0 -63% +63%-150% +150%-15% 0 0 100%-40% 0 -30% 0 -50% +50%0 70%0 100%-10% +10%0 +140%0 26%-10% 0 0 +19% Cities_HH County Jurisdiction 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)IVS Core Concentration Focused Growth Constrained Core Outward Growth Alameda Alameda 6,864 5,664 31,774 39,873 8,099 40,710 8,936 30,123 48,117 17,994 35,935 5,812 36,924 6,801 35,843 5,720 7.19 8.50 6.34 6.52 6.33 Alameda Albany 1,150 818 7,150 9,317 2,167 9,517 2,367 7,401 8,742 1,341 8,356 955 8,356 955 8,356 955 11.64 10.69 10.22 10.22 10.22 Alameda Berkeley 6,775 5,100 46,146 61,876 15,730 63,317 17,171 46,029 59,414 13,385 54,399 8,370 54,399 8,370 54,399 8,370 12.42 11.65 10.67 10.67 10.67 Alameda Dublin 7,976 6,670 15,572 32,216 16,644 35,130 19,558 14,913 33,676 18,763 28,724 13,811 25,813 10,900 30,691 15,778 5.27 5.05 4.31 3.87 4.60 Alameda Emeryville 788 585 5,770 13,260 7,490 14,187 8,417 5,694 12,310 6,616 10,929 5,235 11,351 5,657 10,931 5,237 24.24 21.03 18.67 19.39 18.68 Alameda Fremont 49,265 27,451 71,004 98,564 27,560 104,274 33,271 71,004 113,484 42,480 88,385 17,381 90,095 19,091 86,504 15,500 3.80 4.13 3.22 3.28 3.15 Alameda Hayward 28,094 16,119 46,300 61,283 14,982 65,057 18,757 45,365 64,952 19,587 60,842 15,477 60,842 15,477 60,842 15,477 4.04 4.03 3.77 3.77 3.77 Alameda Livermore 15,259 12,561 28,662 40,801 12,138 43,340 14,677 29,134 41,639 12,505 40,347 11,213 38,254 9,120 41,683 12,549 3.45 3.32 3.21 3.05 3.32 Alameda Newark 8,822 7,590 13,530 19,331 5,802 20,042 6,513 12,972 20,098 7,126 18,774 5,802 18,774 5,802 18,774 5,802 2.64 2.65 2.47 2.47 2.47 Alameda Oakland 36,029 26,867 160,567 226,019 65,453 232,163 71,597 153,791 232,800 79,009 211,512 57,721 212,510 58,719 200,004 46,213 8.64 8.66 7.87 7.91 7.44 Alameda Piedmont 1,078 847 3,810 3,820 10 3,820 10 3,801 3,850 49 4,428 627 4,428 627 4,428 627 4.51 4.54 5.23 5.23 5.23 Alameda Pleasanton 14,138 11,275 24,034 33,819 9,785 35,759 11,725 25,245 35,902 10,657 32,626 7,381 31,542 6,297 33,584 8,339 3.17 3.18 2.89 2.80 2.98 Alameda San Leandro 8,471 6,916 31,647 40,447 8,800 41,427 9,780 30,717 43,405 12,688 37,836 7,119 37,836 7,119 37,836 7,119 5.99 6.28 5.47 5.47 5.47 Alameda Union City 12,363 8,285 20,420 25,900 5,480 27,309 6,889 20,433 25,022 4,589 24,982 4,549 24,982 4,549 24,597 4,164 3.30 3.02 3.02 3.02 2.97 Alameda Alameda County Unincorporated 278,707 201,372 51,265 63,872 12,606 66,483 15,218 48,516 64,205 15,689 60,056 11,540 56,783 8,267 60,961 12,445 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.28 0.30 Contra Costa Antioch 17,695 13,843 32,668 46,365 13,697 48,066 15,398 32,252 41,046 8,794 39,143 6,891 38,600 6,348 41,993 9,741 3.47 2.97 2.83 2.79 3.03 Contra Costa Brentwood 7,542 6,353 18,250 24,284 6,034 25,532 7,282 16,494 22,913 6,419 24,651 8,157 22,994 6,500 26,116 9,622 4.02 3.61 3.88 3.62 4.11 Contra Costa Clayton 2,468 2,131 3,966 4,090 124 4,119 153 4,006 4,654 648 4,538 532 4,538 532 4,538 532 1.93 2.18 2.13 2.13 2.13 Contra Costa Concord 19,417 15,812 46,296 65,624 19,328 69,530 23,234 44,278 73,749 29,471 61,558 17,280 61,018 16,740 68,899 24,621 4.40 4.66 3.89 3.86 4.36 Contra Costa Danville 11,560 9,378 16,574 17,920 1,346 18,202 1,628 15,420 17,350 1,930 18,299 2,879 18,054 2,634 18,515 3,095 1.94 1.85 1.95 1.93 1.97 Contra Costa El Cerrito 2,350 1,806 10,422 20,905 10,483 21,135 10,713 10,142 13,744 3,602 11,985 1,843 12,272 2,130 11,985 1,843 11.70 7.61 6.64 6.79 6.64 Contra Costa Hercules 4,195 3,063 8,361 17,431 9,070 18,186 9,825 8,115 14,173 6,058 12,768 4,653 12,768 4,653 12,999 4,884 5.94 4.63 4.17 4.17 4.24 Contra Costa Lafayette 9,811 7,441 9,589 11,068 1,479 11,356 1,767 9,223 11,532 2,309 10,868 1,645 10,719 1,496 11,000 1,777 1.53 1.55 1.46 1.44 1.48 Contra Costa Martinez 8,606 5,905 14,769 16,156 1,387 16,214 1,445 14,287 15,371 1,084 16,836 2,549 16,591 2,304 17,052 2,765 2.75 2.60 2.85 2.81 2.89 Contra Costa Moraga 5,928 5,524 5,811 6,995 1,184 7,227 1,416 5,570 6,656 1,086 6,673 1,103 6,576 1,006 6,758 1,188 1.31 1.20 1.21 1.19 1.22 Contra Costa Oakley 8,201 7,114 10,835 17,508 6,673 18,239 7,404 10,727 14,393 3,666 14,595 3,868 14,474 3,747 22,704 11,977 2.56 2.02 2.05 2.03 3.19 Contra Costa Orinda 8,111 6,779 6,868 8,788 1,920 8,929 2,061 6,553 7,861 1,308 7,529 976 7,490 937 7,563 1,010 1.32 1.16 1.11 1.10 1.12 Contra Costa Pinole 3,403 2,639 7,336 12,623 5,287 13,134 5,798 6,775 8,509 1,734 9,408 2,633 8,909 2,134 10,536 3,761 4.98 3.22 3.57 3.38 3.99 Contra Costa Pittsburg 10,714 7,775 20,849 36,261 15,412 38,162 17,313 19,527 28,257 8,730 29,724 10,197 28,871 9,344 30,374 10,847 4.91 3.63 3.82 3.71 3.91 Contra Costa Pleasant Hill 4,505 3,570 15,247 17,861 2,614 18,216 2,969 13,708 17,070 3,362 19,479 5,771 18,201 4,493 20,609 6,901 5.10 4.78 5.46 5.10 5.77 Contra Costa Richmond 19,357 12,682 37,897 63,439 25,542 65,681 27,784 36,093 56,884 20,791 48,346 12,253 48,346 12,253 48,232 12,139 5.18 4.49 3.81 3.81 3.80 Contra Costa San Pablo 1,634 1,284 9,975 13,027 3,052 13,387 3,412 8,761 11,786 3,025 11,108 2,347 11,108 2,347 10,620 1,859 10.42 9.18 8.65 8.65 8.27 Contra Costa San Ramon 7,520 6,188 22,061 36,682 14,621 39,247 17,186 25,284 30,737 5,453 33,378 8,094 29,476 4,192 34,367 9,083 6.34 4.97 5.39 4.76 5.55 Contra Costa Walnut Creek 12,785 8,439 33,890 40,244 6,354 40,996 7,106 30,443 37,547 7,104 37,777 7,334 34,208 3,765 38,901 8,458 4.86 4.45 4.48 4.05 4.61 Contra Costa C.C. County Unincorporated 320,507 191,685 61,016 69,382 8,366 70,315 9,299 57,706 69,256 11,550 67,629 9,923 67,027 9,321 68,154 10,448 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.36 Marin Belvedere 388 254 949 969 20 969 20 928 963 35 988 60 988 60 988 60 3.82 3.80 3.90 3.90 3.90 Marin Corte Madera 2,050 1,183 3,948 4,721 773 4,888 940 3,793 4,454 661 4,354 561 4,161 368 4,434 641 4.13 3.77 3.68 3.52 3.75 Marin Fairfax 1,410 1,167 3,301 3,361 60 3,371 70 3,379 3,419 40 3,616 237 3,616 237 3,616 237 2.89 2.93 3.10 3.10 3.10 Marin Larkspur 1,986 1,249 8,036 8,377 341 7,750 -286 5,908 6,607 699 6,436 528 6,436 528 6,519 611 6.21 5.29 5.16 5.16 5.22 Marin Mill Valley 3,018 1,931 6,267 6,631 364 6,709 442 6,084 6,574 490 6,588 504 6,588 504 6,588 504 3.47 3.40 3.41 3.41 3.41 Marin Novato 17,819 9,188 20,375 21,153 778 21,350 975 20,279 21,964 1,685 21,878 1,599 21,853 1,574 21,884 1,605 2.32 2.39 2.38 2.38 2.38 Marin Ross 1,011 832 780 790 10 790 10 798 809 11 867 69 867 69 867 69 0.95 0.97 1.04 1.04 1.04 Marin San Anselmo 1,721 1,294 5,310 5,370 60 5,380 70 5,243 5,323 80 5,653 410 5,653 410 5,653 410 4.16 4.11 4.37 4.37 4.37 Marin San Rafael 10,767 6,503 23,164 28,209 5,045 28,319 5,155 22,764 27,850 5,086 25,556 2,792 25,262 2,498 26,764 4,000 4.35 4.28 3.93 3.88 4.12 Marin Sausalito 1,227 717 4,310 4,400 90 4,420 110 4,112 4,298 186 4,391 279 4,373 261 4,407 295 6.17 6.00 6.13 6.10 6.15 Marin Tiburon 2,918 1,508 3,844 4,242 398 4,305 461 3,729 4,155 426 4,032 303 4,032 303 4,032 303 2.85 2.76 2.67 2.67 2.67 Marin Marin County Unincorporated 291,592 155,293 26,162 28,900 2,738 28,247 2,085 26,193 29,078 2,885 30,110 3,917 29,483 3,290 30,704 4,511 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 Napa American Canyon 2,604 2,094 5,761 7,392 1,632 7,428 1,667 5,657 6,826 1,169 7,402 1,745 7,347 1,690 7,670 2,013 3.55 3.26 3.53 3.51 3.66 Napa Calistoga 1,709 1,485 2,140 2,171 31 2,180 40 2,019 2,178 159 2,140 121 2,134 115 2,146 127 1.47 1.47 1.44 1.44 1.44 Napa Napa 11,548 8,729 29,440 32,019 2,579 32,569 3,130 28,166 31,925 3,759 31,328 3,162 30,830 2,664 31,769 3,603 3.73 3.66 3.59 3.53 3.64 Napa St. Helena 3,122 2,825 2,440 2,533 93 2,551 111 2,401 2,551 150 2,517 116 2,518 117 2,518 117 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.89 0.89 Napa Yountville 920 607 1,110 1,230 120 1,239 129 1,050 1,237 187 1,201 151 1,153 103 1,224 174 2.04 2.04 1.98 1.90 2.02 Napa Napa County Unincorporated 484,471 353,058 10,370 10,716 346 10,754 384 9,583 10,300 717 10,576 993 10,414 831 10,718 1,135 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 San Francisco San Francisco 30,112 19,077 346,680 436,794 90,114 452,093 105,413 345,811 472,534 126,723 436,278 90,467 456,454 110,643 422,240 76,429 23.70 24.77 22.87 23.93 22.13 San Mateo Atherton 3,251 2,909 2,490 2,580 90 2,600 110 2,330 2,685 355 2,729 399 2,729 399 2,729 399 0.89 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.94 San Mateo Belmont 2,942 2,176 10,740 12,759 2,019 12,986 2,246 10,575 12,521 1,946 11,962 1,387 11,962 1,387 11,962 1,387 5.97 5.75 5.50 5.50 5.50 San Mateo Brisbane 2,112 1,526 1,730 5,324 3,594 5,659 3,929 1,821 4,777 2,956 3,403 1,582 3,403 1,582 2,116 295 3.71 3.13 2.23 2.23 1.39 San Mateo Burlingame 2,864 2,188 13,247 19,431 6,184 20,096 6,850 12,361 17,663 5,302 16,289 3,928 16,289 3,928 16,289 3,928 9.18 8.07 7.44 7.44 7.44 San Mateo Colma 1,253 1,091 460 1,372 912 1,392 932 564 2,894 2,330 1,085 521 1,173 609 774 210 1.28 2.65 0.99 1.08 0.71 San Mateo Daly City 4,925 3,496 31,261 43,095 11,834 45,048 13,787 31,090 45,543 14,453 38,559 7,469 38,559 7,469 36,792 5,702 12.89 13.03 11.03 11.03 10.53 San Mateo East Palo Alto 1,616 1,125 7,780 12,310 4,530 12,773 4,993 6,940 10,133 3,193 9,990 3,050 9,990 3,050 9,990 3,050 11.36 9.01 8.88 8.88 8.88 San Mateo Foster City 2,616 1,842 12,210 13,767 1,557 14,027 1,817 12,016 14,289 2,273 13,683 1,667 13,683 1,667 13,683 1,667 7.61 7.76 7.43 7.43 7.43 San Mateo Half Moon Bay 4,133 3,334 4,440 4,730 290 4,779 339 4,149 4,775 626 4,851 702 4,851 702 4,851 702 1.43 1.43 1.46 1.46 1.46 San Mateo Hillsborough 3,943 3,513 3,837 4,589 752 4,737 900 3,693 4,507 814 4,513 820 4,513 820 4,292 599 1.35 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.22 San Mateo Menlo Park 6,524 3,521 12,432 17,563 5,130 18,057 5,625 12,347 15,616 3,269 15,395 3,048 15,395 3,048 14,795 2,448 5.13 4.44 4.37 4.37 4.20 San Mateo Millbrae 2,082 1,660 8,308 12,910 4,602 13,208 4,900 7,994 12,476 4,482 10,172 2,178 10,881 2,887 10,172 2,178 7.95 7.51 6.13 6.55 6.13 San Mateo Pacifica 7,971 4,231 14,320 14,600 280 14,649 329 13,967 14,680 713 15,073 1,106 15,073 1,106 15,073 1,106 3.46 3.47 3.56 3.56 3.56 San Mateo Portola Valley 5,865 4,011 1,730 1,780 50 1,790 60 1,746 1,864 118 1,989 243 1,989 243 1,989 243 0.45 0.46 0.50 0.50 0.50 San Mateo Redwood City 13,182 7,118 29,620 41,032 11,412 42,267 12,648 27,957 41,834 13,877 37,027 9,070 38,470 10,513 36,234 8,277 5.94 5.88 5.20 5.40 5.09 San Mateo San Bruno 3,563 2,664 15,262 21,699 6,437 22,531 7,269 14,701 21,452 6,751 19,370 4,669 19,370 4,669 18,925 4,224 8.46 8.05 7.27 7.27 7.10 San Mateo San Carlos 3,603 2,875 11,909 15,707 3,798 16,157 4,248 11,524 14,758 3,234 13,926 2,402 13,926 2,402 13,863 2,339 5.62 5.13 4.84 4.84 4.82 San Mateo San Mateo 7,910 5,614 38,643 56,678 18,035 59,074 20,431 38,233 55,539 17,306 50,038 11,805 50,038 11,805 48,360 10,127 10.52 9.89 8.91 8.91 8.61 San Mateo South San Francisco 6,023 4,643 20,288 30,522 10,234 31,648 11,360 20,938 31,897 10,959 27,242 6,304 28,548 7,610 28,365 7,427 6.82 6.87 5.87 6.15 6.11 San Mateo Woodside 7,542 6,105 2,029 2,059 30 2,069 40 1,977 2,201 224 2,284 307 2,284 307 2,284 307 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.37 San Mateo San Mateo County Unincorporated197,384 103,271 21,780 23,830 2,050 24,049 2,269 20,914 27,861 6,947 26,825 5,911 26,825 5,911 26,000 5,086 0.23 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.25 Santa Clara Campbell 3,641 2,836 16,892 21,002 4,110 21,609 4,717 16,163 20,311 4,148 19,107 2,944 19,107 2,944 19,048 2,885 7.62 7.16 6.74 6.74 6.72 Santa Clara Cupertino 6,962 5,377 19,830 21,588 1,758 21,910 2,080 20,181 22,440 2,259 24,141 3,960 24,141 3,960 24,141 3,960 4.08 4.17 4.49 4.49 4.49 Santa Clara Gilroy 10,247 8,881 14,330 22,118 7,788 23,329 8,999 14,175 22,772 8,597 20,616 6,441 19,882 5,707 21,265 7,090 2.63 2.56 2.32 2.24 2.39 Santa Clara Los Altos 4,079 3,408 10,670 11,968 1,298 12,150 1,480 10,745 11,940 1,195 12,902 2,157 12,902 2,157 12,902 2,157 3.56 3.50 3.79 3.79 3.79 Santa Clara Los Altos Hills 5,457 4,714 3,053 3,088 35 3,108 55 2,829 3,070 241 3,557 728 3,557 728 3,557 728 0.66 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.75 Santa Clara Los Gatos 6,958 5,272 12,430 13,151 721 13,287 857 12,355 13,632 1,277 14,688 2,333 14,688 2,333 14,688 2,333 2.52 2.59 2.79 2.79 2.79 Santa Clara Milpitas 8,812 6,753 19,030 38,758 19,728 42,096 23,066 19,184 44,837 25,653 31,991 12,807 31,991 12,807 31,991 12,807 6.23 6.64 4.74 4.74 4.74 Santa Clara Monte Sereno 1,025 929 1,229 1,269 40 1,279 49 1,211 1,329 118 1,515 304 1,515 304 1,515 304 1.38 1.43 1.63 1.63 1.63 Santa Clara Morgan Hill 7,547 6,385 12,399 20,040 7,641 21,140 8,741 12,326 19,518 7,192 16,479 4,153 16,146 3,820 21,088 8,762 3.31 3.06 2.58 2.53 3.30 Santa Clara Mountain View 7,774 5,750 32,114 50,348 18,234 52,407 20,293 31,957 46,505 14,548 44,415 12,458 47,079 15,122 42,976 11,019 9.11 8.09 7.72 8.19 7.47 Santa Clara Palo Alto 15,469 7,796 26,705 38,692 11,987 40,633 13,928 26,493 37,835 11,342 38,743 12,250 38,743 12,250 32,600 6,107 5.21 4.85 4.97 4.97 4.18 Santa Clara San Jose 112,699 81,984 305,087 435,585 130,498 456,367 151,279 301,366 493,121 191,755 432,253 130,887 434,400 133,034 417,871 116,505 5.57 6.01 5.27 5.30 5.10 Santa Clara Santa Clara 11,741 9,752 43,403 67,672 24,269 71,032 27,629 43,021 75,243 32,222 64,150 21,129 67,276 24,255 63,366 20,345 7.28 7.72 6.58 6.90 6.50 Santa Clara Saratoga 7,788 6,792 11,000 11,118 118 11,145 145 10,734 11,259 525 12,983 2,249 12,983 2,249 12,983 2,249 1.64 1.66 1.91 1.91 1.91 Gross Acres Net Acres Housing Density 2040 (Households per Net Acre)Outward Growth 2010 (U.S. Census) Core Concentraion Constrained Core ConcentrationFocused GrowthInitial Vision Page 1 Cities_HH County Jurisdiction 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)2040 Growth (2010-2040)IVS Core Concentration Focused Growth Constrained Core Outward GrowthGross Acres Net Acres Housing Density 2040 (Households per Net Acre)Outward Growth 2010 (U.S. Census) Core Concentraion Constrained Core ConcentrationFocused GrowthInitial Vision Santa Clara Sunnyvale 14,028 10,328 54,170 73,425 19,255 75,943 21,773 53,384 73,911 20,527 70,165 16,781 70,165 16,781 70,165 16,781 7.35 7.16 6.79 6.79 6.79 Santa Clara S.C. County Unincorporated 606,579 433,768 31,604 37,991 6,386 38,660 7,055 28,080 35,529 7,449 38,564 10,484 35,619 7,539 41,168 13,088 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 Solano Benicia 10,084 6,205 11,329 13,527 2,198 13,707 2,378 10,686 11,931 1,245 11,878 1,192 11,872 1,186 12,121 1,435 2.21 1.92 1.91 1.91 1.95 Solano Dixon 4,331 3,808 5,617 8,222 2,605 8,458 2,841 5,856 7,237 1,381 7,537 1,681 7,244 1,388 7,796 1,940 2.22 1.90 1.98 1.90 2.05 Solano Fairfield 23,932 19,853 36,061 52,476 16,415 53,556 17,495 34,484 44,945 10,461 47,003 12,519 46,447 11,963 48,903 14,419 2.70 2.26 2.37 2.34 2.46 Solano Rio Vista 4,507 3,992 3,540 4,737 1,197 5,012 1,472 3,454 5,200 1,746 5,358 1,904 4,878 1,424 5,781 2,327 1.26 1.30 1.34 1.22 1.45 Solano Suisun City 2,579 1,959 9,132 10,548 1,415 10,999 1,867 8,918 10,174 1,256 10,353 1,435 10,281 1,363 10,416 1,498 5.62 5.19 5.29 5.25 5.32 Solano Vacaville 17,438 13,156 32,620 41,775 9,155 43,532 10,912 31,092 39,493 8,401 36,408 5,316 36,028 4,936 41,042 9,950 3.31 3.00 2.77 2.74 3.12 Solano Vallejo 21,159 14,692 42,043 47,814 5,771 48,844 6,801 40,559 49,868 9,309 46,200 5,641 46,046 5,487 46,336 5,777 3.32 3.39 3.14 3.13 3.15 Solano Solano County Unincorporated 484,961 404,052 7,817 8,677 860 8,778 961 6,709 9,514 2,805 7,885 1,176 7,699 990 8,049 1,340 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Sonoma Cloverdale 1,672 1,322 3,211 4,639 1,428 4,901 1,690 3,182 4,484 1,302 4,227 1,045 4,138 956 4,270 1,088 3.71 3.39 3.20 3.13 3.23 Sonoma Cotati 1,202 998 2,832 3,387 555 3,419 587 2,978 3,220 242 3,449 471 3,434 456 3,520 542 3.43 3.23 3.46 3.44 3.53 Sonoma Healdsburg 2,490 2,019 4,390 5,284 894 5,474 1,084 4,385 5,717 1,332 5,355 977 5,234 856 5,462 1,084 2.71 2.83 2.65 2.59 2.71 Sonoma Petaluma 8,866 6,996 21,775 24,713 2,938 25,416 3,641 21,737 25,074 3,337 24,538 2,801 24,539 2,802 24,539 2,802 3.63 3.58 3.51 3.51 3.51 Sonoma Rohnert Park 4,155 3,154 15,718 20,395 4,677 21,052 5,333 15,808 18,934 3,126 19,019 3,211 18,676 2,868 19,302 3,494 6.67 6.00 6.03 5.92 6.12 Sonoma Santa Rosa 26,010 20,102 62,886 83,010 20,124 85,275 22,389 63,591 78,227 14,636 81,744 18,154 78,762 15,172 86,210 22,620 4.24 3.89 4.07 3.92 4.29 Sonoma Sebastopol 1,225 960 3,325 3,595 270 3,615 290 3,276 3,532 256 3,801 525 3,757 481 3,880 604 3.77 3.68 3.96 3.91 4.04 Sonoma Sonoma 1,679 1,310 4,476 5,036 560 5,159 683 4,955 5,464 509 5,474 519 5,474 519 5,474 519 3.94 4.17 4.18 4.18 4.18 Sonoma Windsor 4,299 3,372 8,884 13,809 4,925 14,004 5,120 8,962 10,548 1,586 10,325 1,355 10,305 1,335 12,901 3,931 4.15 3.13 3.06 3.06 3.83 Sonoma Sonoma County Unincorporated 965,252 845,140 60,933 67,505 6,572 68,313 7,380 56,951 65,041 8,090 65,278 8,327 64,590 7,639 65,886 8,935 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 Alameda 475,780 338,120 557,651 770,397 212,746 802,536 244,884 545,138 807,617 262,479 718,132 172,994 712,889 167,751 709,433 164,295 2.37 2.39 2.12 2.11 2.10 Contra Costa 486,310 319,410 392,680 546,653 153,973 565,873 173,193 375,364 503,490 128,126 486,291 110,927 472,240 96,876 511,916 136,552 1.77 1.58 1.52 1.48 1.60 Marin 335,908 181,117 106,447 117,124 10,677 116,497 10,050 103,210 115,493 12,283 114,469 11,259 113,312 10,102 116,456 13,246 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.64 Napa 504,375 368,799 51,260 56,061 4,801 56,721 5,461 48,876 55,017 6,141 55,164 6,288 54,396 5,520 56,045 7,169 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 San Francisco 30,112 19,077 346,680 436,794 90,114 452,093 105,413 345,811 472,534 126,723 436,278 90,467 456,454 110,643 422,240 76,429 23.70 24.77 22.87 23.93 22.13 San Mateo 291,303 168,914 264,516 358,337 93,821 369,598 105,082 257,837 359,964 102,127 326,405 68,568 329,951 72,114 319,537 61,700 2.19 2.13 1.93 1.95 1.89 Santa Clara 830,805 600,726 613,947 867,813 253,866 906,095 292,148 604,204 933,252 329,048 846,269 242,065 850,193 245,989 831,324 227,120 1.51 1.55 1.41 1.42 1.38 Solano 568,991 467,717 148,160 187,776 39,616 192,886 44,726 141,758 178,362 36,604 172,622 30,864 170,496 28,738 180,445 38,687 0.41 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.39 Sonoma 1,016,849 885,372 188,430 231,373 42,943 236,628 48,198 185,825 220,241 34,416 223,210 37,385 218,909 33,084 231,444 45,619 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 4,540,433 3,349,251 2,669,772 3,572,327 902,556 3,698,925 1,029,154 2,608,023 3,645,969 1,037,946 3,378,840 770,817 3,378,840 770,817 3,378,840 770,817 1.10 1.09 1.01 1.01 1.01 Page 2 Cities_HH CITY JURISDICTIONS County Jurisdiction % of Net Acres to Santa Clara County Net Acres 2010 Population - Census % of Pop to Santa Clara County 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) IVS Core Concentration Focused Growth Constrained Core Outward Growth Santa Clara Campbell 3,641 2,836 0.47% 39,349 2.21%16,892 21,002 4,110 21,609 4,717 16,163 20,311 4,148 19,107 2,944 19,107 2,944 19,048 2,885 7.62 7.16 6.74 6.74 6.72 Santa Clara Cupertino 6,962 5,377 0.90% 58,302 3.27%19,830 21,588 1,758 21,910 2,080 20,181 22,440 2,259 24,141 3,960 24,141 3,960 24,141 3,960 4.08 4.17 4.49 4.49 4.49 Santa Clara Gilroy 10,247 8,881 1.48% 48,821 2.74%14,330 22,118 7,788 23,329 8,999 14,175 22,772 8,597 20,616 6,441 19,882 5,707 21,265 7,090 2.63 2.56 2.32 2.24 2.39 Santa Clara Los Altos 4,079 3,408 0.57% 28,976 1.63%10,670 11,968 1,298 12,150 1,480 10,745 11,940 1,195 12,902 2,157 12,902 2,157 12,902 2,157 3.56 3.50 3.79 3.79 3.79 Santa Clara Los Altos Hills 5,457 4,714 0.78% 7,922 0.44%3,053 3,088 35 3,108 55 2,829 3,070 241 3,557 728 3,557 728 3,557 728 0.66 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.75 Santa Clara Los Gatos 6,958 5,272 0.88% 29,413 1.65%12,430 13,151 721 13,287 857 12,355 13,632 1,277 14,688 2,333 14,688 2,333 14,688 2,333 2.52 2.59 2.79 2.79 2.79 Santa Clara Milpitas 8,812 6,753 1.12% 66,790 3.75%19,030 38,758 19,728 42,096 23,066 19,184 44,837 25,653 31,991 12,807 31,991 12,807 31,991 12,807 6.23 6.64 4.74 4.74 4.74 Santa Clara Monte Sereno 1,025 929 0.15% 3,341 0.19%1,229 1,269 40 1,279 49 1,211 1,329 118 1,515 304 1,515 304 1,515 304 1.38 1.43 1.63 1.63 1.63 Santa Clara Morgan Hill 7,547 6,385 1.06% 37,822 2.12%12,399 20,040 7,641 21,140 8,741 12,326 19,518 7,192 16,479 4,153 16,146 3,820 21,088 8,762 3.31 3.06 2.58 2.53 3.30 Santa Clara Mountain View 7,774 5,750 0.96% 74,066 4.16%32,114 50,348 18,234 52,407 20,293 31,957 46,505 14,548 44,415 12,458 47,079 15,122 42,976 11,019 9.11 8.09 7.72 8.19 7.47 Santa Clara Palo Alto 15,469 7,796 1.30% 64,403 3.61%26,705 38,692 11,987 40,633 13,928 26,493 37,835 11,342 38,743 12,250 38,743 12,250 32,600 6,107 5.21 4.85 4.97 4.97 4.18 Percent of Santa Clara Growth 4.77% 3.45% 5.06% 4.98% 2.69% Average Annual HH Gain 2010-2040 464 378 408 408 204 Santa Clara San Jose 112,699 81,984 13.65%945,942 53.09%305,087 435,585 130,498 456,367 151,279 301,366 493,121 191,755 432,253 130,887 434,400 133,034 417,871 116,505 5.57 6.01 5.27 5.30 5.10 Santa Clara Santa Clara 11,741 9,752 1.62%116,468 6.54%43,403 67,672 24,269 71,032 27,629 43,021 75,243 32,222 64,150 21,129 67,276 24,255 63,366 20,345 7.28 7.72 6.58 6.90 6.50 Santa Clara Saratoga 7,788 6,792 1.13%29,926 1.68%11,000 11,118 118 11,145 145 10,734 11,259 525 12,983 2,249 12,983 2,249 12,983 2,249 1.64 1.66 1.91 1.91 1.91 Santa Clara Sunnyvale 14,028 10,328 1.72%140,081 7.86%54,170 73,425 19,255 75,943 21,773 53,384 73,911 20,527 70,165 16,781 70,165 16,781 70,165 16,781 7.35 7.16 6.79 6.79 6.79 Santa Clara S.C. County Unincorporated 606,579 433,768 72.21% 90,020 5.05%31,604 37,991 6,386 38,660 7,055 28,080 35,529 7,449 38,564 10,484 35,619 7,539 41,168 13,088 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 Santa Clara 830,805 600,726 1.00 1,781,642 1.00 613,947 867,813 253,866 906,095 292,148 604,204 933,252 329,048 846,269 242,065 850,193 245,989 831,324 227,120 1.51 1.55 1.41 1.42 1.38 ALL 9 COUNTIES 4,540,433 3,349,251 2,669,772 3,572,327 902,556 3,698,925 1,029,154 2,608,023 3,645,969 1,037,946 3,378,840 770,817 3,378,840 770,817 3,378,840 770,817 1.10 1.09 1.01 1.01 1.01 PDA County Jurisdiction Name Key 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) Santa Clara Palo Alto California Avenue PAL1 922 2,889 1,967 2,889 1,967 754 3,893 3,139 2,471 1,717 3,116 2,362 1,552 798 Santa Clara Palo Alto SUB-AREA: VTA/Palo Alto: California Avenue PAL1_VTA1_h n/a n/a 189 2,176 1,987 665 476 840 651 418 229 Santa Clara Palo Alto Palo Alto: University Avenue/Downtown OAPAL1 2,162 3,701 1,539 3,851 1,689 1,823 4,858 3,035 4,451 2,628 5,418 3,595 3,073 1,250 Santa Clara Palo Alto Palo Alto: El Camino Real Corridor OAPAL2 4,272 6,116 1,845 6,457 2,185 4,092 7,004 2,912 8,023 3,931 9,476 5,384 5,657 1,565 Santa Clara Palo Alto NON-OVERLAP VTA Cores, Corridors, and Station Areas VTA1_h n/a 78 92 14 114 36 92 14 107 29 Santa Clara Palo Alto ALL PALO ALTO PDA/GOA 5,842 11,087 8,788 12,006 3,871 Santa Clara 78,280 253,835 175,554 194,483 116,203 151,692 393,331 241,639 335,018 188,833 357,414 211,229 320,185 174,000 CalAv PDA Percent of CPA Growth 14.13% 27.67% 14.02% 19.28% 13.07% CalAv Percent of CPA Total Growth outside of PDA 85.87% 72.33% 85.98% 80.72% 86.93% CalAv PDA Percent of Santa Clara PDA 1.69% 1.30% 0.91% 1.12% 0.46% CalAv PDA Percent of Santa Clara Growth 0.67% 0.95% 0.71% 0.96% 0.35% Average Annual HH Gain 2010-2040 in CalAv PDA 66 105 57 79 27 ALL PDA Percent of CPA Growth 41.94% 97.75% 71.74% 98.01% 63.38% Percent of CPA Total Growth outside of ALL PDA 58.06% 2.25% 28.26% 1.99% 36.62% ALL PDA Percent of Santa Clara PDA 5.03% 4.59% 4.65% 5.68% 2.22% ALL PDA Percent of Santa Clara Growth 2.00% 3.37% 3.63% 4.88% 1.70% Average Annual HH Gain 2010-2040 in ALL PDA 195 370 293 400 129 Average Annual HH Gain 2010-2040 OUTSIDE OF PDA 270 9 115 8 75 Gross Acres Net Acres Housing Density 2040 (Households per Net Acre)Outward Growth 2010 (U.S. Census) Core Concentraion Constrained Core ConcentrationFocused GrowthInitial Vision Constrained Core Concentration Outward GrowthInitial Vision 2010 (U.S. Census) Core Concentraion Focused Growth Page 1 Cities_Jobs CITY JURISDICTIONS County Jurisdiction % of Net Acres to Santa Clara County Net Acres 2010 Population - Census % of Pop to Santa Clara County 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) SSA 2040 Growth SSA (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040)SSA 2040 Growth SSA(2010-2040) 2040 Growth(2010-2040) SSA 2040 Growth SSA(2010-2040) 2040 Growth(2010-2040)IVS Core Concentration Focused Growth Constrained Core Outward Growth Santa Clara Campbell 3,641 2,836 0.47% 39,349 2.21% 22,099 26,897 4,798 27,745 5,646 23,949 25,493 1,544 30,652 6,701 30,728 6,779 30,252 6,302 30,250 6,301 30,539 6,589 30,539 6,590 9.78 8.99 10.83 10.66 10.77Santa Clara Cupertino 6,962 5,377 0.90% 58,302 3.27% 30,513 35,283 4,770 36,329 5,816 20,795 28,798 8,003 27,620 6,630 27,471 6,676 27,650 6,660 27,431 6,636 27,348 6,358 27,132 6,337 6.76 5.36 5.11 5.10 5.05 Santa Clara Gilroy 10,247 8,881 1.48% 48,821 2.74% 16,652 22,666 6,014 24,142 7,490 15,017 21,604 6,587 22,215 4,486 19,218 4,200 21,928 4,199 18,886 3,868 26,154 8,425 22,729 7,711 2.72 2.43 2.16 2.13 2.56 Santa Clara Los Altos 4,079 3,408 0.57% 28,976 1.63% 10,250 11,511 1,261 11,632 1,382 12,865 14,220 1,355 18,101 4,808 17,656 4,792 18,166 4,872 17,675 4,811 18,102 4,808 17,610 4,745 3.41 4.17 5.18 5.19 5.17Santa Clara Los Altos Hills 5,457 4,714 0.78% 7,922 0.44% 1,845 1,937 93 1,948 103 2,769 3,245 477 4,178 1,221 3,920 1,151 4,098 1,141 3,839 1,071 4,357 1,400 4,085 1,317 0.41 0.69 0.83 0.81 0.87Santa Clara Los Gatos 6,958 5,272 0.88% 29,413 1.65% 18,275 20,700 2,425 21,168 2,893 18,629 19,496 867 24,474 5,575 24,187 5,559 24,147 5,248 23,806 5,178 24,268 5,369 23,925 5,296 4.02 3.70 4.59 4.52 4.54 Santa Clara Milpitas 8,812 6,753 1.12% 66,790 3.75% 46,784 55,624 8,840 56,870 10,086 38,678 61,770 23,091 50,180 11,356 50,144 11,466 49,437 10,613 49,280 10,601 49,547 10,724 49,392 10,713 8.42 9.15 7.42 7.30 7.31Santa Clara Monte Sereno 1,025 929 0.15% 3,341 0.19% 400 532 132 554 154 346 355 8 743 218 460 114 722 196 451 104 744 219 460 113 0.60 0.38 0.50 0.48 0.49Santa Clara Morgan Hill 7,547 6,385 1.06% 37,822 2.12% 12,698 20,806 8,109 22,274 9,576 14,951 19,469 4,518 20,811 4,446 19,211 4,260 20,459 4,094 18,827 3,876 23,525 7,159 21,703 6,752 3.49 3.05 3.01 2.95 3.40 Santa Clara Mountain View 7,774 5,750 0.96% 74,066 4.16% 50,074 64,507 14,434 68,811 18,737 45,296 68,083 22,788 60,969 15,279 60,627 15,332 59,866 14,175 59,381 14,085 60,318 14,627 59,822 14,526 11.97 11.84 10.54 10.33 10.40 Santa Clara Palo Alto 15,469 7,796 1.30% 64,403 3.61% 73,303 78,163 4,860 79,291 5,987 65,262 93,493 28,231 103,198 27,817 91,332 26,070 102,015 26,635 90,009 24,748 94,740 19,360 83,302 18,040 10.17 11.99 11.72 11.55 10.69Percent of Santa Clara Growth 1.32% 5.95% 10.02% 9.70% 7.26%Average Annual Jobs Gain 2010-2040 200 941 869 825 601 Average Annual Add Comm Sq Ft for Jobs 84,567 398,745 368,224 349,542 254,806 Santa Clara San Jose 112,699 81,984 13.65% 945,942 53.09% 342,799 593,219 250,420 639,121 296,322 353,541 608,560 255,019 476,342 112,608 463,658 110,117 480,489 116,756 467,666 114,124 472,774 109,041 460,353 106,812 7.80 7.42 5.66 5.70 5.62Santa Clara Santa Clara 11,741 9,752 1.62% 116,468 6.54% 103,186 138,386 35,200 146,862 43,676 96,343 145,309 48,966 127,707 31,366 128,026 31,683 126,417 30,076 126,418 30,075 126,164 29,823 126,164 29,821 15.06 14.90 13.13 12.96 12.94 Santa Clara Saratoga 7,788 6,792 1.13% 29,926 1.68% 6,826 7,279 453 7,308 482 9,734 9,764 30 13,775 3,923 13,662 3,928 13,431 3,580 13,285 3,552 13,744 3,893 13,595 3,862 1.08 1.44 2.01 1.96 2.00 Santa Clara Sunnyvale 14,028 10,328 1.72% 140,081 7.86% 72,392 96,408 24,016 101,639 29,247 63,834 115,973 52,139 83,190 19,334 82,720 18,886 82,126 18,269 81,554 17,720 81,787 17,930 81,109 17,275 9.84 11.23 8.01 7.90 7.85Santa Clara S.C. County Unincorporated 606,579 433,768 72.21% 90,020 5.05% 50,304 64,481 14,177 65,924 15,620 29,887 51,131 21,243 5,145 1,636 38,940 9,053 4,872 1,363 38,224 8,336 5,227 1,718 38,322 8,434 0.15 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 Santa Clara 830,805 600,726 1 1,781,642 1 858,399 1,238,400 380,001 1,311,617 453,219 811,895 1,286,762 474,867 1,069,300 257,404 1,071,960 260,065 1,066,075 254,179 1,066,980 255,085 1,059,338 247,443 1,060,240 248,345 2.18 2.14 1.78 1.78 1.76ALL 9 COUNTIES 4,540,433 3,349,251 3,271,321 4,493,333 1,222,012 4,734,624 1,463,303 3,268,229 4,734,002 1,465,773 4,265,733 994,832 4,272,464 1,004,235 4,265,734 994,830 4,266,710 998,481 4,265,742 994,830 4,266,780 998,551 1.41 1.41 1.28 1.27 1.27 PDA Initial County Jurisdiction Name Key 2010 (estimated)2035 Growth (2010-2035) 2040 Growth (2010-2035) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) 2040 Growth (2010-2040) Santa Clara Palo Alto California Avenue PAL1 2,244 2,382 551 2,382 139 1,835 2,727 892 1,834 2,795 961 2,719 885 2,287 453 Santa Clara Palo Alto SUB-AREA: VTA/Palo Alto: California Avenue PAL1_VTA1_h 223 n/a 937 1,386 449 937 1,361 424 1,309 371 1,167 230 Santa Clara Palo Alto NON-OVERLAP VTA Cores, Corridors, and Station Areas VTA1_h 41 n/a 67 112 44 60 82 22 83 23 80 20 Santa Clara Palo Alto Palo Alto: University Avenue/Downtown OAPAL1 8,265 9,048 2,622 9,048 783 12,833 16,183 3,350 12,832 17,367 4,535 16,908 4,076 17,677 4,845 Santa Clara Palo Alto Palo Alto: El Camino Real Corridor OAPAL2 8,174 10,210 2,389 10,210 2,036 10,231 14,478 4,247 10,233 15,418 5,186 16,218 5,986 15,227 4,995 Santa Clara Palo Alto ALL PALO ALTO PDA/GOA 2,957 8,982 11,127 11,341 10,542 Santa Clara 152,324 282,092 302,741 282,092 129,768 382,878 674,030 291,152 391,673 545,680 154,008 550,961 159,288 520,944 129,271 CalAv PDA Percent of CPA Growth 2.31% 3.16% 3.69% 3.57% 2.51%CalAv Percent of CPA Total Growth outside of PDA 97.69% 96.84% 96.31% 96.43% 97.49%CalAv PDA Percent of Santa Clara PDA 0.11% 0.31% 0.62% 0.56% 0.35% CalAv PDA Percent of Santa Clara Growth 0.03% 0.19% 0.37% 0.35% 0.18% Average Annual Jobs Gain 2010-2040 in CalAv PDA 530 32 29 15 ALL PDA Percent of CPA Growth 49.39% 31.82% 42.68% 45.83% 58.44% Percent of CPA Total Growth outside of ALL PDA 50.61% 68.18% 57.32% 54.17% 41.56%ALL PDA Percent of Santa Clara PDA 2.28% 3.09% 7.22% 7.12% 8.16% ALL PDA Percent of Santa Clara Growth 0.65% 1.89% 4.28% 4.45% 4.25% Average Annual Jobs Gain 2010-2040 in ALL PDA 99 299 371 378 351Average Annual Jobs Gain 2010-2040 OUTSIDE OF PDA 101 642 498 447 250 Focused Growth Constrained Core Concentration Outward GrowthInitial Vision 2010 Core Concentraion 2010 Gross Acres Net Acres Job Density 2040 (Jobs per Net Acre)Outward GrowthConstrained Core ConcentrationInitial Vision Core Concentraion 2010 Focused Growth Page 1 Regional Projections to 2040: Methodology and Results Stephen Levy, CCSCE Presentation to ABAG Regional Advisory Working Group February 7, 2012 Overview •Best Practice Methodology for Regional Projections •Developing Regional Job Growth Projections •Recent History and Short Term Trends •The Case for Above Average Job Growth to 2040 •Projections of Total Jobs and by Sector •Issues and Challenges •Population and Housing Best Practice Methodology Used by All Major Regions in CA •Bay Area job projections depend on assumptions about U.S. job growth and the Bay Area share of U.S. jobs. The region and nation are connected. •Bay Area population projections depend on job growth and the proportion of Bay Area workers living in the region. •Bay Area household projections depend on population growth, age and ethnic composition, behavioral factors and assumptions about housing supply. Bay Area Job Growth‐1 •Bay Area job growth depends on the number (POOL) of jobs created in the U.S. and the SHARE of U.S jobs locating in the region. •The POOL of U.S. jobs depends on the amount population growth, the age profile of the population and labor force participation rate trends. •The amount of population growth depends on assumptions about immigration and birth rates. Bay Area Job Growth‐2 •The SHARE of U.S. jobs locating in the Bay Area depends on the composition of U.S. job growth and the competitive position of the Bay Area. •The share of job growth is primarily determined by growth in the region’s economic base—those sectors that sell a majority of goods and services to customers across the state, nation and world. Bay Area Job Growth‐3 •Leading sectors in the Bay Area economic base are technology, including hardware, software and social media, professional and technical services, and foreign trade and tourism. The economic base accounts for 40% of total jobs and is the primary focus of the competition for job shares. •The remaining jobs serve local residents and businesses. The profile of these jobs in the Bay Area is similar to the national profile. Job Share History and Recent Trends •Bay Area grew more slowly than the nation between 1990 and 2010—the explanation •Since late 2010 the Bay Area has outpaced the nation in job growth led by Silicon Valley •UCLA forecasts that the Bay Area will outpace the nation in job growth in 2012 and 2013 •High tech job growth and space acquisition surged in late 2011 continuing into 2012 The Bay Area Share of U.S. Job Growth Job Growth in 2011 (Pre Revision) UCLA Bay Area Forecast •An increase of 160,000 wage and salary jobs or +5.8% between Q4‐2011 and Q4‐2013. There will be additional job growth for self‐ employed workers. The forecast for annual job growth is at least 80,000 per year for 2012 and 2013. •Real income growth (above the rate of inflation) of 3.7% in 2012 and 3.3% in 2013. Real taxable sales gains of 2.7% and 3.1%. Short Term Outlook •Bay Area outpaces the state and nation in 2012 and 2013 •An increase in national and state growth in 2014 and 2015 with the Bay Area participating •By 2013 the beginnings of recovery in construction and world economic growth •Santa Clara, San Francisco and San Mateo counties rank in the top ten in average wages but also in $ and % wage growth in 2011. Long Term Strengths •Industry structure—high concentration of high wage, fast growing industries •Strength in labor force (education and skills), patents, company headquarters •Location on the Pacific Rim favors growth in Bay Area trade, tourism and foreign investment •A foundation for above average growth Bay Area has High Share of Fast Growing High Wage Sectors •Bay Area has 2.4% of nation’s jobs •10.3% for software; 8.3% for Internet services •12% of computer and electronic manufacturing •7% of computer services; 8.1% of scientific R&D services •Above average shares in management, consulting and architectural & engineering services McKinsey Global Institute Report for Bay Area Council •In 2010 Bay Area organizations held 16,364 patents. 2nd place was New York with 6,383 •Highest % of college grads in workforce (44%)—national average is 28% •Highest share of jobs in innovation sectors (18%)—next are Boston and Seattle •50% of top clean tech firms, 7 in 10 top social media firms, 2nd highest number of Fortune 500 global companies after New York Bay Area Job Projections to 2040 •A high tech and recovery bounce in the short term •Above average job growth to 2020 •Slightly above average job growth after 2020 •Driving sectors are technology and professional services •Above average job growth in these sectors plus health care, leisure and hospitality and self employment Job Growth to 2040 Bay Area Share of U.S. Jobs Bay Area Jobs (Thousands) Bay Area Job Growth (Thousands) Above Average Job Growth 2007‐2040 Below Average Job Growth 2007‐2040 Issues and Challenges •These job projections reflect the likely growth pattern if the region maintains its competitive attraction for technology, trade and tourism and other driving industries. •Being competitive includes facing the challenges of education, infrastructure, housing and quality of life that are well known in the region, state and nation. Job growth is never automatic. •All long‐term projections are subject to uncertainties in national and world demographic and economic trends. Regional Population Growth •Determined by the population needed to support the projected job growth •Depends also on projected levels of in commuting •In commuting in this alternative is assumed to increase following historical trends •Today I want to call attention to the pattern of growth by age group—implications for workforce and housing Bay Area Population Growth by Age Group and Decade Household Projection Methodology •HH growth consistent with projected job and population growth •Population growth analyzed by age and ethnic group •Household formation rates by age and ethnic group developed with input from HCD •Today I want to call attention to the age pattern of projected HH growth HH Growth by Age and Decade 1 California Demographic Forecasts: Why are the numbers over estimated? Prepared by City of Palo Alto November 15, 2011 Actual California Population growth Over the last decade, the state of California added 3.4 million people, to reach a total of 37.3 million. This was an increase of 10% over the decade. This growth rate follows the gradual slowing that started after 1990, down dramatically from the very high rates of the post‐World War II era. Note that the Department of Finance’s (DOF) 2007 projections reflect a very high growth perspective. The DOF numbers are currently used as the population forecasts for all state and local projects—they are not scheduled to be revised until 2013. Table 1. California’s population growth over the last five decades (average growth from census to census) Census Dept of Finance Projections (2007) 1960s 29.2 1970s 18.5 1980s 25.7 1990s 13.8 2000s 10.0 14.8 2010s 12.8 2020s 11.6 2030s 10.2 Source: US Census Bureau actual Census numbers; California Department of Finance 2007 Projections. 2 Recent State forecasts have been consistently overestimated Even after the sharp decline in growth during the 1990s, forecasters consistently tended to be overly optimistic about population growth rates through the 2000s. In 2005, the Public Policy Institute of California issued a report (“California 2025: Taking on the Future”) that included the population projections of all the key demographic forecasters. The consensus forecast from this group was some 40% higher than the actual outcome for the state: Table 2. California Population Forecasts for 2010 made before 2005 (Percentage growth expected from 2000‐2010) California Dept of Finance 15.2 USC Population Dynamics 11.6 UC Berkeley (Lee, Miller) 13.9* Public Policy Institute of CA 15.2* CCSCE 17.2 UCLA Anderson Forecasting 16.6 Average of six 2005 forecasts 15.0 *=center point of band Source: Public Policy Institute of California, “California 2025: Taking on the Future”, 2005, Page 29. The consensus forecast was some 50% above the actual numbers. The only forecaster who produced a number below the actual 10% growth was the UC Berkeley group who stated that there was a 5% chance that the growth rate would be lower than 7.1%. The 2005 PPIC Report stated that “Recent trends make population projections for California especially difficult…For these reasons, planners should consider alternative population scenarios … as useful alternatives for planners.” (PPIC, 2005, pages 27‐ 28) Even as late as the end of 2009, on the eve of the decennial census, estimates by the California Dept. of Finance (the organization responsible for the numbers that are used for all state allocation formulas) remained strikingly high at 14.1% which was 1.5 million or 44.7% above the above the contemporaneous and more accurate Census Bureau’s Current Population Estimates. 3 Critical Components of Change and the Future The Census data provide a nice detailed perspective on the actual components of change during the decade. While the 3.1 million people added through natural increase (births minus deaths) were the largest single growth factor, the 2 million net gain from foreign immigration was important in overcoming a net outflow of 1.6 million from native born emigration, primarily to other states. Table 3. Components of Population Change in California, 20002010 (millions of people) Births +5.45 Deaths ‐2.35 Net Domestic migration ‐1.63 Foreign immigration +2.58 Foreign emigration ‐0.59 Military, etc ‐0.07 TOTAL +3.38 Source: USC, Population Dynamics Research Group, “What the Census would show”, February 2011. The challenge for projecting change in the future is the dramatic shifts in some of these base categories. With the aging population, we know that, even with slight increases in longevity, the aging population in California will raise the annual number of deaths in California from 271K in 2011 to 462K in 2039, while the number of births will rise slightly from 532K in 2011 to 551 in 2039. The natural increase will fall from some 260K today to 90K in 2040. Thus, over time any increase in California’s population will increasingly rely on migration. Since net domestic migration has averaged a net outflow of some 160K per year since the early 1990s, any growth in population will be increasingly dependent on foreign migration. (Source: USC, Population Dynamics Groups, April 2011). There is little reason to see a major shift in domestic migration with California’s high cost and high unemployment rate. That leaves foreign migration as the critical component source of long‐term population growth. The most dynamic source for California’s growth has been immigration from Mexico, both legal and illegal. All observers (The Dept of Homeland Security, the Pew Charitable Trust Hispanic Center, and the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton) agree that net immigration from Mexico has been down dramatically in recent years with the stricter enforcement of border crossing and the prolonged recession in the US. Pew estimates that the illegal immigrant population in the US fell by some 7% between 2007 and 2010. The important debate about the future is whether this is a business cycle phenomenon or part of a longer term trend. The group that has the best data source and takes the longer term look is the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton. For decades they have been tracking migration patterns from Mexico and doing annual surveys of thousands of families from migration centers in Mexico. They found that the percent of first time immigrants from the Mexican communities of highest immigration fell from 1.2% of adults in 2000 to 0.6% in 2005 to zero in 2010. They identify that the changes are due to Mexican demographic and 4 economic factors as much as from U.S. conditions. They identified five internal factors of change in Mexico: • Fertility rates are falling dramatically from 6.8 births per women in 1970 to 2.8 in 1995 to 2 in 2010 (replacement level). • The number of young people entering the labor market has fallen from one million a year in the 1990s to 700K today and demographic factors will bring that down to about 300K in 2030, not enough to meet local job needs. • The rate of college attendance and college completion has doubled over the last decade, raising the career path of an increasing share of young workers. • The wage disparity between Mexico and the U.S. is narrowing sharply with average wage gaps falling from 10:1 in the 1960s to some 3.7:1 in the early 2000s. • The cost of migration has risen dramatically for illegal entrants, further narrowing the earnings gap. All of these factors point to the need, at the least, of looking at alternative scenarios of population growth in California that are more sensitive to possible underlying changes in migration patterns. 5 Sources of Demographic projections about California US Bureau of the Census (responsible for the decennial census and does updated estimates each year of state populations—has been much closer to actual numbers than the Cal Dept. of Finance) California Department of Finance (responsible for state population estimates between the Census years—forecasts used as key source for state government planning). Statewide estimates for 2010 (made in 2009) were 41% higher than the 2010 Census numbers for the state, 83% over for the nine Bay Area counties and 137% higher for the three West Bay counties. Ronald Lee, UC Berkeley, Center for Economics and Demographics of Aging, “Special Report: The Growth & Aging of California’s Population”, 2003 (an important report that identified the detailed assumptions that went into the Department of Finance’s long‐term projections). Hans Johnson, Public Policy Institute of California, “California 2025: Taking on the Future”, Chapter 2 ‘California’s Population in 2025’ (a report that gathered projections from eight academic and government sources). Johnson concluded that “population projections for California are especially difficult…In addition to overweighting contemporary trends, forecasters are notoriously bad at predicting fundamental demographic shifts... For these reasons, planners should consider alternative population scenarios.” Pages 27‐28. John Pitkin & Dowell Myers, USC Population Dynamics Research Group, “The 2010 Census Benchmark for California’s Growing and Changing Population”, February 2011; “Projections of the Population of California by Nativity and Year of Entry to the U.S.”, April 2, 2011. (Pitkin and Myers had the lowest of the forecasts in the 2005 study—though still overestimating growth by 16%. They are working with the California Department of Finance on components for a new longer‐term forecast; they are still assuming a net immigration number of 160,000 holding steady in the future.) Steve Levy, Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy UCLA Anderson Forecasting Project Greg Schmid October 2011 Date: November 1, 2010 To: MTC Planning Committee, ABAG Administrative Committee From: ABAG Staff Subject: Employment Forecasting Method & Determining 25 Year Regional Housing Need Summary SB 375 requires each Metropolitan Planning Organization in California to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy, an integrated regional land use and transportation plan, that demonstrates, amongst other things, areas within the region sufficient to house “all the population of the region.” The steps and formulas for estimating the amount of housing needed to house all of the region’s population, as well as the demographic and economic assumptions incorporated into the housing estimate are provided in detail in this memo. In addition, staff is requesting that the Board approve a new methodology used to forecast the region’s long term employment growth. Regional job estimates are a fundamental component to forecasting population growth and housing need. As the result of a comprehensive review of employment growth forecasting techniques and results, staff is recommending that ABAG adopt the “shift share” methodology to prepare the long-term forecast, specifically to estimate the regional total number of jobs. This methodology would make ABAG’s employment growth forecasts consistent with the other large metropolitan planning organizations in California, and better explains the prior twenty year trend in Bay Area employment growth (1990-2010). In summary, the agency is recommending that ABAG’s Executive Board approve: 1) A revised methodology for forecasting the region’s long-term employment growth; 2) The formula for calculating the region’s 25 year housing need; 3) The household formation assumptions to be used in the formula for calculating the 25 year housing need. 2 Revised Employment Forecasting Methodology For this year’s update to the forecast, the agency is recommending that staff employ a different methodology for forecasting the region’s long-term job growth - a shift share method instead of the current econometric (IMPLAN) model. The alternative forecast method, utilized by the other large MPOs in California, is known as the “shift share method.” The shift share method is essentially a two step process, whereby first total U.S. employment is assumed for a future year. Next, the Bay Area’s share of that employment is assumed for future years, typically by looking at historical regional shares of national employment. The Bay Area’s share of employment is then applied to the U.S. total employment estimate, thereby arriving at total future Bay Area employment. There are several reasons for selecting shift share over econometric models to estimate total future Bay Area employment. The shift share method is more consistent with the methodology of employment forecast that is used by the other large MPOs in the State, namely SACOG and SCAG. It is more transparent in terms of explanation and tracking history. It is more practical to use to explain the regional economic narrative that underlies planning and the SCS. Additionally, the results of shift share conform better to the regional perception of the long term job forecast. We recognize that there is great uncertainty in forecasting the future economy. In order to better connect with our partners with the SCS, we gain more credibility with forecasts that comport better with their understanding of the future economy. Calculating the Region’s 25 Year Housing need The specific calculation of the number of units needed to “house all the population of the region” can be described best as a series of steps. The first three steps are to estimate total population, while the final two are about applying household formation rates to that total population: 1. Estimate demographic population growth, as determined by natural increase; 2. Estimate employment growth; 3. Determine in-migration, mostly due to employment growth; 4. Add in-migration to demographic population to arrive at total population; 5. Determine “household formation” rates; 6. Apply household formation or headship rate to total population to determine total housing need. Household Formation Assumptions for the 25 Year Need To describe the method more fully, exemplary household estimates have been included. This estimate was made by starting with the 2000 census headship rates by age and racial/ethnic group for the bay area. Since the Projections 2009 forecast did not differentiate racial/ethnic populations, estimates in the forecast years were derived using data from the California Depart of Finance’s long run population forecast. After reviewing various state demographic methodologies, and consulting with state from other regions, it was assumed that individual racial/ethnic headship rates would trend 50% toward the 2000 regional mean by the 2040 forecast year. This is to reflect the pattern of migrant groups taking on the characteristics of the broader population over time. 2035 Example Cohort Total Population Male Female Households <15 1,661,460 846,520 814,940 15-24 1,076,530 550,800 525,730 105,970 25-34 1,187,140 609,160 577,990 512,310 35-44 1,181,710 600,720 580,980 677,940 45-54 1,042,580 524,010 518,580 602,050 55-64 998,410 499,000 499,410 508,130 65+ 1,952,280 895,860 1,056,430 1,163,360 Total 9,100,100 4,526,040 4,574,050 3,569,750 As a point of comparison, the Projections 2009 forecast of households for the same year is 3,302,780 3 4 APPENDIX 1: Detailed Discussion Revised Employment Forecasting Methodology As discussed in the September, 2010 staff report to the ABAG Executive Board, from 1990 to 2010, there has been a marked shift in the trend of employment growth in the Bay Area. If we look at the current decade and the 1990’s, we see that overall employment growth has only been about 5 percent; or about 0.25 percent annually. In 1990, total jobs amounted to 3.1 million, in 2000 there were 3.6 million jobs in the Bay Area and by 2010, jobs declined to approximately 3.3 million. ABAG’s previous projections (P 2009) estimated a total number of jobs of 5.1 million by 2035, reflecting an average annual growth rate of approximately 1.7 percent. Despite the low percentage increase, this trend is far greater than the Bay Area’s job production over the last 20 years. One of the key issues in forecasting future employment growth is explaining why the Bay Area has added so few jobs in the last twenty years despite robust growth in the regional economy, and whether this trend will continue into the future. The job component of the forecast is crucial for estimating total population and long term housing need, as discussed further below. For this year’s update to the forecast, the agency is recommending that staff employ a different methodology for forecasting the region’s long-term job growth - a shift share method instead of the current econometric (IMPLAN) model. Over the last 15 years, ABAG staff has been using IMPLAN software to generate a set of input/output (I/O) tables at the county level to estimate future employment. Data sources that inform the county-level I/O tables, among others, are originally from the U.S. Census Bureau, the State of California Employment Development Department and the State Franchise Tax Board. These tables, primarily utilized to reflect the economic relationship between firms (“impact analysis”), represent the Bay Area’s economy by showing the flow of goods and services between sectors. Outputs from one regional industry become the input for another, or an economic sector can use inputs from outside the region. Some outputs are locally sold; others are exported from the region. These sector flows show the inputs from each industry needed to produce goods or services for a single economic activity and the corresponding sales of goods and services to other industry sectors and to consumers. For long term forecasting purposes however, the econometric model does not accurately reflect changes in the region’s competitiveness with respect to how growth in the region’s economy translates to growth in the region’s job production. While there have been significant job losses during the recent recessions, there has also been a shift in the regional economy over the last two decades. Growth in manufacturing, retail and utilities has been limited, while significant growth has occurred in professional services, education and healthcare; areas 5 that tend to have higher output per employee. Further explaining the continued growth in regional GDP is that jobs are also being restructured. Jobs that can be off shored or relocated to other lower cost areas have increased firms’ productivity, but result in less employment in the Bay Area. Therefore, while there is still a relationship of economic growth (or GDP) to employment, the relationship appears to be fundamentally altered. Part of this explanation could result from the type of industries that are expanding in the Bay Area, and part can be explained by the Bay Area’s cost of living which impacts regional competitiveness. Survey information from Bay Area firms indicates that the cost of housing in the Bay Area is one of the largest impediments to job growth here. The alternative forecast method, utilized by the other large MPOs in California, is known as the “shift share method.” The shift share method is essentially a two step process, whereby first total U.S. employment is assumed for a future year. Next, the Bay Area’s share of that employment is assumed for future years, typically by looking at historical regional shares of national employment. The Bay Area’s share of employment is then applied to the U.S. total employment estimate, thereby arriving at total future Bay Area employment. A shift share analysis for the Bay Area was performed by Steve Levy, Director and Senior Economist at the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy at the request of ABAG. Mr. Levy, who is an authority in the field, provides similar information to both the Southern California Association of Governments and Sacramento Council of Governments. As indicated at the September Executive Board, staff has been participating in numerous discussions with respect to data associated with the Bay Area economy and job forecasting trends. A peer review group on this subject was set up under the auspices of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute. Additional meetings were held between MTC and ABAG to discuss the rationale of alternative methodologies. Following a sufficient period of due diligence, ABAG staff is recommending that the best method for forecasting future employment in the Bay Area should utilize the shift share method. A fuller discussion of the rationale is provided below. Shift Share Method and Results The shift share method for employment forecasting utilizes the following approach: 1) estimate U.S. job growth and 2) review historical data as to the share of jobs that the Bay Area captures of the national total; 3) estimate the future Bay Area employment growth in relation to the national forecast. To estimate long term U.S. job growth, Levy states (in memo to ABAG staff, See attachment 1, August 24 report, and attachment 2, September 19 report) that the “normal methodology is to start with population by age group, project labor force participation rates and unemployment rates and end with a projection of total jobs for the nation.” Using this method, Mr. Levy projects U.S. job growth at just fewer than 180 million jobs. While other metropolitan areas utilize other national employment forecast numbers, Mr. Levy’s analysis reflects a 0.6 percent annual growth rate for the 2008-2035 period. According to Levy, the forecast assumes less growth in immigration and 6 percent unemployment over the period. The forecast also assumes “large growth in labor force participation by older workers.” Mr. Levy also examined the Bay Area’s historical share of total U.S. jobs. According to Levy’s analysis, the Bay Area had 2.65 percent of the nation’s jobs in 1990, and that share fell to 2.46 percent in 2008.He goes on to say that the Bay Area lost approximately 100,000 jobs in the 1990s related to base closures, defense downsizing and their multiplier effect. He indicates that without these losses, the Bay Area’s job share in 2008 would have been 2.53 percent instead of 2.46 percent. Levy also states the “remaining share losses are largely the result of high productivity gains in the tech manufacturing sector plus some movement of assembly jobs to other locations in the older parts of the region’s high tech base. It is somewhat complicated in the sense that the Bay Area did not lose share in these sectors since 1990 but that these sectors represent a larger part of the region’s economic base and, thus, the national job losses hurt our region more.” Under this analysis, Mr. Levy has concluded that the 6 Bay Area’s high end share of 2.55% would result in a forecast of 4.4 million jobs in 2035, which means that the Bay Area would be projected to grow an average of 50,000 jobs per year over the next 25 years. Bay Area jobs would grow by roughly 24% compared to the national job gain of 18%, a higher growth rate than that currently projected for SCAG and SANDAG. The rationale and optimism for this higher growth rate is that the Bay Area economic base is concentrated in sectors likely to lead the nation in job growth. However, while this forecast takes into account the Bay Area’s assets, it is substantially below the econometric forecast of Projections 2009. We believe this forecast methodology more accurately builds in recognition of the prior twenty year trend which has constrained job growth in the Bay Area. While the agency is recommending a change in methodology to forecast total regional employment, the existing model would be used to determine employment distribution by county and industry sector, as well as to calculate related variables. However, total employment results from the traditional model would be adjusted to fit the 4.4 million job estimate for the region. Rationale for Using Shift Share There are several reasons for selecting shift share over econometric models to estimate total future Bay Area employment. Shift share methodology is consistent with other metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in the state, and is more transparent and easier to understand than internal econometric modeling. Consistency The shift share method is more consistent with the methodology of employment forecast that is used by the other large MPOs in the State, namely SACOG and SCAG. SANDAG uses a blend of methodologies but their results, in terms of job growth forecasts, are similar to the other MPOs. Consistency with other MPOs is valuable in that it makes SCS metrics comparable across the major metropolitan areas and assists in implementing the policy goals of the State. 7 8 ansparent are methodology is more transparent in terms of explanation and tracking history. actical methodology is more practical to use to explain the regional economic narrative that underlies onforms to Regional Understanding etter to the regional perception of the long term job forecast. B 375 & Regional Housing Target able Communities strategy must “identify areas within the region he Bay Area regional agencies, as well as the State Department of Housing and Community Tr The shift sh Assumptions regarding U.S. job growth projections are utilized throughout the nation. Looking at the Bay Area's share (as well as other regions in CA) of national employment is easy to track over time, and transparent as to which midpoint is selected based on the regional narrative. This simplicity contrasts with ABAG's econometric model which uses a variety of inputs/assumptions and then transforms national GDP projections into regional employment through a set of coefficients using IMPLAN data. One of the many issues of using econometric data is that it is difficult to forecast the impacts on regional competitiveness and leakage to the Central Valley. Pr Shift share planning and the SCS. Using shift share, we can look at discreet periods (1960-1990) (1990-2010) and track data. Projecting outward, the narrative as to how the SCS and other regional planning processes may impact regional competitiveness is more understandable, as it is tracking the regional share of jobs compared to the national average. Above the national average is one narrative; at or below is another. C The results of shift share conform b Comments have been made by professors, planners, investment bankers and economists that ABAG's employment projections are too high. We recognize that there is great uncertainty in forecasting the future economy. In order to better connect with our partners with the SCS, we gain more credibility with forecasts that comport better with their understanding of the future economy. Economic growth and job growth are dependent on the region making progress on the many issues associated with proper planning and investment. To the extent that the Bay Area makes progress on reducing constraints to job growth, the Bay Area’s share of national employment will increase. S Senate Bill 375 states that the Sustain sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan, taking into account net migration into the region, population growth, household formation and employment growth.” T Development (HCD), interpret this requirement to mean that the region must plan for housing sufficient to meet total new demand, as generated by natural population increase (net births), household formation and employment growth. The region must demonstrate how all of the region’s growth in housing demand can be met within the Bay Area’s nine county borders, and not by surrounding counties via “spill-over”. 9 he net effect of this legislative requirement is that the region must plan for more housing than it has alculating the Regional Housing Target rent process than what is used to traditionally estimate long- ow to specifically calculate the number of units needed to “house all the population of the region” can 7. Estimate demographic population growth, as determined by natural increase; due to employment growth; population; to total population to determine total housing need. ormulaically, the above steps could be summarized as: 1) PopulationTotal = Population irths-deaths) + Net Migration(jobs) tep 1: Demographic Population Growth hic population is perhaps the most straightforward aspect of looking at the details of the projected population for the region, specific policy implications emerge, The purpose of this requirement is presumably to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) attributed to people living just outside of the region, and commuting to jobs within the Bay Area. T traditionally planned. To assume that the entire region’s housing demand will be fully met within the region means to assume that there will be an increase in housing supply. The supply could be increased through modifications to local land use plans and expanded subsidies for below-market rate housing. C Estimating housing demand or need is a diffe term household growth. Demand in housing is generated by natural increase, employment growth, and migration. When estimating demand, limitations on housing development are not taken into account, such as fiscal or local land use constraints, e.g. zoning codes. Need is simply based on estimates of total population and household formation. H be described best as a series of steps. The first three steps are to estimate total population, while the final two are about applying household formation rates to that total population: 8. Estimate employment growth; 9. Determine in-migration, mostly 10. Add in-migration to demographic population to arrive at total 11. Determine “household formation” rates; 12. Apply household formation or headship rate F (b 2) HousingTotal Need = PopulationTotal x Household Formation S Estimating long-term growth in the demograp estimating total housing need. Demographic population growth refers to growth attributed exclusively to natural increase, or the number of new births, less deaths. Migration into the region is not taken into account in the demographic population. In the most significant of which is the projected aging of the population. Over the next several decades, the number of people over 65 and over 80 years old will nearly triple. By 2035, one quarter of the population, almost 2.3 million people will be 65 years or older. Over three million people will be over 55; this is one- third of the Bay Area’s projected population. As we plan our communities, and move forward with the development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy, we will need to consider the needs of a much older, and perhaps significantly greater non-driving population, including the need for non-auto dependent mobility and smaller homes. ployment Growth pulation is directly impacted by economic growth. Population growth is taff assumes that there will be a long-term decline in employment growth, over previous forecast tep 3: In-Migration tion is driven by economic opportunities in the Bay Area relative to opportunities Step 2: Em The region’s total projected po attributed to two fundamental factors: natural increase and net in-migration. Economic opportunities are a key driver to in-migration. Therefore, to understand migration you first need to understand how the regional economy will grow, specifically how many jobs the Bay Area will have in the next 25 years. S periods. Considering the magnitude of the recession and anticipated slow recovery, in 2009 ABAG reduced its long-term forecast by nearly 140,400 jobs for the year 2035, compared to earlier forecasts. Under the recommendation contained in this staff report, the 2035 forecast would be reduced by 700,000 jobs over Projection 2009 estimates. (See discussion regarding employment forecasting method above) S As stated above, migra outside the region. A primary driver of in-migration occurs when a tight labor market causes people (economic migrants) to relocate to obtain employment. Once employment growth is estimated, labor force participation rates are applied to the demographic population. The difference between the available labor force and the number of new jobs is the unmet demand for labor. The demand for labor is supplied by migrants into the region and in-commuters. 10 M 11 igration is also composed of (although to a much lesser extent) social migration and retirement tep 4: Compute Total Population d, net migration can be computed. The net number of new migrants PopulationTotal = Population(births-deaths) + Net Migration(jobs) tep 5: Headship Rates/Household Formation population who are heads of household. Every head of ine how many housing units are needed to house the entire he chart above, constructed from data compiled by a housing economist at the National Association of imates have been included. This estimate was migration, which is dependent on employment, income and the cost of living. Data from the Department of Finance on projected migration by age cohort demonstrates that an increasing number of seniors will be migrating out of the region by 2040. Even considering the increase in retirement migration, we project the 65 years and older age group to see the greatest growth rates in the coming decades. S Once employment growth is estimate into the region is added to the demographic population to make up the region’s total projected population. S Headship rate is the percentage of people in the household, theoretically, requires a separate housing unit. If there were no restrictions on the number of housing units available, i.e. those that exist due to local land use policies or other financial and/or environmental constraints on development, every head of household would form new “households” or need a home. The rate of new households that are formed is called the household formation rate. It is these rates that are applied to the total population to determ population. T Home Builders (NAHB), shows U.S. age-specific headship rates for 2002. Notice that those age 65 and over have a headship rate four times that of 15- to 24-year olds, and about third larger that those in the 25- to 34-year old category. As the senior age group grows, this difference in headship rates really begins to matter. That the Bay Area’s population is dramatically aging over the next 25 years, therefore, has significant implications for the region’s total housing need. To describe the method more fully, exemplary household est 12 tep 6: Apply Headship Rate to Total Population la uses household formation rates to determine how HousingTotal Need = PopulationTotal x Household Formation ousing Need and the In-Commute forecast is inter-regional commuting. People working in the Bay made by starting with the 2000 census headship rates by age and racial/ethnic group for the bay area. Since the Projections 2009 forecast did not differentiate racial/ethnic populations, estimates in the forecast years were derived using data from the California Depart of Finance’s long run population forecast. After reviewing various state demographic methodologies, and consulting with state from other regions, it was assumed that individual racial/ethnic headship rates would trend 50% toward the 2000 regional mean by the 2040 forecast year. This is to reflect the pattern of migrant groups taking on the characteristics of the broader population over time.. S Once total population is determined, the second formu many house units are needed to house the total population. H A related component of the population Area, but living outside the region are motivated by factors similar to economic migrants. However, housing costs and opportunities cause them to make different choices, i.e. to live just outside of the region in surrounding counties, rather than within the region. If the region were to supply sufficient housing to meet all demand, as generated by both demographic changes and migration, then inter-regional commuting would be obviated. If the total need is not supplied, then people will continue to choose to live just outside of the region, and commute in to their place of employment. Therefore, the amount of housing supplied by the region has a direct impact on the numbers of people who commute into the region. S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 1 Planning Committee STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: February 1, 2012 Subject SB375/SCS Implementation Update and Transmittal of Comment Letter on SCS Alternatives Summary of Issues ABAG has requested comments from local jurisdictions on the evaluation results for the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) alternative scenarios. Staff has developed general comments on the three constrained Alternative Scenarios, and has compiled comments received to date from Contra Costa jurisdictions. Staff recommends transmittal of a comment letter to MTC/ABAG on the SCS Alternatives. Recommendations Approve transmittal of comment letter to MTC/ABAG on the SCS Alternatives Financial Implications N/A Options Allow the selection of a preferred SCS alternative to proceed without further comment Attachments A. Draft comment letter to Executive Directors Steve Heminger, MTC, and Ezra Rapport, ABAG Executive Director Ms. Adrienne Tissier, Chair of MTC, and Mr. Mark Luce, President of ABAG – Authority Comments on SCS Alternative Scenarios – (Revised) B. Comment letters from local jurisdictions regarding the SCS Alternative Scenarios – (Revised) Changes from Committee The Planning Committee (PC) approved transmittal of a comment letter to the Chair of MTC and the President of ABAG, supporting the restoration of the Current Regional Plans scenario, and requesting development of a balanced jobs‐ housing scenario based on Current Regional Plans. PC directed staff to continue to work on the letter, noting that in some jurisdictions, large differences still remain between the proposed scenarios and local general plans. Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 2 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 2 Background In response to Senate Bill (SB) 375, MTC is required to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that meets the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction targets for cars and light trucks as established by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Work is currently underway at the regional agencies to define and evaluate a number of SCS alternatives with an objective of establishing a preferred SCS alternative by March 2012 for incorporation into the 2013 Regional Transportation Plan (the RTP, also known as Plan Bay Area). Evaluating the Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) Alternatives Work continues at the regional agencies on the analysis of five SCS alternatives: 1. Initial Vision Scenario (IVS): As defined in April 2011, this scenario assumes unconstrained housing and jobs growth for the Bay Region through 2040, and focuses the majority of new growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs). 2. Core Concentration Unconstrained (CC‐U): Uses the unconstrained land use forecasts from the IVS, and focuses growth more in the PDAs that are located in the inner bay areas of San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose. 3. Focused Growth Scenario (FG): This scenario is constrained and recognizes the potential of the PDAs and Gorwth Opportunity Areas (GOAs), with an emphasis on housing and job growth along major transit corridors. 4. Constrained Core Concentration Growth Scenario (CCC): This scenario uses a constrained land use forecast, while concentrating housing and job growth at selected PDAs in the inner Bay Area (defined as areas along the Bay from Richmond south to San Jose and up to San Francisco), and along the region’s core transit network. 5. Outer Bay Area Growth Scenario (OBA): This scenario addresses higher levels of housing and jobs growth in the outer Bay Area in the context of a constrained land use forecast, shifting jobs and housing away from San Francisco. To qualify as an SCS, the alternatives must meet a per capita GHG reduction target of 7 percent below 2005 emissions by 2020, and 15 percent below 2005 by 2035. Recently released modeling results from ABAG and MTC indicate that all of the alternatives meet the 7 percent GHG reduction target for 2020, but none meet the 2035 emissions reduction target of 15 percent. As shown below in a PowerPoint slide extracted from Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 3 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 3 MTC staff’s presentation, GHG reductions for 2035 range from minus 7.9 percent for the Outward Growth scenario, to minus 9.4 percent for the Constrained Core Concentration alternative. 10 Each of the five scenarios exceeds the 2020 target. The year 2035 result exceeds, in each scenario, the year 2020 result. To bridge the remaining gap, MTC proposes to introduce a series of policy initiatives that would further reduce GHG emissions across all alternatives by an additional 6.5 percent. The policies, when overlaid upon the SCS alternatives, would bring both the Focused Growth and the Constrained Core Concentration alternatives to the 15 percent target. The remaining alternative come within a fraction of a percent (for example, Outward Growth would have a 14.4 percent reduction, just 0.6 percent away from the target). The proposed policy initiatives are outlined on the following page (also extracted from MTC staff’s PowerPoint): Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 4 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 4 Policy Initiative Per‐Capita CO2 Emissions Reductions (2035) Smart Driving Campaign1 (changing driver behavior to improve fuel economy; ~$27 m over 5 yrs) 1.4% Bicycle Network (build out of the regional bike network; ~$2,200 m over 28 yrs) 0.5% Safe Routes to Schools/ Pedestrian Network (expansion of the SR2S and a continued TLC program; $500 m over 5 yrs) 0.3% Vanpool Incentives (significant increase in the monetary incentive; ~$37 m over 10 yrs) 0.9% Electric Vehicle Strategy (consumer incentives, education, and charger installations to accelerate EV adoption; ~$170 m over 10 yrs) 1.0% Commuter Benefit Ordinance (mandatory pre‐tax transit passes or employer operated shuttles; admin cost) 0.3% Telecommuting (no specific policies identified at this time) 1.4% Parking Pricing (modest pricing throughout the region with higher pricing near transit; meter & enforcement cost) 0.7% TOTAL 6.5% Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 5 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 5 With this information at hand, Authority staff is prepared to comment to MTC and ABAG on the SCS alternatives. A draft comment letter is shown in Attachment A, with key points summarized as follows: • The alternatives scenario evaluation lacks a “no‐build” alternative. We would like to see that alternative, formally known as “Current Regional Plans (CRP),”restored and made comparable to the SCS alternatives • The Outward Growth scenario, which initially sounded promising, turns out not to embrace the regional job center concept that we previously requested MTC/ABAG to analyze • The overall forecast for the region still appears to be higher than recent data would dictate, given the ripple effects of the recession, and perhaps a sixth alternative that lowers the forecast and promotes subarea jobs‐housing balance should be explored • The recently ‐introduced policy initiatives significantly change the playing field. Depending on how aggressive they are (assuming they are all in the 6 percent to 8 percent range), any of the alternative scenarios could become viable SCS options regardless of land use distribution. The Importance of Maintaining “Current Regional Plans” as the “No‐Build” Alternative The CRP Alternative is essentially the “no‐build” scenario for the SCS. It was developed by ABAG through extensive input from local staff and was based upon adopted general plans. The CRP was released by ABAG as draft Projections 2011 in December 2010. Authority staff views the CRP alternative as a critical benchmark that reflects local general plans, including some preliminary SCS elements as set forth in adopted specific plans for selected PDAs, that would remain in effect even if the new RTP is not adopted. According to MTC staff, the CRP, when tested using the T‐2030 financially‐ constrained transportation network, resulted in a 7 percent reduction in GHG emissions. The CRP corrected for the impacts of the recession, with significantly lower growth figures than ABAG’s Projections 2009 from two years prior. These recession corrections, when coupled with new modeling results, further increased emissions reductions for draft Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 6 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 6 Projections 2011 and the CRP by 5 percent (from 2 percent to 7 percent) compared with Projections 2009. Staff believes that the performance of the CRP alternative would improve slightly if it were analyzed using the same unconstrained transportation network that MTC assumed for the Constrained Core Concentration and Focused Growth alternatives, which were each tested assuming increases in transit frequency of 46 percent regionwide. MTC and ABAG staff have indicated that they no longer support the CRP alternative, and that they will no longer analyze it as a “base case” for comparison to the “build” Alternatives 1 through 5. Indeed, they have also opted not to update the CRP to reflect the 2010 Census, making it more difficult for Authority staff to attempt “apples‐ to‐ apples” comparisons with the SCS alternatives. Without the CRP, however, we have no benchmark with which to compare the SCS Alternatives. We therefore, in our comment letter, request that MTC/ABAG restore the CRP as the “base case” or “no build” alternative for the SCS analysis. Other Comments The attached comment letter points out that the proposed land use changes for the constrained SCS alternatives (FG, CCC, and OB) involve especially significant land use shifts when compared to adopted policies as reflected in the CRP. The changes to GHG emissions, however, are marginal. This becomes acutely evident when viewed in the broader context of AB 32, which addresses total emission reductions for all sectors, including industry, manufacturing, construction, and agriculture. Because so much of the Bay Area has already been developed, changes in future land use patterns – even the extreme changes considered in the Core Concentration Alternatives – have very little impact on GHG emissions from cars and light trucks. Although the regional forecast for the FG, CCC, and OB Alternatives is “constrained,” it still assumes growth rates that are considerably higher than those experienced in the past 20 years, and it still does not fully incorporate the ripple effects of the persistent recession. We therefore have asked MTC to consider lowering the forecast. A lower Planning Committee STAFF REPORT February 1, 2012 Page 7 of 7 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Brdltr SB 375 Update.docx 4.B.4‐ 7 forecast would likely improve the performance of all of the alternatives, because as we have learned through the visioning exercise (the IVS and CC‐U), lower population growth means less travel, less congestion, and fewer emissions. Also noted in our letter are the effects of the recently‐introduced policy alternatives (enhanced telecommuting, electric vehicles, etc.), which were brought in by MTC and ABAG to close the remaining gap between the SCS alternatives and the GHG emissions target. These have a far more significant impact on emissions than land use changes. With a 6.5 percent reduction, they are five times as effective as the most aggressive SCS Alternative (Core Concentration Unconstrained). Furthermore, the assumed percentage reductions that MTC assigned to each individual policy, if “tweaked” by only a couple of percentage points, result in even the CRP meeting the SCS target. Enhanced telecommuting, for example, with its direct impact on trip reduction, could move the needle several percentage points in the right direction if more aggressive policies were pursued. We therefore at this time recommend that MTC/ABAG restore Current Regional Plans as a “no build” benchmark and perform an “apples‐to‐apples” comparison with the SCS alternatives. We also suggest a sixththat the preferred alternative that wouldshould blend the CRP with local jurisdiction comments on the development prospects of the PDAs, and would foster the achievement of subarea jobs‐housing balance in places like East County that are striving to achieve it. This new preferred alternative, called the “Subregional Jobs‐Housing Balance” alternative, cshould result in a reasonable, achievable SCS that has local support, is congruous with local land use plans and programs, and meets the emissions targets. COMMISSIONERS David Durant, Chair Don Tatzin, Vice Chair Janet Abelson Genoveva Calloway Jim Frazier Federal Glover Dave Hudson Karen Mitchoff Julie Pierce Karen Stepper Robert Taylor Randell H. Iwasaki, Executive Director 2999 Oak Road Suite 100 Walnut Creek CA 94597 PHONE: 925.256.4700 FAX: 925.256.4701 www.ccta.net February 15, 2012 Ms. Adrienne J. Tissier, Chair Mr. Mark Luce, President Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments Joseph P. Bort Metro Center Joseph P. Bort Metro Center 101 Eighth Street P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94607‐4770 Oakland, CA 94607‐4756 Subject: Authority Comments on Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Alternative Scenarios Dear Ms. Tissier and Mr. Luce: ABAG staff recently requested local agency comments on its land use scenarios developed as part of the Bay Area’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). The Authority (CCTA) acknowledges the high level of outreach with which ABAG staff engaged the CMAs and local jurisdictions during the SCS development process, and appreciates the opportunity to comment on the alternative scenarios. The passage and implementation of AB 32 and SB 375 set in motion a very complicated and challenging task for MTC and ABAG: to define a Sustainable Communities Strategy that will have broad regional support while reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as part of a broader statewide effort. The Authority commends MTC and ABAG staff on the thought and effort they have dedicated to the San Francisco Bay Region’s SCS and the work here in Contra Costa, in particular. Regional agency staff explained the rationale and assumptions of the SCS’s development; provided the initial and interim versions of the SCS to local planning agencies in a variety of formats and at several levels of geography; and worked diligently to both elicit and respond to comments, questions, and criticisms of the proposed allocations of forecast growth to the individual communities, PDAs, and other small‐area levels. The Authority is helping to facilitate review of the SCS process and alternatives by the County and our 19 cities and towns. We encouraged jurisdictions to send their comments to us and the letters we received are attached. Draft 4.B.4-8 ATTACHMENT A Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 2 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx Each responding jurisdiction is pleased to participate in the process and is committed to help develop a workable SCS. All are concerned, however, about some or all of the alternatives and their underlying assumptions. Their analyses lead us to offer the following comments as part of a continuing effort to respond to MTC and ABAG and improve the SCS process and its chances for implementation. The Jobs and Housing Forecasts Remain Too High Which Has Important Ramifications for the Region We recognize and appreciate that the jobs and housing forecasts used for the alternative scenarios are lower than those employed in the Initial Vision Scenario and the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario.1 Nevertheless, the new forecasts for the three constrained scenarios remain at the high end of remotely plausible outcomes for the forecast period. We find insufficient justification for the forecasts used in the alternative scenarios in the material provided to us. Regarding jobs, from 1990 to 2007 the Bay Region added jobs at an annual rate of 25,200.2 Skipping over the “great recession” to the year 2010, ABAG is assuming in its constrained forecast for Scenarios 3 through 5 that the region will add 33,200 jobs annually from 2010 to 2040.3 This pace of growth seems highly speculative and anything but “constrained”. We briefly note that the future housing growth picture has changed dramatically following the collapse of the housing bubble and the resultant recession.4 Recent work performed by a nationally recognized economics consultant reduced the 2040 housing forecast for Contra Costa by 100,000 units. We therefore suggest that you revisit the housing forecast, taking into account the time required for the market to re‐absorb foreclosed and abandoned housing units before a resurgence in building can occur. 1 The jobs and housing forecasts of the two unconstrained forecasts (Scenarios 1 and 2) offer, in our view, neither a reasonable nor an achievable basis for developing the SCS. Therefore, neither is considered in the balance of this letter. 2 2007 Jobs (3,652,000) ‐ 1990 Jobs (3,224,400) = 427,600, / 17 (years) = 25,153/year. 3 2040 Jobs (4,266,752 ‐ 2010 Jobs (3,271,878) = 994,874, / 30 (years) = 33,162/year. 4 The 2011 Woods & Poole series projected 548,770 Contra Costa households by 2040, 17,100 less than the Initial Vision Scenario but 36,850 higher than the Outer Growth scenario. In 2012, while still recognizing the relatively strong growth potential of the Western United States, California and the San Francisco Bay Area, Woods & Poole has reduced its 2040 forecast to 448,131 households for Contra Costa County: that’s 24,100 households lower than the Constrained Core Concentration scenario comparable forecast. 4.B.4-9 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 3 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx We also refer you to the analysis prepared by Palo Alto Council member Greg Schmid that demonstrates a pattern of forecasts consistently exceeding actual growth.5 These are more than debating points. The forecasts would require numerous General Plan changes to accommodate more intense land use than currently anticipated in many jurisdictions and may overwhelm the capacity of current, planned and affordable infrastructure. Our jurisdictions also note that the housing forecasts in the alternative scenarios may form the basis for the next round of RHNA allocations, which in turn may require jurisdictions to make major changes to their housing elements, some of which were only recently approved. Adopting more realistic jobs and housing forecasts would diminish demands to intensify land uses, reduce GHG production by reducing energy consumption, congestion and trips, and necessitate less expensive improvements to transit and highway infrastructure and operations. Therefore, we strongly recommend that the jobs and housing forecasts for the preferred scenario be reduced in light of historical performance, current conditions, and more likely outcomes for future growth. Contra Costa County is Diverse and No Single Scenario Adequately Meets the Aspirations and Conditions of our Jurisdictions Alternative Scenarios 3, 4, and 5, while applying identical “constrained” household and job forecasts region‐wide, offer significantly different land use futures for the Bay Area. “Focused Growth” (FG), “Constrained Core Concentration Growth” (CCC), and “Outward Growth” (OG) each follow a distinct pattern of distribution of the fixed increment of future regional growth. As a county with extensive growth potential in multiple PDAs (with less potential in others) and with communities and sub regions classified as both “Inner Bay Area” and “Outer Bay Area”, the differences between the alternative scenarios are, for Contra Costa, very large indeed. Furthermore, the alternative scenarios are inconsistent with the Current Regional Plans (CRP) scenario, which received an extensive review by local staff and which reflects expected growth based upon local general plans.6 With regard to comments on individual PDA and city allocations, we refer you to the 5 Greg Schmid, Councilmember, City of Palo Alto “California Demographic Forecasts: Why are the numbers over‐ estimated?,” November 2011, included in City of Palo Alto’s City Council Staff Report “Response to Alternative Scenarios for SCS”, dated December 5, 2011. 6 Current Regional Plans – essentially ABAG Projections 2011– was extensively reviewed by the planning staff of Contra Costa’s local jurisdictions and in our view reflects the most likely land use forecast for Contra Costa. 4.B.4-10 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 4 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx attached letters received from our jurisdictions. Reflecting the diversity of our 19 cities and towns, each jurisdiction finds different scenarios more to their liking. No single scenario reflects the aspirations and conditions of a large share of our jurisdictions. To illustrate this point, the following table (based upon attached subarea Tables 1‐12) compares the Current Regional Plans (CRP) to the three alternative scenarios (FG, CCC, and OG) for four Contra Costa sub areas, which are in themselves not homogeneous. Figures 1 and 2 summarize these observations. Figure 1. Subregional Household Growth 2010 ‐ 2040 by SCS Scenario 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 West County Central County East County Tri‐Valley (C.C.C) Tri‐Valley (A.C.) Ne t Ne w Ho u s e h o l d s CRP Growth FG Growth CCC Growth OG Growth Figure 2. Subregional Job Growth 2010 ‐ 2040 by SCS Scenario 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 West County Central County East County Tri‐Valley (C.C.C) Tri‐Valley (A.C.) Ne t Ne w Jo b s CRP Growth FG Growth CCC Growth OG Growth 4.B.4-11 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 5 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx We conclude that any successful SCS must be a combination of the alternative scenarios and the Current Regional Plans. Contra Costa County Sub-Area Alternative Scenarios (Compared to Current Regional Plans) 3. Focused Growth (FG) 4. Constrained Core Concentration (CCC) 5. Outward Growth(OG) West County Intensified housing growth (Table 1) Arbitrarily cuts job growth in half (Table 2) Represents the closest housing growth to the CRP (Table 1) Arbitrarily cuts job growth in half (See Table 2) Slightly increased housing growth (Table 1) Arbitrarily cuts job growth in half (Table 2) Central County & Lamorinda Slight increase in housing growth (Table 3) Slight decrease in job growth (Table 4) Slightly less housing growth than the CRP (Table 3) Fewer jobs (Table 4) Significantly higher (38%) housing growth (Table 3) Job growth higher than CRP (Table 4) East County Housing growth that most closely resembles the CRP (Table 5) Significant (more than 50%) reduction in job growth for East County compared to the CRP (Table 6) Reduced housing growth (Table 5) Significant (more than 50%) reduction in job growth for East County compared to the CRP (Table 6) More housing growth than the CRP (Table 5) Significant (50%) reduction in job growth for East County compared to the CRP (Table 6) Tri-Valley Reasonable housing growth for Contra Costa, slight reduction for Alameda portion (Table 7) Increased jobs for Contra Costa; lower job growth for Alameda portion (Tables 8 and 10) Significant reductions in planned housing growth Reasonable job growth for Contra Costa Significant reductions in job growth for Alameda (Table 10) Overall, 35% reduction in jobs (Contra Costa and Alameda combined – Table 12) More housing growth for Contra Costa, less for Alameda portion (Tables 7 & 9) More job growth for Contra Costa, less for Alameda portion (Tables 8 & 10) Overall job growth similar to CRP (within 3%) 4.B.4-12 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 6 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx Land Use Changes Make a Limited Contribution to Achieving the AB 32/SB 375 Target and Differences among Scenarios Are Minor After careful review of the SCS Alternatives, we are compelled to comment on the overall GHG reduction targets and the factors that will help achieve them. Figure 3, on the following page, shows the forecast of GHG emissions in the state of California over the next 40 years. During this time, the SB 375 target is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 85 million equivalent metric tons per year (tons) by the year 2050, a more than 80 percent reduction. By the year 2020, to return emissions to the 1990 level of 427 tons, forecast emissions of 507 tons have to be reduced by 80 tons. Of the 80 ton reduction, only three tons, or roughly four percent are to be achieved by altering land use patterns as envisioned through SB 375; the 96 percent balance is to be achieved from improved fuel standards, energy efficiency, industrial measures, and other methods to curb emissions from the construction, manufacturing, and agricultural sectors. We conclude from Figure 3 that changes in regional land use patterns offer a relatively small contribution to the overall strategy for reducing GHG emissions. Given the significant and challenging regulatory, economic, and investment efforts necessary to fundamentally change land use patterns, the question of cost effectiveness arises. What are the costs of the relatively modest reductions in GHG emissions associated with variations in land use patterns? And might there be less costly, more feasible options for achieving them? A key lesson that we have learned from the regional agencies’ efforts is that GHG emissions are not particularly sensitive to land use change. In fact, the Alternative Scenarios show reductions in GHG by 2040 ranging from minus 7.9 percent to minus 9.4 percent. Compared to the CRP, which received a minus 7.0 percent based on the higher starting point of the 2000 Census, even the most aggressive land use changes only move the needle a couple of points. 4.B.4-13 Constrained Core Concentration Initial Vision/Core Concentration Focused Growth Outward Growth Current Regional Plans 9.4% 9.1% 8.2% 7.9% 7.0% Bay Area Regional Contribution Scenarios Mi l l i o n M e t r i c T o n s C O 2 E q u i v a l e n t 15% 0% 50 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 100 250 300 350 150 200 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 80% 427 427 800** 85 275 4 3 2 1507 610 *Million Metric Tons CO2 Equivalent Tons* 2020 Emissions 507 Target 2020 Emissions (1990)427 Forecast 2050 Emissions 800** Target 2050 Emissions (20% of 1990) Target 2035 Emissions (interpolated) 85 Required Reductions: Year Tons* By 2020 80 By 2050 715** 1 2 3 4 5 275 **Estimate based on California Council on Science and Technology Report, 2011 IMPROVED FUEL EFFICIENCY (PAVLEY I & II) LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARDSREGIONAL LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION (SCS) Projected Land Use & Transportation Emissions Reductions NON-TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS REDUCTIONACTUAL/PROJECTED EMISSIONS 5 Figure 3: Regional Land Use and Transportation SCS Achieving StAtewide ghg Reduction tARgetS 4. B . 4 - 1 4 Ms . Ad r i e n n e Ti s s i e r Mr . Ma r k Lu c e Fe b r u a r y 15 , 20 1 2 Pa g e 7 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 8 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx We Recommend a Preferred SCS Focused on the Current Regional Plans and Incorporating the Policy Directions Being Contemplated We urge MTC/ABAG to restore the Current Regional Plans Scenario as a benchmark, or “Base Case” that gives us an “apples‐to‐apples” comparison with the SCS Alternatives. Specifically, we would like to see the CRP updated to the 2010 Census, and extended out to 2040, so it is comparable to the SCS alternatives. We would also like to see the CRP tested using the core transit network that was used to evaluate the Focused Growth and Constrained Core Concentration Scenarios. This will further inform us of the performance of the SCS alternatives, apples‐to‐apples. We ask that you incorporate the CRP forecast into the SCS analysis as the “no‐build” alternative. The CRP includes three important concepts that our jurisdictions want the final SCS to incorporate: 1) Restore jobs to the east and west subareas; 2) match Central County housing growth with available capacity; and 3) include a more realistic jobs, population, and housing forecast. Restore Jobs to the East and West Subareas We are concerned about the cutback in job growth for Contra Costa’s East and West subareas. East County in particular is already “housing rich” and “jobs poor.” Yet all of the scenarios (FG, CCC, and OG) assume 50 percent fewer jobs than the CRP. Reduced job growth in East County will only serve to exacerbate congestion on Highway 4. We, therefore, cannot support any alternative that forces more East County residents to commute to the inner Bay to get to their jobs. Historically, West County has had more workers than jobs, and prior to the recession the jobs‐housing balance in that subarea was steadily improving. Yet all of the scenarios (FG, CCC, and OG) assume a 50 percent reduction in job growth. This assumption will generate congestion, especially on I‐80, as more workers living in West County would be forced to commute to Oakland or San Francisco to their jobs. In our previous letter, we advocated for consideration of “regional job centers.” We were initially heartened to learn that MTC/ABAG had added an Outward Growth Scenario specifically to respond to our suggestion. We are now, however, disappointed to find that the OG scenario increases housing in areas of Contra Costa that already were approaching jobs‐housing balance (in Central County, for example), and reduces jobs in the places where they are needed the most (East and West County). We request 4.B.4-15 Ms. Adrienne Tissier Mr. Mark Luce February 15, 2012 Page 9 S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\4.B.4 Attach.A.SCSAlt.Comment Letter.docx that the final SCS scenario at a minimum restores job growth in West and East County to the CRP levels, and improves jobs‐housing balance throughout Contra Costa. Match Central County Housing Growth with Available Capacity The OG Scenario adds 13,628 additional households in Central County compared with the CRP. This 38 percent increase assumes a growth rate of 1,646 new dwelling units per year. Not since the 1970’s has Central County come close to this rate of growth. Even including development of the Concord Naval Weapons Station, we consider this forecast unrealistic. Include a More Realistic Jobs, Population, and Housing Forecast Our comments on the forecast for the alternative scenarios are described above. A more plausible forecast will reduce the need for the major modifications in land use policy required by the alternative scenarios and can look more like Current Regional Plans. Finally, we understand that since none of the alternatives achieves the 2040 GHG reduction goal, you are analyzing “policy directions” to bridge the gap. We applaud this decision and note that these directions may reduce GHG by approximately 6.5 percent. This effect is four times the variation among the Alternative Scenarios and would enable all scenarios and the CRP to meet the GHG goal. The Authority recommends an SCS incorporating these features, coupled with a robust T‐2040 transportation network, and the newly introduced policy directions. This should result in a reasonable, achievable SCS that has local support and is congruous with local land use plans and programs. We look forward to continuing this very engaging and productive dialogue with you on the Bay Region’s future. Sincerely, DRAFT David E. Durant Chair cc: CMA Directors Doug Kimsey, MTC Ken Kirkey, ABAG File: 13.03.08.06 Attachments 4.B.4-16 Table 1. West County Household Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 88,549 26,334 114,883 3. Focused Growth 88,549 29,744 118,293 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 88,549 27,795 116,344 5. Outward Growth 88,549 29,651 118,200 Table 2. West County Job Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 62,590 36,092 98,682 3. Focused Growth 62,590 18,775 81,365 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 62,590 18,087 80,677 5. Outward Growth 62,590 18,914 81,504 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios HOUSEHOLDS *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS 4. B . 4 - 1 7 Table 3. Central County Household Forecasts (includes Lamorinda) Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 146,020 35,764 181,784 3. Focused Growth 146,020 39,185 185,205 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 146,020 32,920 178,940 5. Outward Growth 146,020 49,392 195,412 Table 4. Central County Job Forecasts (includes Lamorinda) Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 176,455 56,873 233,328 3. Focused Growth 176,455 53,769 230,224 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 176,455 48,122 224,577 5. Outward Growth 176,455 65,632 242,087 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios HOUSEHOLDS *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS 4. B . 4 - 1 8 Table 5. East County Household Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 102,962 36,286 139,248 3. Focused Growth 102,962 33,175 136,137 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 102,962 30,390 133,352 5. Outward Growth 102,962 47,355 150,317 Table 6. East County Job Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 55,943 41,880 97,823 3. Focused Growth 55,943 17,100 73,043 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 55,943 15,565 71,508 5. Outward Growth 55,943 21,757 77,700 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS HOUSEHOLDS 4. B . 4 - 1 9 Table 7. TriValley ‐ Contra Costa Household Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 37,833 8,632 46,465 3. Focused Growth 37,833 9,071 46,904 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 37,833 5,780 43,613 5. Outward Growth 37,833 10,155 47,988 Table 8. TriValley ‐ Contra Costa Job Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 57,882 14,819 72,701 3. Focused Growth 57,882 16,344 74,226 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 57,882 14,666 72,548 5. Outward Growth 57,882 20,001 77,883 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios HOUSEHOLDS *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS 4. B . 4 - 2 0 Table 9. TriValley ‐ Alameda Household Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 71,031 41,359 112,390 3. Focused Growth 71,031 34,060 105,091 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 71,031 28,744 99,775 5. Outward Growth 71,031 39,594 110,625 Table 10. TriValley ‐ Alameda Job Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 119,678 59,742 179,420 3. Focused Growth 119,678 37,941 157,619 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 119,678 33,781 153,459 5. Outward Growth 119,678 52,336 172,014 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios HOUSEHOLDS *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS 4. B . 4 - 2 1 Table 11. TriValley ‐ Total (CCC & AC) Household Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 108,864 49,991 158,855 3. Focused Growth 108,864 43,131 151,995 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 108,864 34,524 143,388 5. Outward Growth 108,864 49,749 158,613 Table 12. TriValley ‐ Total (CCC & AC) Job Forecasts Scenario 2010 Growth 2010‐2040 2040 Total 0. Current Regional Plans* 177,560 74,561 252,121 3. Focused Growth 177,560 54,285 231,845 4. Core Concentration‐Constrained 177,560 48,447 226,007 5. Outward Growth 177,560 72,337 249,897 *2010 Base Normalized to Alternative Scenarios HOUSEHOLDS *2010 Base Normalized to 2010 Census JOBS 4. B . 4 - 2 2 Comments Received from Local Jurisdictions on the SCS Alternative Scenarios From Date of Comment Via Signed By Notes City of Antioch 1/26/2012 Letter Tina Wehrmeister, Community Development Director City of Brentwood Pending ‐‐ City Council to review scenarios 2/14/12 ‐ feedback to follow (per Debbie Hill) City of Clayton City of Concord Pending ‐‐ City Council to review scenarios 3/6/12 ‐ feedback to follow (per Carol Johnson) Town of Danville City of El Cerrito City of Hercules City of Lafayette 1/31/2012 Letter Carol Federighi, Mayor City of Martinez Informal comments transmitted to ABAG via email Town of Moraga City of Oakley 1/31/2012 Letter Bryan Montgomery, City Manager City of Orinda Pending ‐‐ City Council met on 1/31/12 and directed staff to draft a comment letter City of Pinole 1/18/2012 Letter Peter Murray, Mayor City of Pittsburg City of Pleasant Hill (1)12/20/2011 Letter Greg Fuz, City Planner 2 letters submitted City of Pleasant Hill (2)1/30/2012 Letter June Catalano, City Manager 2 letters submitted City of Richmond City of San Pablo 1/24/2012 Letter Cecilia Valdez, Mayor City of San Ramon City of Walnut Creek Comments transmitted via ABAG survey Contra Costa County S:\05‐PC Packets\2012\02\Authority\SCS Comment Log As of 2/6/2012 AT T A C H M E N T B 4. B . 4 - 2 3 4.B.4-24 City of Pleasant Hill December 20, 2011 Kenneth Kirkey, Planning Director Association of Bay Area Governments Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 10 1 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94604 SUBJECT: Priority Development Area Modification -Diablo Valley College Bus Transit Center and Buskirk Avenue Corridor, Pleasant Hill, CA Dear Mr. Kirkey: O ree,clod- The City has recently concluded a review of the boundaries of its two existing Priority Development Areas (PDA's) located at the Diablo Valley College Bus Transit Center and within the Buskirk Avenue Corridor. The purpose of conducting this review was to ensure that the PDA boundaries more accurately reflect, and take into consideration, existing adopted City land use and planning maps and documents, including, but not limited to the General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Map, applicable specific plan boundaries, redevelopment project area boundaries, Housing Opportunity sites, as well as, right-of-way and parcel boundaries. The revised boundaries also exclude existing single family residential neighborhoods that are not contemplated to transition to other uses during the planning period. The PDA boundaries originally established in 2007 were conceptual in nature and, as a result, should not be relied on for SCS scenario planning and/or related employment and household growth projections. Please provide the attached revised PDA boundary maps to the appropriate staff in your organization so that they can be referenced as the SCS process goes forward. Please also note that the City continues to be concerned that the projections for household and employment growth being made by the SCS team substantially exceed the amount of growth the City anticipates will occur as envisioned in our General Plan and based on constraints noted in our May 17, 2011 correspondence (attached) commenting on the Initial Vision Scenario. Further infonnation regarding the PDA boundary revisions is included in the attached applications which we are providing to you in the event that they are needed for your records. Also please note that the overall vision and place type for both PDA areas are unchanged from when both were first designated as PDA's. The revised PDA boundaries have been reviewed and approved by both our Planning Commission and our City Council (see attached resolutions and exhibits). 100 Gregory Lane • Pleasant Hill • Califomia 94523-3323 • (925) 671-5270· FAX (925) 256-8190 4.B.4-25 December 20, 2011 Page 2 If you have any questions please contact me at (925) 671-5218 or through email at gfuz@ci.pleasant-hill.ca.us. Attachments: A Letter from the City of Pleasant Hill Mayor to the ABAG, MTC and BAAQMD, dated May 17, 2011 B City Council Resolutions of Support for PDA Modifications, including Proposed Modified Priority Development Area boundaries (both PDA's) C Planning Commission Resolutions of Support for PDA Modifications (both PDA's) D Amended FOCUS Priority Development Area Applications (both PDA's) CC: City Council Planning Commission City Manager City Attorney City Engineer File 4.B.4-26 .'II PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA ~ PROPOSED MODIFICATION "~f DIABLO VALLEY COLLEGE BUS TRANSIT CENTER s N.T.S. 4.B.4-27 .'Ii PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA ~ PROPOSED MODIFICATION /f~£ BUSKIRK AVENUE-MONUMENT BOULEVARD CORRIDOR s N.T.S. 4.B.4-28 CITY OF PINOLE 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA 94564 Tel: (510) 724-8912 Fax: (510) 724-4921 January 18, 2012 Mr. Mark Green, Chair Association of Bay Area Governments P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Via Email: markg@unioncity.org Ms. Adrienne J. Tissler, Chair Metropolitan Transportation Commission Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4770 Via Email: atissier@co.sanmateo.ca.us RE: Sustainable Communities Strategy -Alternative Land Use Scenarios Dear Mr. Green and Ms. Tissier, Thank you for providing the Sustainable Communities Strategy land use alternative scenario information for our consideration and input. The City has reviewed the alternative scenarios and underlying assumptions and compared the 30-year forecasts to our recently updated General Plan and Three Corridors Specific Plan. Our specific plan applies to portions of the City (San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way) that the City has prioritized for development. The City was mindful of SB375 requirements when establishing the policy direction and development standards to support sustainability and GHG reduction over time within our land use planning documents. We utilized property owner input and parcel specific analysis to determine dwelling unit potential and assess market demand for job-generating land uses. We allowed for greater development intensification and adopted a variety of mixed use· designations to provide flexibility to respond to changing market conditions. We also included extensive policy support for encouraging the evolution of a multi-modal transportation system including greater transit ridership. This policy direction depends on future regional funding to support more efficient transit service within Pinole including the extension of new passenger service travel modes to northwest Contra Costa County to relieve Interstate 80 congestion over time. This letter follows prior City staff feedback to ABAG staff over the past two years including comments on the Initial Vision Scenario last May. We are pleased that ABAG and MTC have prepared alternatives to the Initial Vision Scenario to provide a more realistic distribution of housing units based on proximity to existing transit. We believe the Core Concentration scenario which more closely links housing growth to frequent transit service is a more realistic approach than was used in the Initial Vision scenario. We also support allocating at least 70 percent of planned housing production within PDAs that are closest to major downtowns and along key transit corridors where viable alternatives to auto use now exist. 1 4.B.4-29 Due to our financial capacity and current transit service levels, we believe enhanced transit investment within Pinole is needed to support the transit-oriented higher densities of over 30 dwelling units per acre planned within portions of Pinole. This may not be feasible within the preferred SCS alternative. Additionally, the land assembly challenges associated with small properties under separate ownership and local socio-economic conditions, including school quality, hinder likely housing growth within Pinole. Consequently, we believe a maximum of 17% household growth or approximately 1,100 housing units should be utilized for Pinole in the preferred SCS alternative. Through the City's recent planning effort, the City increased its employment development potential by intensifying allowable non-residential development along the Specific Plan Corridors in Pinole. As part of the review of the SCS job growth alternative assumptions, the City evaluated existing employment densities and the economic forecasts utilized to prepare the Specific Plan. Based on this information, the City anticipates job growth of approximately 16% or 1,000 jobs during the SCS planning period. The City also supports the employment growth assumption that at least 50 percent of job growth should be expected to occur in the region's 10 largest cities and the remaining 50 percent should be planned primarily for PDAs closest to key transit corridors. We appreciate this opportunity to provide initial feedback on the detailed SCS alternatives. During the coming weeks, City staff will provide further information. We look forward to working with you during the SCS and RTP preparation process. Sincerely, p~?:::;if Mayor cc: Ken Kirkey, ABAG Planning Director Sailaja Kurella, Regional Planner Martin Engelman, CCTA Christina Atienza, WCCTAC Project File 2 Zci O ___ 0 H L)CITorSANPABLO ,N January24,2012 Ms.Sailaja Kurella,Regional Planner Association of Bay Area Governments 101 Eighth Street Z Oakland,CA 94607-4756 Subject:Comments on the “Alternative Scenarios” Dear Ms.Kurella, <This letter is in response to the recent release of the Technical Analysis on the five proposed Alternative Scenarios by MTC/ABAG to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS).As an unconstrained scenario,the City of San Pablo recognizes that many of the assumptions in the first scenario,the Initial Visions Scenario (IVS),would have to change in order for the SCS to be an effective and realistic tool toward meeting the greenhouse gas reduction goals established by AB 32 and SB375. We preface our comments by acknowledging that the purpose of the IVS was to initiate a discussion about a consensus-oriented regional approach to steering long-term sustainable growth and to thereby explore a potential regional sustainable growth scenario where development of two of the most vital ingredients to a sustainable Bay Area —housing production and transit service — was unconstrained. The report released in December of 20lldefines and analyses the five Alternative Scenarios (one of which is the Initial Vision Scenario itself);and offers four additional Alternatives to meet the goals of the SCS.The City of San Pablo has formed a City Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee that has been selected to review and provide feedback on the development of the SCS.Below are our comments on each of the proposed scenarios: 1383 I San Pablo Avenue,Building I •San Pablo,CA 94806 Main:5 I 0-215-3000 •Fax:5 10-620-0204 www.SanPabloCA.gov City of New Directions 4.B.4-30 z -z -L o « ~ ....... C...) ~ ::i d CITYofSAN PABLO ~ January 24, 2012 Cily '!f New Direclions ....... U Ms. Sailaja Kurella, Regional Planner Association of Bay Area Governments 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Subject: Comments on the" Alternative Scenarios" Dear Ms. Kurella, This letter is in response to the recent release of the Technical Analysis on the five proposed Alternative Scenarios by MTC/ABAG to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). As an unconstrained scenario, the City of San Pablo recognizes that many of the assumptions in the first scenario, the Initial Visions Scenario (IVS), would have to change in order for the SCS to be an effective and realistic tool toward meeting the greenhouse gas reduction goals established by AB 32 and SB375. We preface our comments by acknowledging that the purpose of the IVS was to initiate a discussion about a consensus-oriented regional approach to steering long-term sustainable growth and to thereby explore a potential regional sustainable growth scenario where development of two of the most vital ingredients to a sustainable Bay Area -housing production and transit service - was unconstrained. The report released in December of 2011 defines and analyses the five Alternative Scenarios (one of which is the Initial Vision Scenario itself); and offers four additional Alternatives to meet the goals of the SCS. The City of San Pablo has formed a City Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee that has been selected to review and provide feedback on the development of the SCS. Below are our comments on each of the proposed scenarios: 13831 San Pablo Avenue, Building I • San Pablo, CA 94806 Main: 510-215-3000 • Fax: 510-620-0204 www.SanPabloCAgov Ms.Sailaja Kurella Association of Bay Area Governments January 24,2012 Page 2 Scenario 1 (The Initial Vision Scenario) and Scenario 2 (Core Concentration Scenario): Based on the Technical Analysis released in December,both of these scenarios are based on unconstrained growth;assume very strong employment growth, and unprecedented funding to support housing affordability.Scenario 1,the Initial Vision Scenario which was released in March 2011 was discussed at our City Council in May of 2011.At that time it was concluded that this unconstrained scenario would be unattainable given the lack of resources and economic support.Scenario 2,Core Concentration,which is also an “unconstrained” scenario,faces the same challenges as Scenario 1 as far as the need for unprecedented funding.The difference between the two being that Scenario 2 would be developed to provide a more concentrated development pattern along transit corridors.These two scenarios continue to be unattainable and inconsistent with local planning efforts as far as the number of Households that would be allocated to San Pablo. Scenario 3 (The focused Growth Scenario)and Scenario 4 (Constrained Core Concentration): Both of these scenarios concentrate housing and job growth at selected Priority Development Areas in the inner Bay Area along the region’s core transit network and job centers-San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose.These two scenarios assume the same total number of Households for San Pablo of 11,108.In the past year,the City of San Pablo has conducted extensive public outreach in efforts to inform a New General Plan for the City and a new Specific Plan for San Pablo Avenue that focuses on Transit Oriented Development and developing a complete community.Local efforts have resulted in the creation of new General Plan designations and densities.To this effect the maximum build out for San Pablo is to accommodate a total of 10,620 households and both Scenario’s 3 and 4 would undermine this local planning effort. Scenario 5 (Outer Bay Area Growth Scenario): This scenario addresses higher levels of growth in the Outer Bay Area and is closer to previous development and the local planning efforts of jurisdictions in the past years,but with lower rates of job dispersal.Regional Centers and large City Centers grow but slower than other Place Types,while Suburban Centers and office parks outside of PDAs continue to grow at higher rates than the regional average.This scenario also assumes more growth of households in what is considered the Outer Bay Area,while allowing for greater growth along PDA’s.For San Pablo this is the alternative that makes the most sense.This scenario assumes the number of households would be at 10,620,in line with our recently adopted General Plan,and it also increases the number of jobs in our 4-304.B.4-31 Ms. Sailaja Kurella Association of Bay Area Governments January 24, 2012 Page 2 Scenario ,1 (The Initial Vision Scenario) and Scenario 2 (Core Concentration Scenario): Based on the Technical Analysis released in December, both of these scenarios are based on unconstrained growth; assume very strong employment growth, and unprecedented funding to support housing affordability. Scenario 1, the Initial Vision Scenario which was released in March 2011 was discussed at our City Council in May of 2011. At that time it was concluded that this unconstrained scenario would be unattainable given the lack of resources and economic support. Scenario 2, Core Concentration, which is also an "unconstrained" scenario, faces the same challenges as Scenario 1 as far as the need for unprecedented funding. The difference between the two being that Scenario 2 would be developed to provide a more concentrated development pattern along transit corridors. These two scenarios continue to be unattainable and inconsistent with local planning efforts as far as the number of Households that would be allocated to San Pablo. Scenario 3 (The focused Growth Scenario) and Scenario 4 (Constrained Core Concentration): Both of these scenarios concentrate housing and job growth at selected Priority Development Areas in the inner Bay Area along the region's core transit network and job centers-San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose. These two scenarios assume the same total number of Households for San Pablo of 11,108. In the past year, the City of San Pablo has conducted extensive public outreach in efforts to inform a New General Plan for the City and a new Specific Plan for San Pablo Avenue that focuses on Transit Oriented Development and developing a complete community. Local efforts have resulted in the creation of new General Plan designations and densities. To this effect the maximum build out for San Pablo is to accommodate a total of 10,620 households and both Scenario's 3 and 4 would undermine this local planning effort. Scenario 5 (Outer Bay Area Growth Scenario): This scenario addresses higher levels of growth in the Outer Bay Area and is closer to previous development and the local planning efforts of jurisdictions in the past years, but with lower rates of job dispersal. Regional Centers and large City Centers grow but slower than other Place Types, while Suburban Centers and office parks outside of PDAs continue to grow at higher rates than the regional average. This scenario also assumes more growth of households in what is considered the Outer Bay Area, while allowing for greater growth along PDA's. For San Pablo this is the alternative that makes the most sense. This scenario assumes the number of households would be at 10,620, in line with our recently adopted General Plan, and it also increases the number of jobs in our Ms.Sailaja Kurella Association of Bay Area Governments January 24,2012 Page 3 City to 10,618 -practically a 1:1 ratio between households and jobs.The jobs would be strategically centered along the PDA’s in San Pablo (San Pablo Avenue,and 23rd Street).This option is consistent with our local planning efforts and encourages a healthy balance of households to jobs that would be of great benefit to our community and will result in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled by our residents to jobs outside of our City,and hence a reduction in greenhouse gases,as required by SB375 and AB32. We look forward to continuing to work with you through this very important planning process.We are also very interested in learning how the recent State Supreme Court ruling on Assembly Bill xl 26 and Assembly Bill xl 27 will affect the development of the SCS and future funding for PDA’s. We would also like to assert that the City of San Pablo is committed to participating in the SCS process and we would be more than willing to discuss any practical and achievable local land use planning efforts that meet the needs and maintain the character of our City and work to address the goals of AB32 and SB375.We realize that no one scenario is going to fit perfectly the needs of every jurisdiction.Please feel free to contact Tina Gallegos,City Planner if you have any additional questions or would like to schedule a follow up meeting.We look forward to continuing to work with you through this very important planning process. Sincerely, Cecilia Valdez Mayor of the City of San Pablo cc:San Pablo City Council City Manager 4-314.B.4-32 Ms. Sailaja Kurella Association of Bay Area Governments January 24, 2012 Page 3 City to 10,618 -practically a 1:1 ratio between households and jobs. The jobs would be strategically centered along the POA's in San Pablo (San Pablo Avenue, and 23rd Street). This option is consistent with our local planning efforts and encourages a healthy balance of households to jobs that would be of great benefit to our community and will result in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled by our residents to jobs outside of our City, and hence a reduction in greenhouse gases, as required by SB375 and AB32. We look forward to continuing to work with you through this very important planning process. We are also very interested in learning how the recent State Supreme Court ruling on Assembly Bill x1 26 and Assembly Bill x1 27 will affect the development of the SCS and future funding for POA's. We would also like to assert that the City of San Pablo is committed to participating in the SCS process and we would be more than willing to discuss any practical and achievable local land use planning efforts that meet the needs and maintain the character of our City and work to address the goals of AB32 and SB375. We realize that no one scenario is going to fit perfectly the needs of every jurisdiction. Please feel free to contact Tina Gallegos, City Planner if you have any additional questions or would like to schedule a follow up meeting. We look forward to continuing to work with you through this very important planning process. Sincerely, ~h/-J'~ Cecilia Valdez ' ~ Mayor of the City of San Pablo cc: San Pablo City Council City Manager 4-324.B.4-33 January 26, 2012 Ms. Adrienne J. Tissier, Chair Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 Mr. Mark Luce, President Association of Bay Area Governments P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94607 Re: Comments on the Sustainable Communities Strategy - Alternative Land Use Scenarios Dear Ms. Tissier and Mr. Green: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Sustainable Communities Strategy - Alternative Land Use Scenarios. The Alternative Land Use Scenarios, along with comments received, will be used to develop the preferred scenario and the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) required by SB 375. The overarching goal of SB 375 and the SCS is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by integrating transportation and land use planning. As an additional means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the City has previously stated that it would support a SCS that shows future job growth in areas that are already "housing rich" which will reduce commute times. It is therefore disappointing to see that all scenarios do not project the amount of jobs that Antioch is hoping to attract in the future. In particular I would like to call your attention to the Hillcrest e-BART Station PDA. The City has prepared a specific plan for this area which calls for transit oriented development that will be a job center as well as contain high density residential development. The specific plan projects 5,600 jobs in this PDA alone while the SCS Alternative Land Use Scenarios project 321 jobs at best and 155 jobs at worst. This' discrepancy skews the job projections for the entirety of the City. The City recognizes that focusing future housing density near transit hubs is an important way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as the region grows. Therefore, Antioch would support the Focused Growth Scenario which emphasizes housing along major transit corridors with the caveat that all scenarios are flawed in projecting future jobs as discussed above. - Community Development Department P.o. Box 5007·200 H Street ·Antioch, CA 94531-5007· Tel: 925-779-7035 • Fax: 925-779-7034· www.ci.antioch.ca_us 4-32 4-334.B.4-34 Comments on the Sustainable Communities Strategy - Alternative Land Use Scenarios January 26, 2012 Page 2 Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Alternative Land Use Scenarios. I am available to discuss the City's position with ABAG and MTC staff and can be reached at 925.779.7038 or twehrmeister@ci.antioch.ca.us. Sincerely, J,WUtA~ Tina Wehrmeister Community Development Director cc: City Council Planning Commission Jim Jakel, City Manager Mindy Gentry, Senior Planner Ezra Rapport, ABAG Ken Kirkey, ABAG Steve Heminger, MTC Doug Kimsey, MTC 4.B.4-35 J~nuary 31, 2012 Ms. Adrienne J. Tissier, Chair MetropolItan Transportation Commission Joseph P. Bort Metrocenter iOl Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4770 Mr. Mark luce, President City Council Carol Federighi, Mayor Mike Anderson, Vice Mayor Brandt Andersson, Council Member Carl Anduri, Council Member Don Tatzin, Council Member Associ~tion of Bay Area Governments P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Subject: Response to the Alternative Scenarios for the Sustainable Communities Strategy Dear Chair Tissier and President luce: Thank you for the opportunity to submit the City of lafayetteJs comments on the Alternative Scenarios for the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). We appreciate ABAG's and MTCs continued efforts to develop the process and products to comply with SB 375. Developing the SCS for the Bay Area, with its . economjc, social, and environmental diversity, is a significant challenge for all of us. Therefore, we want to first thank ABAG and MTC staff for addressing some of the City's concerns with the loitial Vision Scenario. The City's comments on the Alternative Scenarios are in two parts -generar and comments specific to Lafayette. General Comments • T~e presentation of the Scenarios continues to be overly complicated and academic. There is too much emphasis on methodology and data-crunching rather than summarizing the presentation into a simpre statement describing a-practical plan. This plan should be based on historic trends in regional and local growth and established focal land use policies, which should drive more reasonable expectations about future growth. • The Scenarios (emain unrealistic from a common sense perspective. While it is possible projected growth could be accommodated physicaUy, it is highly unlikely Bay Area growth will attain the levels projected considering the historic trends, shrinking availability of funding, and environmental constraints. We agree with the findings of Palo Alto's Councilmember Greg Schmid. As an economist, he surveyed a variety of growth projections made before 2005, including ones from UC Berkeley, UCLA, and the California Department of Finance, to be far too optimistic about growth rates. CouncHmember Schmid cited a report from the Public Policy Institute of California that 4.B.4-36 City of lafayette Response to the Alternative Scenarios for the Sustainable Communities Strategy JanuarY 311 2012. - Page 2of4 • • • • • included population projects of all key demographic forecasters. The consensus forecast from this group was 40 percent higher than the actual outcome. The Scenarios are based on the antiCipation of an improving economy and assume an overly optimistic rate of job growth inconsistent with historical experience of job growth even during periods of economic growth. Job growth in the Bay Area at times has been lower than the national rate. Studies show that parts of the Bay Area} such as Silicon VaHey, will probably recover sooner. However, other areas, such as those with depressed housing markets, will not recover as quickly. The annual forecast of new jobs might occur during portions of the forecast period, but it is highly unlikely to occur throughout the period. This is important since the jobs forecast influences both population and household growth and the need for new housing. The forecast also affects the production ofthe.greenhouse gases (GHG). The-increased emphasis on jobs in the Alternative Scenarios over the Initial Vision raises the question-of what happens if a city or county cannot provide sufficient development to accommodate both projected jobs and housing. Redevelopment has been the major tool in producing affordable housing and public infrastructure il!lprovements and in promoting economic development. This tool is no longer available .. making the .Scenarios even more unrealistic. The scope of the Preferred Scenario must respond to the foss of this funding. , . Whn~ GHG reduction targets can .be met in the short-term, they cannot be met in the long-term using any of the Alternative Scenarios. The Scenarios do little better than the Current Regional Plan (eRP) and aU rely on additional policy initiatives to meet performance targets. This suggests that the CRP should be established as the baseline Scenario, updated to the 2010 Census, and extended to 2040 so that it is comparable to the other Scenarios. As these other policy initiatives appear to be capable of meeting the GHG targets .. the focus should be on making only minor adjustments to the . CRP. Identified transportation funding for needed infrastructure to support any of the Alternative Scenarios is -and will continue to be -woefully inadequate. Comments Specific to lafayette • The growth projected for the downtown in our General Plan and the current version of the draft Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) is consistent with the characteristics and development guidelines for a Transit Town Center. For this reason, any additional development projected for lafayette's PDA beyond what is projected in our plans is unnecessary. • The number of households in the Focused Growth Scenario for the city as a whole is consistent with our General Plan projections. For the downtown I PDA, the Focused Growth and Constrained Core 4.B.4-37 City of lafayette Response to the Afternative Scenarios for the Sustainable Communities Strategy January 31t 2012 Page 3 of4 Concentration Scenarios are the most consistent with the General Plan and OSP. While the City prefers its own General Plan and OSP as incorporated into the eRP, the City supports the Focused Growth Scenario for Lafayette's household growth citywide and in the POA. • Except for the Core Concentration Scenario, the jobs projections are unreasonable. While it is likely there will be increased telecommuting throughout the city in the future, almost aU new jobs that are not home-based wiH occur in the downtown. The downtown cannot accommodate the amount of job growth projected by the other three Alternative Scenarios and meet the housing requirements. Therefore, the City can only support the Core Concentration Scenario for job growth; the other Scenarios are unrealistic and unacceptabre. • However, as demonstrated through the DSP proce.s$, additional growth in Lafayette's downtown, even under the General Plan, will result in substantial traffic impacts. These impacts are even more significant because of projected growth in Moraga. This is growth that is beyond our control, and yet it significantly affects the quality of Ufe in lafayette every day. There win be other environmental issues as well. It is the goal of both the Genera) Plan and DSP to maintain our downtown character and preservation of our hillsides and existing neighborhoods. Meeting this goal constrains future development. Even achieving the projections in the General Plan ultimately may not be feasible. As listed in our Jetter commenting on the Initial Vision Scenario fast year, these constraints include: Because of our topugraphy and the soil conditions of our hUlsJdesT more intense levels of development are limited to the downtown. The downtown is limited by a lack of parcels available or suitable for redevelopment. The OSP EJR estimated that at most 30 percent of the downtown would redevelop by 2030. Existing traffic Levels of Service in the downtown are already at lOS O· at some intersections with two major intersections at LOS F. The DSP EIR shows that under the General Plan buHdout scenario more intersections could reach LOS 0, EI and F by 2030 and mitigation may not be feasible. A network of creek corridors with significant riparian habitat crisscrosses the downtown. There is a lack of parks in the downtown -onlyO.7 acres. This does not come dose in meeting our General Plan's standard of 5 acres /1,000 residents. The DSP proposes three additional parks in the downtown to meet this shortfall, and these park sites would not be available for additional development. • The Preferred Scenario should not only recognize Lafayette's constraints, but the constraints that exist in every community. 4.B.4-38 City of lafayette Response to the Alternative Scenarios for the Sustainable Communities Strategy January 31, 2012 Page 4 of4 As a conduding comment, Lafayette is not alone in having serious concerns about the highly speculative and ultimately unrealistic direction that the SCS appears to be taking and in questioning the possible excessive reliance of 5B375 on land development patterns different from existing general plans. It may be time to begin the discussion on how to realistically address dimate change in California without burdening already-impacted cities and counties. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the Alternative Scenarios. We-will continue to be an active participant in the SCS process, and look forward to reviewing the Preferred Scenario with our comments incorporated and the EIR. In the meantime, jf you have any questions for the City, please contact Ann Merideth} Special Projects Manager at amerideth@ci.lafayette.ca.us or 925.284.1968. -Sincerely, Carol Federighi Mayor Cc: Sailaja Kurella, ABAG 4.B.4-39 A Pt..-\C&jor FA..\UllES iii IN HE.-\IIT 0/ 1M DELTA 3231 Main Street Oakley, CA 94561 925625 7000 tel 9256259859 fax www.ci.oakley.ca.us January 31, 2012 MAYOR Kevin Romick VICE MAYOR Carol Rios COUNCILMEMBERS Pat Anderson Randy Pope Jim Frazier Steve Heminger, Executive Director MTC Joseph P. Bort Metro Center 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4770 Ezra Rapport, Executive Director ABAG Joseph P. Bort Metro Center 101 Eight Street Oakland, CA 94607-4770 SUBJECT: Oakley City Council Comments on Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Alternative Scenarios Dear Mr. HernhLger and Mr. Rapport On January 24, 2012, the Oakley City Council received a presentation on the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Alternative Scenarios. The City Council understands the challenges in achieving the benchmarked reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and the Council appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the alternatives. The City Council also supports the goals of pr.oviding housing and jobs to the Bay Area while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Since the beginning of the SCS process, back to Projections 2009, Oakley has been providing comments related to inconsistencies with the adopted Oakley General Plan. Although adjushnents were made to provide growth projections more closely resembling Oakleyl s General Plan, none of the alternative scenarios were able fa reach those marks. In regards to the SCS Alternative Scenarios, the Oakley City Council would like to offer the following comments: e The. five alternatives scenarios, and especially the three Hreasonable planning" alternative scenarios" do not seem realistic in that they fail to recognize some local agencies' planned growth and adopted General Plans. Q None of the alternative scenarios fulfill the Oakley General Plan when it comes to residential build out. The City Council believes housing 4.B.4-40 January 31, 2012 Comments on SCS Alternative Scenarios Page 2 of3 leads to jobs, and east County needs jobs. Also, east County provides housing options that may not be available in denser, urbanized areas. Also, many east County residents are those that prefer single family housing as a lifestyle choice over higher density attached or multi- family housing. e A risk to undermining the Oakley General Plan residential projections is the potential for Oakley to be unable to compete for funding in transportation and land use, and thereby lose some ability to competitively build a community that will provide housing and jobs to east County residents. o The recent elimination of Redevelopment Agencies further financially burdens local agencies. An alternative scenario that focuses growth and incentives in areas that do not include Oakley further puts Oakley behlnd when attempting to redevelop the City and attract jobs. o While focusing incentives and growth in already developed areas of the Bay Area may achieve some goals of the alternative scenarios, it does not solve one main problem of east Contra Costa County, which is the long and tenuous commutes of many residents to tl}.e job centers in central and west County, as well as job hubs in Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose. By providing funding and new and redevelopment to east County, it will become more attractive to job providers, result in more jobs, and eventually lead to less vehicle miles traveled per capita (a goal of GHG reduction). G The overall feeling of the Oakley City Council is that the SCS alternative scenarios do not have Oakley's best interests in mind. These alternatives to a regional approach fail to fully co~ider local agencies' planning processes and long term land use plans, and while it has been stated that the SCS alternatives will not result in a loss of local land use control, it is understood that funding may be more favorably provided to tI:ose agencies fulfilling the goals of the adopted SCS. If those goals do not match the goals of a local agency, that agency may not be able to compete for funding, which could be considered a loss of local land use control. 4.B.4-41 January 31/ 2012 Comments on SCS Alternative Scenarios Page 30f3 The City of Oakley City Council hopes these comments will be considered when developing an alternative scenario that looks to achieve the goals of the SCS. Oakley City Council recommends that alternative incentivizes Oakley and east County to continue to develop in a responsible manner so as to reduce vehicle miles traveled. per capita and continue to increase the quality of life for its residents. Bry ontgomery City Manager C: Oakley City Council 4.B.4-42 City of Pleasant Hill January 30, 2012 . ·Ms~·Adrienne J. Tissier, Chair Metropolitan Transportation Commission Joseph P. Bart MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 Mr. Mark Green, Chair Association of Bay Area Governments PO·Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94607 o recycled paper SUBJECT: City of Pleasant Hill Comment Letter ~Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) -Alternate Scenarios Dear Ms. Tissier and Mr . Green: Please consider the following comments regarding. the latest Alternative Scenario projections released by the Association of Bay Area Govemments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). As previously stated in our May 17, 2011 correspondence (attached), and more recentlyincorrespondence dated December 20, 2011 (attached); the City is concerned that projections for household and employment growth in Pleasant BiU being m,ade in the Sustainable Communities Strategie$ (SCS)'plamrlng ,process suhstantiallyexceedtheamount . of growth the City anticipates will occur as envisioned in our General Plan and based on various other City physical constraints. While the Core Concentration Scenario projects a reduction in overall emplo)'lllent .. gnlcwth during the planning period to 266 (from an increase oimore than 5~OOO itt the Initial Vision scenario), overall household growth is· projected to increase. by more than 700 over the Initial Vision scenario's .. projectiolls resulting in a: projecte~l increase, of 3,362. households by 2040. • The other three,Alternative Scetl~os allincl'Qde signiflcantlyhigher growtbprojectionsforhoth . households and employment when comptlred·. to the ... proJecti()Ils. containediu the Initial Vision . scenario. Consequently, the City remains very concerned that the growth. projections being generated by the SCS· planning process remain unrealistic and inconsistellt with our.· General Plan. The City remains supportive of the goals of the SCS . process provided that our concerns over growth projections for households and employment are adequately addressed. 100 Gregory lane -Pleasant Hilt -California 94523-3323 -(925) 671-5270 -FAX(92S) 256-8190 4.B.4-43 January 30: 2012 Page 2 If you have any questions please contact me at (925) 671-5204 or through email at Jcatalano@ctpleasant-hill.ca.us . ..• ~.~ ~ .. neca~ /' .~~; ~anager . . Attachments -J..etter from the City of Pleasant Bill Mayor to ABAG and MTC, dated May 17, 2011 andLett~r from the-City ofPleasan,t Hin to ABAG for Priority Development Area, Modifications, dated December 20; 2011 cc: City C;ouncil Plannifig Commission City Manager City Attorney CityErtgineer File Constrained Core Concentration Initial Vision/Core Concentration Focused Growth Outward Growth Current Regional Plans 9.4% 9.1% 8.2% 7.9% 7.0% Bay Area Regional Contribution Scenarios IMPROVED FUEL EFFICIENCY (PAVLEY I & II) LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARDSREGIONAL LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION (SCS) Mi l l i o n M e t r i c T o n s CO 2 E q u i v a l e n t 15% 0% 50 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 100 250 300 350 150 200 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Projected Land Use & Transportation Emissions Reductions 80% 427 427 800** 85 275 4 3 2 1507 610 *Million Metric Tons CO2 Equivalent Tons* 2020 Emissions 507 Target 2020 Emissions (1990)427 Forecast 2050 Emissions 800** Target 2050 Emissions (20% of 1990) Target 2035 Emissions (interpolated) 85 Required Reductions: Year Tons* By 2020 80 By 2050 715** 1 2 3 4 5 275 **Estimate based on California Council on Science and Technology Report, 2011 NON-TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS REDUCTIONACTUAL/PROJECTED EMISSIONS 5 Figure 3: Regional Land Use and Transportation SCS Achieving StAtewide ghg Reduction tARgetS City of Palo Alto Sustainable Communities Strategy (SB 375) Key Issues for Alternative Land Use Scenarios January 25, 2012 The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SB 375) requires a regional plan and a series of strategies that will produce a per-capita reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) over the next 25 years. SB 375 is based on the premise that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions may be reduced significantly by land use patterns and transportation facilities and programs to reduce VMT. The potential for GHG reductions relates to the extent to which land uses and transportation systems accommodate an unknown future of population increase, economic growth, market forces, and transportation funding availability and pricing approaches. As such, realistic basic demographic and growth assumptions for such a strategy are imperative to derive the appropriate strategies and to assure that cities and counties in the Bay Area region (and other regions) plan accordingly. Similarly, all alternatives to provide for GHG reduction strategies must be considered to provide the appropriate mix of programs to cost-effectively meet regional and statewide goals. To ensure these issues are adequately addressed, the City of Palo Alto believes that further independent analysis of many of the assumed demographic and economic projections and GHG benefits in the Initial Vision Scenario and Alternative Land Use Scenarios must be provided and the following key questions must be answered: Demographic and Economic Projections The proposed Alternative Land Use Scenarios anticipate an increase of 33,000 jobs annually in the region, as compared to 10,000 jobs annually in the past two decades. The attached table compares these growth rates through 2040 to past trends and a straight-line projection over the past 20 years. This is a dramatic increase as Silicon Valley and many other technology centers continue to find ways to provide value with fewer jobs, not more. The key questions include: “Are the assumptions for the demographic and economic projections realistic? Or are they overstated and reflective of a different time period when the economy of the region was manufacturing-heavy and migration to California and the Bay Area was rapid and substantial?”Is the approach of assuming a 2.45% of the projected national employment increase in the next 25-30 years appropriate? The following provides data appear strongly suggest that the projections are unrealistic: 1.The State’s Department of Finance (DOF)is working with a forecast model that projected a population growth of 9.9% for 2000-2010 for the Bay Area, whereas the Census showed a growth rate of 5.4% over that period.This represents a 45% overestimation of population in the region. For the West Bay counties (San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara), the DOF projected a 10.2% growth, while actual growth was 4.3%, thus an overestimate of 58%. A similar overestimate occurred for statewide population.See the attached memo from Councilmember Schmid for further background. SB375 Key Issues for Alternative Land Use Scenarios Page 2 2 2.Natural population increase (births –deaths)was 3.1 million for the past decade, the single largest factor of growth in the state. This increase is expected to fall from about 260,000 annually today to about 90,000 in 2040, due to the gradually aging population and a long- term decline in fertility rates that are now approaching a long-term replacement level. 3.Migration to the state has slowed substantially in the past decade and is not expected to rise dramatically in the future, due to factors beyond just the state or national economy. The primary contributor to in-migration in California is and will be from Mexico. However, the institutions studying migration (Dept. of Homeland Security, Pew Charitable Trust Hispanic Center, and the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton) all agree that immigration has slowed due to the economy and stricter immigration enforcement. Some of the studies, particularly from Princeton, also suggest that this is a long-term trend due to declining fertility rates, higher educational levels, and a lesser wage disparity in Mexico than in the U.S. than in prior years. The City of Palo Alto suggests that experts at Stanford University, the University of California, and/or the Public Policy Institute, among others, be consulted to provide independent auditing of the projections offered to date by ABAG and MTC, as well as those in other regions statewide. SB375 Key Issues for Alternative Land Use Scenarios Page 3 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions The goal of SB 375 is to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light trucks by 7 percent per capita by 2020 and 15 percent per capita by 2035 compared to 2005, as set by the California Air Resources Board (ARB)for the Bay Area. The Plan Bay Area SCS is focusing on achieving an unrealistically high population and employment increase that will require a significant amount of infrastructure and land use changes to support that growth. The key questions are:are there viable alternatives to allow cities to propose means to achieve GHG reductions at the local level to supplement the assumed savings for the region?Could the SCS allow cities to provide programs and facilities that may more effectively (less costly) achieve the needed GHG reductions? 1.The SCS is expected to provide for about 9% of the GHG reductions to satisfy statewide AB32 climate change objectives. These objectives are to be achieved by gaining a 15% per capita reduction in the Bay Area (actually yielding a slight total increase in GHG emissions). 2.Overestimating population and employment would mandate a level of infrastructure (particularly for transportation), new programs, and land use change that may not be warranted and almost certainly won’t be affordable. 3.Many cities have adopted or are considering climate change, land use, and transportation programs to reduce GHG emissions. Examples of efforts that relate to SB375 objectives include: compact development policies and plans, protected open space buffers, bicycle and pedestrian programs and facilities to decrease vehicle ridership, and promotion of electric vehicle infrastructure and programs. 4.Recent evaluation of the Alternative Scenarios shows that the three primary alternatives reduce GHG emissions by a range of 7.9 –9.3%, as compared to an objective of 15% by 2040. Since no alternative meets the GHG reduction targets, and the difference between scenarios is not extensive, cities should be allowed flexibility in how they achieve GHG reductions and demonstrate how they accomplish this through other transportation and land use initiatives. Page 1 Planning and Transportation Commission1 Verbatim Minutes2 February 8, 20123 4 DRAFT EXCERPT5 6 7 Update Regarding SB375 (Sustainable Communities Strategy) pertaining to designating Planned 8 Development Areas (PDAs), analysis of Alternative Scenarios,and next steps.9 10 Chair Martinez: Okay our last item on the agenda tonight is an update on SB375 by our Planning 11 Director Curtis Williams. Welcome.12 13 Mr. Curtis Williams, Planning Director: Thank you Chair Martinez and Commissioners. I’m going 14 to go through some of the Staff Report for you. There are three kind of main topics that I want to 15 cover with you as far as potential discussion items. Actually two of them I think are pretty minimal. 16 The third one more substantial. Just as a way of background, the last sort of actions we’ve taken 17 since we met with you are in November the Council approved after the Commission had discussed 18 also a letter to MTC, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission regarding their transportation 19 grant criteria. If you’ll recall the criteria had included some things like complete streets policy and 20 various other things and also focused on planned or priority development areas which we have one of 21 in California Avenue area. That’s were grants would go towards and then a third major criterion was 22 the certification of the housing element for the City in order to qualify for grants so we had sent a 23 letter to MTC at that point and requested certain changes in those criteria.24 25 Also, about the same time shortly thereafter we sent a letter to ABAG to indicate that we thought 26 they needed to segregate out Stanford’s share of the housing allocation as we did the last go round 27 with our housing location. They’ve not done that yet. The county where Stanford is located on the 28 campus, the county has also written a letter to ABAG requesting the same thing so we have another 29 housing methodology committee meeting in early March, March 8th I believe it is and at that time 30 we’ll be talking or seeing if they’ve made any changes to that and reflect that change which will 31 hopefully reduce our allocation by several hundred units if they do.32 33 Thirdly the Regional Housing Mandate Committee of the Council has met now once officially as a 34 standing committee. They had been meeting informally before that and so their last meeting was on 35 January 26th, that was a couple of weeks ago. It was the day after your meeting and so they discussed 36 some of the items we’ll be discussing tonight and actually gave us a recommendation on one of them 37 to take forward to the Council. 38 39 So the three main topics we want to talk about tonight are whether to designate other Priority 40 Development Areas. I think we used the term Planned Development Areas in the Staff Report but the 41 official term is Priority Development Areas and whether to designate downtown in the El Camino 42 corridor also as Priority Development Areas. Second issue is the one Bay Area Transportation Grant 43 criteria and responding to the latest version of that and then the third is sort of the bigger picture of 44 where we are in the alternative scenarios analysis that ABAG and MTC have put forward and how 45 we move forward to address that and the upcoming preferred scenario that they are working on 46 developing.47 48 Page 2 So first of all, actually this is coming through too lightly, these colors here but just indicate for you 1 here on this map, California Avenue, that kind of purplish color here is our one Priority Development 2 Area that we had submitted to ABAG a few years ago and so that qualifies for various transportation 3 and planning grant funding potentially it was helpful in garnering the support of VTA and MTC for 4 the California Avenue streetscape grant that we got. Second, as we’ve mentioned before, when the 5 agencies began looking at these various scenarios for growth in the Bay Area they took all these 6 Priority Development Areas and sort of mapped them out and said we really want to have 70% of 7 future growth land in those areas. They quickly realized that that was probably impossible because 8 there weren’t enough of those designated but they recognized that there were some other areas like 9 transit corridors and our downtown and such that potentially could handle more growth and might be 10 additional candidates for that growth so they called these growth opportunity areas. They asked us if 11 we had opportunities that might fit that category. We did not project number of units or anything like 12 that but we indicated we had El Camino corridor that has transit service, is close to a couple of train 13 stations and then there’s downtown which is close to the University Avenue train station and is a high 14 intensity area. So those were factored into their analysis however they do not have the status of the 15 Priority Development Areas and that now becomes significant because, as I mentioned, 16 Transportation Grant funding is proposed the way the new criteria are set out to be focused on these 17 Priority Development Areas so it may be that if we don’t have these other areas designated that we’re 18 not going to be able to request transportation funding for let’s say the Charleston El Camino 19 intersection if we wanted to do improvements there like we’ve done at the Stanford El Camino 20 intersection of something like that.21 22 So the two growth opportunity areas for us are the El Camino corridor which is hard to see here but 23 it’s mapped in this light beige color and then there’s kind of a yellow circle here around University 24 train station and downtown which is yet a third growth opportunity area. So the question becomes, 25 ABAG has allowed us now to request additional designations of these areas and we can request that 26 they become Priority Development Areas. The plus side of that is that we then qualify for 27 transportation funding assuming we meet the other criteria which include having a Certified Housing 28 Element and the downside we’re not sure about but it appears to us that they are likely to retain a 29 high, what we consider to be an unreasonably high development intensity showing in those areas. So 30 we do have concern if we ask for that designation we are going to set in place there a higher intensity 31 development than we would otherwise anticipate so we brought this forward to you.32 33 Our initial recommendation had been that we not have downtown designated. We don’t think there 34 really are that many transportation funding opportunities downtown in any event but that we might 35 do the El Camino Real corridor partly because it didn’t take a lot of staff work. VTA has already 36 designated it under what they’d like to see planned as a Priority Development Area but we did not. 37 But ABAG is willing to accept just a resolution from Council saying we agree with VTA’s 38 designation of that corridor so it would be a fairly straightforward thing to do but we’re still 39 concerned about the development side and how they target housing in particular in the PDA so we 40 went to the Council’s committee with this basically recommendation not to designate the downtown 41 and kind of an ambivalent recommendation about the corridor, the El Camino corridor and the 42 Council’s committee recommended that we not designate either the El Camino corridor or the 43 downtown as additional Priority Development Areas. It’s Staff’s feeling that that’s not a big risk to 44 take. We’re willing to take the chance, we believe that there will be other opportunities down the 45 road to designate PDAs if we get to a point where we are comfortable with where things are headed. 46 They’re not going to just all of a sudden say this is it for the next 30 years. We’re not going to allow 47 you to designate anything else but right now it just seems too uncertain as to what the implications 48 are of that further designation to do that. 49 Page 3 1 So Item 1 before you tonight is to weigh in on that recommendation to Council. We’ll be going to 2 Council on the 21st of this month and talking to them about it and seeing if they want us to pursue 3 either one of those PDA designations. 4 5 The second item is the One Bay Area Transportation Grant Program itself so as I mentioned, and 6 there’s information in your packet that is essentially an update letter about what recommendations 7 they took and what recommendations the MTC didn’t as far as agency’s comments on the One Bay 8 Area Grant Program, its Attachment G. They did streamline the other criteria. They did add 9 language such as we recommended that the PDA, rather than limiting grant funding within the 10 boundaries of that area, that it also included contributions, areas that contributed to that so for 11 instance, California Avenue is our PDA if we have shuttle program, develop a shuttle program we 12 want to have some funding from VTA from the research park which is outside the bounds of the 13 PDA, but the research park to the Cal Trans train station or something like that would qualify 14 geographically and that’s connected to the PDA. So they did do that. They eliminated some kind of15 ambiguous criteria and focused on the “complete streets concept” and wanting cities to have this 16 concept of using streets for pedestrian bicycle transit and vehicles. 17 18 Policies like that in their general Comprehensive Plans, several cities I know are very concerned 19 about that. They don’t intend on updating those plans for a while. They don’t have those policies 20 now and in our case I think its fine because we’re in the middle of updating the transportation 21 element. All our policies lead us in that direction anyway so we won’t have any problem meeting 22 that criteria but they do still have one of the criterion and is prerequisite at this point is we have a 23 housing element that’s certified by the State Housing Community Development Department prior to 24 June of 2013 or something like that for the present period so we may, but it’s a tough, we’ve got a 25 ways to go with it yet. 26 27 For your information 72% of cities in the Bay Area currently have a Certified Housing Element so 28 28% do not. There was originally something in there about, or you could have a Certified Housing 29 Element for the next period. It looks like they took that out. I don’t know whether that helps or hurts 30 us but in any event they still have that in there. There are a lot of cities that even though they may 31 have Certified Housing Elements they see this as a Harbinger of the future and they’re going to have 32 to keep it certified and it might be difficult to do down the road and it might be difficult to have this 33 in there and that HCD is pretty arbitrary in the way it deals with cities a lot of times there is concern 34 about having to negotiate back and forth with them to get certification and puts more power in their 35 hands over the Housing Element.36 37 So there is a fairly solid movement and coalescence on the idea of commenting back to MTC that 38 having an approved Housing Element by a city but not necessarily certified would be better language 39 and the Santa Clara County Planning Directors met last week and VTA was there as well and we’re 40 putting together a sort of joint position recommendation to MTC to that effect as well as some other 41 suggestions but that’s the primary one. 42 43 So Staff’s suggestion on this item is that we follow up the letter that was sent before and just hammer 44 home the issue on housing and leave the rest of the stuff alone but just hammer home the issue on the 45 Housing Element be certified and recommend that this not be a prerequisite to this, to getting grant 46 funding. So that’s the second item.47 48 Page 4 The third item is the alternative scenarios. So as we’ve discussed before there are basically five 1 alternative scenarios that have been outlined. I really don’t consider 1 and 2 to be in the realm of 2 possibility for, I think ABAG just started with those as kind of unconstrained options but the other 3 three, the focus growth, constrained core and outward growth are the three that are primarily under 4 consideration and then they hope to then focus down to a preferred scenario which we now hear will 5 be probably mid March that they’ll have something out for the MTC and ABAG boards to start 6 looking at.7 8 The three options, all of them aimed towards accommodating one approximately one million new 9 jobs and 770,000 new housing units in the next 25 to 30 years in the Bay Area. So they all then, the 10 way they are laid out and the way they are laid out the first two are pretty much to focus growth in 11 and around transit stations. The third one, outward growth, spreads it out more. It’s not business as 12 usual but it is certainly more dispersed than the other two options and we’ve shown you tables last 13 time you were here that showed that at the range for Palo Alto and housing units for instance is about 14 in that period of time about 6,100 new units under that outward growth scenario up to 12,500 new 15 units which is about a 50% increase in Palo Alto Housing stock for the 25 to 30 year period. 16 Simultaneously about 20 to 25,000 new jobs in Palo Alto over that period as well.17 18 So the Council and Committee have focused less on the specific details of how those alternative 19 scenarios and the distribution of them have happened than kind of challenging the overall numbers 20 and essentially saying this is 33,000 jobs per year compared to 10,000 that we had over the last 20 21 years as an average just seems to be out of whack. I did go to a presentation yesterday, Steven Levy 22 of Palo Alto, Dena Belzer who has worked here before and is well respected Economist in Berkeley 23 and a woman from University of California, I forget her name, a Housing Economist, presented for 24 the first time that we have seen presented, sort of the assumptions and how they got to these numbers 25 and it sounded pretty good but it still seems out there so we’re waiting to get the PowerPoint 26 presentations from them and we’ll get those out to you when we do but basically Steven Levy’s 27 perspective was that he worked with several other firms national firms and institutes as far as making 28 projections, everything from Bureau of Labor statistics to UCLA Anderson School and the various 29 other ones to drive essentially a national job growth projection for the next 25 to 30 years and then 30 looked at what the Bay Area’s percentage of the national job growth scene has been over time and its 31 fluctuated but its generally been between 2.4 and 2.8% or something like that.32 33 Then they looked at the sectors that they thought were most likely to generate jobs and a lot of them 34 tend to be things that are prominent like technology, entertainment, health care, those kind of sectors 35 and felt that we were well positioned to maintain a pretty high share of that and so they didn’t really 36 increase substantially I think it ended up being 2.4% of the national job growth over that period of 37 time and that gave them their total of almost a million jobs in the next 25 to 30 years in the Bay Area 38 and then rolling back from that, how many housing units does it take and they had said originally 39 770,000 making various assumptions about job to housing ratio.40 41 They’re reducing the housing number because of the foreclosures and figuring that a lot of, if you 42 have new jobs, a number of those people are going to fill houses that are empty right now so that will 43 probably bring the 770,000 number down more like 700,000 but its still a lot. So like I said it sort of 44 theoretically it still seems like it’s not reflecting the sort of increased productivity in the Bay Area, 45 some of the trends towards telecommuting and other things that are enabling people not to have to 46 have offices or go and move to a different location to have jobs.47 48 Page 5 So there are still questions about that but I think that after hearing it, it to me made me wonder how 1 difficult it’s going to be to challenge what they’re saying. They’ve got a fair group of economists 2 behind this thing, its not just ABAG Planning Staff coming up with those numbers. So we’ll be 3 pursing that on that note and also on some of the rest of the alternative scenario analysis. I’m going 4 to bring in a firm, Economic and Planning Systems, which is in Berkeley and they’ve done some 5 analysis recently for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority and I thought it was very well done, 6 looking at both the overall forecast as well as also they’ve looked at some of the sub areas of Contra 7 Costa County and how numbers didn’t seem to make sense just within those parameters.8 9 They also did,let me show you. The other component of this that is particularly concerning is that 10 you will recall the intent of this whole exercise is reportedly to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and 11 they have now, they took those alternative scenarios and they looked at the greenhouse gas targets for 12 the Bay Area as set forth by Air Quality Management Board is 7% per capita reduction by 2020, 13 2035 a 15% per capita reduction. So they have analyzed, given certain transportation substantially 14 upgraded transportation network and the different land use patterns on the three scenarios, what they 15 think that impact could be and so here this is 5 scenarios but the three bottom ones here are the ones 16 we’re most interested in I think.17 18 So the Draft Focus Growth scenario which is mostly focused in the PDAs but a little outside of that 19 shows a 7.4% reduction by 2020 which beats the 7% that was the target and a 9.1% reduction by 20 2035 I think. Yeah that’s here. The second one, Constrained Core Concentration, which is really the 21 most focused in Oakland and San Jose and San Francisco and us and the other smaller centers shows 22 7 1/2 % and then 9.4% reduction, not really too close to 15% reduction for any of them and then the 23 Draft Outward Growth which you might have thought would be kind of lagging far behind in terms 24 of greenhouse gas reductions is 7.9% by 2035 so the difference between the highest and the lowest is 25 not an awful lot. And then you take from that and one of the other things that this consulting firm 26 that we’re going to bring on to work with us has done is they’ve looked more at the greenhouse gas 27 issue and I think not only relate it to the different scenarios but also to the overall AB32 which is the 28 statewide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Law and as far as those targets go, this whole effort is about 29 4% of the reduction for the whole state, statewide AB32 and SB375 across the whole state is about 30 4% of the 100% so most of the rest is industrial sources and cap and trade or whatever you do, 31 emission controls the vehicle standards on cars, transition to more electric vehicles, etc., etc., 4% is 32 land use and transportation connections.33 34 Of that, you get to where it is showing some very different land use patterns here that aren’t showing 35 a tremendous difference in the amount of reduction and I think they’ve got another… That might be 36 the best one. At any rate, I think this consultant group has done some good charts showing that 37 relationship and they’ve indicated from the beginning of this process that if they can’t make the 15% 38 reduction then we’ll have to be looking at other transportation initiatives to help reduce it so this is a 39 list of some of the other transportation policy type initiatives that might help reduce greenhouse 40 gasses and you can see that commitments to additional bicycle networks, Safe Routes to School, 41 more electric vehicle strategy, focus on that, telecommuting, total could reduce by 6.5% on top of the 42 9.4 or 7.9 or whatever to get us to the 15% assuming these models are all correct but the point is that 43 that list of those strategies is much more significant than the gap between the different land use 44 policies and so maybe they should de-emphasize the land use connections in putting all the cities 45 through the ringer on being concerned about this and focus more on some of these transportation 46 policies and then maybe allow the cities flexibility to come up with their own additional 47 transportation policies to try to make up gaps if that’s the case so I’m starting to see more of a 48 direction for that. Unfortunately, they’re plowing ahead and like I said, ABAG plans on releasing a 49 Page 6 preferred scenario which I expect will be a hybrid between these three somewhere and coming out 1 with that in the second week of March I think it is. Their plan then is to have pretty much the whole 2 rest of the year being public review and city’s commenting, etc. on the preferred alternative and then 3 early in 2013 they’ll be deliberating at MTC and ABAG to adopt an alternative as the sustainable 4 community strategy for the region.5 6 So that’s where we are. Sorry it takes a while to get through it there. There’s just a lot going on. 7 The Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the next round of housing allocations is due out probably 8 in the next couple of months also and we had thought that that was going to be like one third of 9 whatever the 25 year scenario was because its going to cover 8 years now but they have recognized 10 the economic situation and apparently I haven’t seen numbers yet but they’ve apparently ratcheted 11 down the numbers considerably. What I heard last was that they will be, at least Bay Area wide, the 12 total housing unit objective will probably be like a quarter to a third less than it has been this last go 13 round which was a 7 year period so for an 8 year period it will be less. Now what that means, how 14 they allocate it and whether we still manage to get ours to go up more I can’t promise that that won’t 15 happen but that will come out then. So we’ve got a March 8th is the next meeting of that 16 methodology committee. Councilmember Scharff is at that committee so he’ll be at that meeting.17 18 Then we haven’t made many inroads as far as outreach. I know Commissioner Keller and I both 19 went to one of the community meetings that MTC and ABAG sponsored and that was worthless 20 pretty much the word for it. I think the agencies know that and its partly because the meetings you 21 haven’t heard have been sort of infiltrated by some property rights and advocates in that who have 22 sort of shouted down the speakers and really caused some disruption but even apart from that 23 generally the thrust of these things have been at such a high level, such a conceptual level, its DU 24 favor, having more housing near transit and greater open space in the hillsides and along the Bay or 25 not. It’s kind of that level, something they should have been asking two or three years ago in this 26 process. It should be a lot more specific so there wasn’t any presentation of these alternative 27 scenarios and what they might mean for the city you’re in and the opportunity to come at it 28 meaningfully. They did send out last week what they call a virtual survey I think is what they call it 29 and I just sent that out today to all of you, to the Council, to Palo Alto neighborhoods, to a long list I 30 have of civic organizations and such. It’s a survey that is along the same lines. It’s not much more 31 specific than the community meetings but I thought it was at least useful to get it out there and let 32 people know what’s happening, gave the link to this effort and I did put a little bit in the blurb that I 33 sent out about the 12,500 units for Palo Alto and that hopefully maybe some people can see that and 34 their eyes will open and they will focus in on it and try to get some more involvement. We’ve also 35 had, I sent that off to the school to get that distributed to the School Board and the Council’s 36 Regional Housing Mandate Committee if you don’t know will have one School Board member. 37 They haven’t appointed one yet so Bob Golton came on their first meeting but by the next meeting 38 which is the 23rd they will have that.39 40 I’ve also told them that I had mentioned to you all that if you would like to have a liaison appointed, 41 someone to come sit in on those meetings, it wouldn’t be a voting member or anything but you can 42 certainly come and be there so you can carry things back and forth between the Commission and the 43 Committee and they didn’t have any problem with that so feel free to do that.44 45 Tonight, the one particular action before you is on the Priority Development Areas, as I mentioned 46 the Council Committee recommended that we not pursue either of those, the downtown or El Camino 47 corridor for that. We don’t really need direction from you on the One Bay Area Transportation, 48 we’re going to write the letter in any event but if you want to say anything about that, that’s fine too 49 Page 7 and then any additional thoughts you have about how we proceed on these alternatives and when the 1 preferred alternative comes back or comes out next month how we bring that back to you would be 2 appreciated. Thank you for your indulgence.3 4 Chair Martinez: Thank you Curtis. We have one member of the public to speak so let’s open the 5 Public Hearing. Good, we have another coming up.6 7 Vice Chair Fineberg: Bob Moss to be followed by Cedric de La Beaujardiere.8 9 Mr. Bob Moss: Thank you Chair Martinez and Commissioners. I want to begin by reminding you of 10 something you’ve probably never heard of before. There’s a fellow who is the one time President of 11 Cal Tech and the Nobel Laureate in Physics and he had a saying that one of the greatest evils 12 bequeathed to us by the ancient Greeks was extrapolation and if you look at the figures, his name was 13 Murray Gilman by the way, if you look at the figures in the report where the projects are for growth 14 and also if you look at that letter that Greg Schmid sent he kind of rips it to shreds.15 16 The population growth in California for the first time in 160 years was just barely enough for us to 17 keep the same number of Congress members. It’s the first time we didn’t have an increase in 18 Congress. If you look at the details, out of the 3.4 million around numbers of new residents in 19 California almost 70% were foreign immigrants so are we going to project that we’re going to have 20 that many foreign immigrants over the next 30 years? I doubt it.21 22 The job predictions, 35,000 jobs in Palo Alto would bring us about 20 to 25,000 more than we had 23 during the peak of the dot com boom and that’s after eliminating some areas that were for 24 commercial and industrial and convert them into housing so it’s just not going to happen. It can’t.25 26 In terms of the PDA areas, if you look at that map along El Camino, if you adopt the PDA along El 27 Camino and go a quarter of a mile on either side, all of Ventura, all of Southgate, all of Evergreen 28 Park would be converted from single family to multifamily housing. More than a third of College 29 Terrace and almost half of Barron Park will be converted to multifamily housing. And what will 30 happen is some developer will come in, buy some lots in the R1 area, demolish the houses and build 31 high density housing and reduce the value of the existing housing which will start to create a series of 32 reductions in value. 33 34 What the Staff is saying is you are not going to get money from the state. Let me remind you of 35 something. Every multifamily unit which is built costs the City of Palo Alto a minimum of $1,500 a 36 year more for services than it pays in taxes. It could be as much as $1,900. So if you build 2,000 37 new multifamily units in Palo Alto, our deficit in the budget increases by over $3 million a year. I 38 don’t think that we should have El Camino as a PDA. I think you should agree with the Council and 39 limit it to California Avenue.40 41 Vice Chair Fineberg: Cedric de La Beaujardiere.42 43 Mr. Cedric de La Beaujardiere: So I’m actually thinking kind of the opposite of what Bob just spoke 44 but he’s got a lot more data. He’s thought a lot more about it than I have, I’ve just kind of come into 45 it tonight but to me it seems that to the extent that Palo Alto will be grown, I think we should try to 46 focus that growth in certain areas and I think El Camino is a good area to focus on that growth 47 because it is on that transit corridor. Maybe you could try to incentivize that higher density goes 48 more on El Camino and the density should decrease as it enters into the R1 zones. You already have 49 Page 8 an R1 zone and I think that is single family residential so I’m not sure what the current plan is for the 1 El Camino corridor in terms of the Comprehensive Plan but I would hope you would tend to focus it 2 on El Camino and not scatter it about.3 4 I had something else but I can’t remember it. Thanks very much.5 6 Chair Martinez: Okay thank you. If there are no more speakers from the public we shall close the 7 Public Hearing. Planning Director Williams.8 9 Mr. Williams:I just wanted to clarify for Cedric that, and I’m not speaking for the City but I think 10 generally our Comp Plan heads this way and most of our policies that we do support higher density 11 growth along the El Camino frontage and in downtown as well as the California Avenue area, its just 12 a matter of the degree of that and the compatibility with it and so not having it encroach into the 13 single family areas, having it be at a scale that’s compatible but what we’re seeing is so the basic 14 principle of where growth would be and what’s being laid out is not so much an issue as it is a scale 15 and the magnitude of what’s being discussed and so I think that’s where our focus is but I wouldn’t 16 want to be seen as that we’re not agreeing that if there are areas that would accommodate higher 17 densities or intensities that those are the areas generally but much more narrowly focused or moderate 18 in intensity than what ABAG and MTC have shown.19 20 Chair Martinez: Okay Commissioners. As always we’re going to start with Commissioner Keller. 21 Did you want to go over your questions that you submitted?22 23 Mr. Williams: Yes I apologize for that. I was going to go over these questions and I don’t know if I 24 have any great answers to them but the first one was the memo by Councilmember Schmidt which I 25 did get to you and he does do this analysis of the growth related to sort of historically and in 26 particular the last 20 to 30 years vis-a-vis what’s being projected at this point.27 28 The second one is that the proposals are per capita decrease and much less in the 15% population is 29 increasing so there’s actually a net increase in total greenhouse gasses from this because the 30 population increase offsets the per capita decrease and that is correct. Can Palo Alto propose to 31 implement its own goal by its own means rather than following… The answer is no at this point. I 32 mean we could propose it but that’s not currently the way it looks like this is headed however that’s 33 certainly a suggestion we can make is that there is some component of this program that is a locally 34 driven for this specific community that may be able to do some things and other communities can do 35 something else to address it.36 37 Would it be worthwhile to put in language about Palo Alto’s own 15% greenhouse goal in our 38 Housing Element target? It wouldn’t hurt. I don’t know if it would make much difference but 39 certainly to the extent that we’re tying it to the location of housing, size of housing and type of 40 housing we could do that. Where is Palo Alto meeting its own… I wasn’t able to glean that 41 information as to how close we are to meeting our greenhouse gas targets but I’ll try to get that from 42 our sustainability people.43 44 Could Palo Alto make Charleston Arastradero Road improvements part of the process for 45 implementing a BRT station at that location? Is that a potential alternative to naming El Camino 46 Real a PDA? Well to the extent that we would then be sort of funding might be a project that would 47 otherwise not be eligible for funding, I don’t know if that’s the question or not. If we did I think 48 there are ways, there are some things we could do with Charleston Arastredero and the intersection at 49 Page 9 El Camino that would make it more likely to be a BRT location than, because I know right now there 1 are some issues with the configuration of that intersection and the way it works and such. I think we 2 could do that. I don’t know if it makes it an alternative to naming El Camino as a PDA.3 4 Commissioner Keller: I think what I was referring to is if VTA is hot to trot about that being a BRT 5 location, maybe they would be willing to put in some cash for doing it and that would fund the 6 intersection improvements.7 8 Mr. Williams: Okay. Attachment H on Page 6 shows a dip in employment in the mid 1990s, dip past 9 the boom, narrative seems to… Also states that large growth in labor force participation by 10 workers… Are these points worthwhile in our response? I don’t know yet. I think we’ll ask the 11 consultant when they come on board if they think it is. I do think that it’s going to be important in 12 our response to focus our attention on certain things and not be trying to sort of hit 20 different 13 subjects. There are a lot of them out there that we could go after and not just sort of glaze over when 14 they read a letter.15 16 How would the need for household growth be affected if Bay Area jobs are projected at 4 million in 17 2035 rather than 4.4 million? Well the household growth, they’ve basically figured at the 1.4 jobs 18 per household so if you take that 400,000 job difference I guess and divide by 1.4 and get that many 19 less households which would not be an insignificant number. It would be what 250 or 270,000 or 20 something like that less households. 21 22 To what extent were RHNA allocation numbers increased by building more housing than allocated in 23 the last RHNA or does more housing production… I don’t think that housing production did it so 24 much as overall our population increased a little bit so the population is a little bit more allocated due 25 to the current population of housing units but its not just because of the rate of growth in the last 10 26 years or whatever but I think it has more to do with the think that affects us the most is our proximity 27 to two and arguably three transit stations. We need to go back and emphasize with them again that 28 we’re really proximate to three because I think we get dinged for being close to the San Antonio 29 Station when in reality we don’t have a population that lives within walking distance that Mountain 30 View does and I think that’s a good point.31 32 Commissioner Keller: Plus that San Antonio Station only has one train in an hour.33 34 Mr. Williams: Yes. So a lot of things in the scenario development and even in the GHG reductions 35 that were achieved there were dependent on, and you have to go through a lot of this material to see it 36 but on very substantial investments in transportation that are quite questionable about as to whether 37 or not those will come into play or not. 38 39 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Garber first and then Commissioner Michael.40 41 Commissioner Garber: Curtis, correct me if I’m wrong and you may have made the point and I’m 42 forgetting, if we were to include the downtown area as well as El Camino as part of the PDA areas, 43 part of the fear, and I haven’t read Councilperson Scharff’s letter and maybe he implies it there, but 44 we are sort of suggesting that there is opportunity for growth within the city in those particular cases 45 and we’re sort of opening the door to that interpretation, are we not?46 47 Mr. Williams: That’s exactly the concern and the scenarios as they’ve been developed now already 48 using this growth opportunity term, I can show you that I’ve got a table right there that can show you 49 Page 10 the ranges of development intensity that they’re showing under those scenarios and its extremely high 1 already and so we’re kind of, our sense is that if we don’t designate them they may back off on some 2 of those numbers. If we do designate them they’re at least going to keep the numbers at that point 3 and they may even go higher if we say this is a Priority Development Area.4 5 Commissioner Garber: That’s it for the moment. Thank you.6 7 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Michael.8 9 Commissioner Michael: So I had a question that runs through the number of different topics that 10 you’ve been presenting and if I can just use an experience I had when I was working in Santa Clara 11 about a block away from light rail and my office was located there for 10 years or more and in that 12 entire 10 year time I only had one occasion that it made sense for me to use the light rail to go to 13 some destination that was served by that system. So the question I have is basically if you start at a 14 point A and need to get to a point B then the transit system that gets you from point A to point B is 15 useful but if its not you’re probably going to rely on an automobile or something that doesn’t 16 necessarily do so well with greenhouse gas reduction and part of the issue with the scenarios seems to 17 imply some increased development intensity, you know the issue of the cost to the city if you go from 18 single family to multifamily and minus that occasion, today I made a couple trips from the 19 community center neighborhood to the California Avenue neighborhood and met Commissioner 20 Tuma for lunch and we had a wonderful discussion about the Planning Commission and then I came 21 from the community center here for the meeting and the question is if I could have made that trip in 22 something other than an automobile, the point A to point B problem, it really isn’t served well by 23 anything other than car traffic or streets which got me here in time and so it seems to me over time 24 that there may be some value to having more development along transit corridors but then there’s the 25 question of in Palo Alto and I’m somewhat new to these projections or extrapolations when you have 26 some population of the city currently and in the future that will change and some number of jobs 27 currently and there’s more jobs than residents and there’s more people coming from other locations 28 to work here and the people who live here may be going elsewhere for their jobs. All of this relates 29 to the point A and point B connection and how that relates to the development intensity of the transit 30 systems and I would like to develop my personal understanding of how this plays into the planning 31 because at the moment I don’t have a clear vision of how that should evolve and I know that part of 32 this with the scenarios which has relatively comparable results but they rely on the free market for the 33 development along with some incentives and I just, it’s a bit of a mystery to me as to how that’s 34 going to evolve and the impact that Council and the Planning Commission may have on establishing 35 priorities that will facilitate an evolved evolution of that. But the point A to point B problem is one 36 that I’m kind of stuck on, if you have any comment to help me understand that.37 38 Mr. Williams: I think you’ve hit it pretty well. The plan here is that there would be a lot more of 39 those connections made by transit or by bicycle or there would be ways that are facilitated that are 40 much improved over today. That’s a fundamental assumption here which again, depending upon 41 funding availability and other issues is questionable but at least if you assume that I tend to believe 42 that over time if we’re investing in transportation and particularly transit and areas near transit that 43 we’ll have more of those connections that could be made without vehicles but to what degree and at 44 what cost to the community also depending on how much we take on. 45 46 Mr. Moss makes the comment about the cost of housing and that’s true for every community and if 47 indeed we’re going to have 700,000 new homes they’re going to have to go someplace so there’s 48 somewhat of a fair share concept at work here too. Do you want them to go out into the interlands 49 Page 11 kind of and then we continue to have the business as usual greenhouse gas issues and pollution and 1 building more highways and such where dollars go or do you want to try to get some handle on that 2 and have some of that come in and some of the cities that would prefer to have commercial 3 development but take on some of the residential so again it becomes a matter of how much can you 4 do that can still retain the character of Palo Alto and in some cases enhance the character of Palo Alto 5 because I think there’s a lot of opportunity for that in some of these areas as well so there are 6 definitely places to do that and ways to enhance that transportation network to make that A to B 7 problem resolvable but again the test here is to come up with something that is somewhat realistic 8 and it doesn’t serve any purpose to say a city, whether its Palo Alto or someone else, is going to be 9 sort of allocated or designated that we think that they’re going to have three times as many housing 10 units as they realistically are likely to have because then the other two thirds of those units that can’t 11 be built there, are they going to Tracy or somewhere else that is completely frustrating the goals of 12 the plan? Why not have something that is more realistic that puts those units… There are cities that 13 have a lot of vacant space that are close to transit lines that could accommodate that and it would be 14 more affordable for the housing. They could get to Palo Alto on the train in 15 minutes and isn’t that 15 a better solution? So I think that’s what we’re really… Number one we’re arguing about whether the 16 700,000 units is right or not but also we’re going to be talking about where those units are going and 17 being sure that we’re prescribing some and having a flexibility to make sure those are going in places 18 that make sense, where they will get built, and not where its just a pipe dream and it frustrates the 19 plan in the end.20 21 Commissioner Michael: Just as a follow up, I know when we met with you in connection with the 22 futures work with the IBRC you had very helpful information about the demographic projections 23 with the appropriate cautions about the accuracy of the assumptions and so forth but there were a 24 couple things that were interesting. One was the change in the different age groups, the cohorts and 25 I’m getting to the more advanced age group as opposed to Palo Alto has been very famously 26 attractive to families whose children want to attend our schools and what happens when the families 27 come in and they may prefer a single family house close to the neighborhood school but is there 28 going to be adequate housing for that cohort as their children graduate from school and parents have 29 an empty nest and they could downsize. It seems to me that there may be a shortage of housing for 30 the cohort relative to the changing demographics.31 32 Also one of the things that came up in the discussion that Commissioner Tuma and I had at lunch was 33 the attractiveness of some of the families coming in may be Asian families or different ethnic groups 34 that may have multiple generations living in one house, just a different cultural values but this is a 35 change which seems to be in process and may be likely to continue. But that seems to be fairly 36 significant in terms of these scenarios being those that are more likely.37 38 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Tuma. Your thoughts?39 40 Commissioner Tuma: First, thank you for this report. It was long but packed with interesting 41 information. There is a lot of things that we’ve been working on for years now so it was interesting 42 and informative. To address the specific questions that you had asked on the topic of the PDAs I 43 think with the uncertainty of what would the impact of a designated PDA are might be, I think the 44 direction that you’ve talked about is wise where we don’t necessarily designate it now. 45 46 I also think that we don’t need to put the map back up but that swath down El Camino, if we get to 47 the point where we do think we see over time that there’s not these downsides to designate areas as 48 PDAs perhaps the width of the band that goes down El Camino is simply too wide. I looked at it and 49 Page 12 I had a similar kind of reaction. It seems we’re getting significantly into the R1 areas and if you’re 1 going to do density along El Camino you would then want to have some ability even from there to 2 transition in intensity into the R1 neighborhood but I think the corridor itself is interesting to look at 3 and I don’t know that there is any particular requirement that a PDA be of any size, shape or 4 dimension or anything like that so I think maybe when we get to looking at that going more narrowly 5 down El Camino, and to my mind if you’re looking at the two, El Camino versus downtown, El 6 Camino seems like a better alternative if we were going to do one and then maybe the other one for a 7 variety of reasons including proximity to transit and other areas and commuting and things like that 8 so that makes sense to me.9 10 When it comes to, on the One Bay Area issue about having a certified housing element, one that just 11 fundamentally scares me because we can’t seem to get the housing element done to save our lives and 12 its difficult but two is, I think you had used the word instead of certified that it would be approved 13 and perhaps even another way to think of that would be simply compliant, because I think we’re 14 going to have a very long protracted and perhaps nasty debate with the powers that be about whether 15 our housing element is compliant and what does compliant mean and I think there is a little more 16 helpful ambiguity perhaps in a compliant housing element versus a certified housing element or even 17 an approved one and that debate is going to continue I think to rage on for a long time depending on 18 the various numbers they come out with. It’s nice to hear their cutting them down by 30% but I still 19 think it’s high so some thoughts on direction on the Certified Housing Element issue.20 21 On the topic of the alternative strategies and the jobs and housing units, one of the things that these 22 numbers say loud and clear, I mean if you take the numbers and its interesting to hear your reaction 23 to some of the methodology and rationale behind it as being you know, maybe not entirely off its 24 mark. But even if you said, let’s cut those numbers in half, we’re still looking at an upward direction 25 of 6,250 housing units which would be a 25% increase over what we have now. So you take their 26 numbers and you cut them in half, growth is coming. There is significant growth under even a very 27 conservative scenario here and so this goes I think to one of the things that I’ve said for a long time 28 which is growth is coming, we have to be planful, thoughtful, and put things where we want them 29 and not just try to say somehow all this growth isn’t coming and we’ll deflect it to other 30 neighborhoods or communities or things like that.It’s coming whether its in the magnitude its being 31 talked about, I’m skeptical, but its coming and we’re going to have to absorb it so the more thinking 32 we do about the locations for the units, the size, the types of units, that’s the discussion that to me is 33 inevitable and will serve us well if we put more effort into that.34 35 In terms of addressing Mr. Moss’ concern because I think many of us have this, I would say to the 36 electorate and the legislature and whatever else, whoever else controls it, and I’m glad to hear more 37 and more discussion, Prop 13 needs to go away and needs to be dealt with. It’s such a problem. If 38 you think about all the things that are going on and what we’re talking about here you’ve got this, 39 you know its just more and more and more impact which is going to happen, no matter what we all 40 want its going to happen, but to continue to not have the funding mechanism that we fundamentally 41 need for our schools and other services, times have changed. So well beyond what we’re talking 42 about tonight but I just don’t see, I mean the scenarios that you talk about where you have 12,000 43 new housing units in Palo Alto and a million new jobs, 750,000, that will break the Bay Area 44 fundamentally as we know it in that period of time. If that scenario happens, you know, it’s going to 45 be broken. So I don’t know where the leadership comes from and there is more and more discussion, 46 I’ve seen recently about doing so in Prop 13 but it’s a big component of making this work so. That’s 47 my thought.48 49 Page 13 Mr. Williams: That was one of the recommendations from all three economists I saw yesterday. 1 That was the number one recommendation. You’ve really got to reform or toss out Prop 13.2 3 Vice Chair Fineberg: I’m going to try to start high level and then drill down into detail. On the first 4 question of whether or not to designate the PDAs, I would concur with the Council’s subcommittee 5 that it is premature now and I don’t know if you’re looking for formal recommendation but that the 6 Planning Commission not recommend designation of the two areas as PDAs. My main reason for 7 that conclusion is that it puts the cart before the horse. We have absolutely no idea what the fiscal 8 impacts would be, what the land use impacts would be, we’ve done no environmental analysis and 9 it’s counterintuitive to me to change zoning and planning before we know what effect it’s going to 10 have.11 12 I think we are making progress with our area plans that we’ve got and our Comp Plan to do the 13 analysis to increase density and its not a coincidence that the areas that we’re looking at are at Cal 14 Ave. and the areas that the rail corridor is looking at is along the transit corridor, maybe other areas 15 too but we’re going to get indicators for how much growth we as a community want in those areas 16 and we’ll understand those impacts after we do the analysis with our Comp Plan update and to name 17 or redesignate a PDA before we have that analysis done, I don’t want to characterize how I think 18 about it but I think its good not to make that designation. 19 20 In terms of whether we, how we feel about having the requirement for an approved housing element, 21 I think the case could be made that the denser or more built up an area the harder it is to find land and 22 the more difficult the task of developing a compliant housing element and that level of complexity 23 increases the time requirement. Maybe we might have been better organized several years ago but it 24 doesn’t remove the fact that it’s a lot more difficult to drop on potential areas that can be rezoned 25 versus other communities that have wide open undeveloped areas where it’s an easier task and the 26 scenarios ought to recognize that complexity does add time burden.27 28 As far as the five alternatives, my comments are much more detailed there. I still have to go back to 29 my fundamental previous statements that this entire visioning scenario is an exercise in the willful 30 suspension of disbelief. They are asking us to plan, irregardless of real world constraints. It’s a 31 creative endeavor and you’re supposed to imagine where the growth should go without knowing how 32 its going to get paid for, without knowing whether there is land that you can do it on, whether 33 property or R1 owners are willing to have four houses on their lot and where the funding is going to 34 come from for schools, for infrastructure, so its asking us to plan without the constraints of reality 35 and reality kind of hasn’t entered this planning yet. Yet, when we look at the Bay Area plan Page 8, 36 its telling us, unless I’ve misunderstood and Staff please jump in and correct me, that the sort of most 37 dense growth in the areas like Palo Alto would yield an 8% reduction of greenhouse gasses but the 38 more unconstrained growth of scenario 5 would yield a 7.2% reduction so its about maybe a 2% 39 difference in reduction of greenhouse gasses and it’s a huge burden on the communities to change 40 their land use patterns for only a 2% difference so that, unless I’m misunderstanding, is telling me 41 that this entire vision of using land use to produce greenhouse gasses, is barking up the wrong tree, 42 putting it bluntly. I agree with your comments earlier that maybe the state ought to look at other 43 means for reducing greenhouse gasses and you had showed us that other list. 44 45 If I can just finish up then, I think that there’s a little bit of a danger in looking at specifically the El 46 Camino corridor for PDA because the transportation there is a rapid transit bus. It doesn’t exist in its 47 full state now and it’s coming from VTA, an organization that over the last decade has done nothing 48 but cut bus service in Palo Alto so I view that as a very fragile transportation option. There are 49 Page 14 problems inherent with it that haven’t been analyzed. It is parallel to Cal Train and will potentially 1 cannibalize it. It s a whole other discussion beyond here but potentially cannibalizing riders on Cal 2 Train and also if it gets priority timing on the lights potentially shutting the combination of the VTA, 3 rapid transit and the train, potentially cutting off east west transit throughout all of Palo Alto as east 4 west routes have to stop for the south routes. 5 6 The solution to that and I don’t know if it’s appropriate to push for it in this, is transit dollars to 7 underground rail crossings. If we can underground those rail crossings, we keep our kids safer, we 8 get our cars east and west without the impenetrable barriers, we could potentially then support higher 9 growth without the negative impacts of the roads shut down and then maybe we see if there’s really 10 buses running up and down El Camino but I think its really dangerous to plan for growth on El 11 Camino on the supposition that there might be busses so that’s another place that we have to be 12 careful of the cart before the horse.13 14 Chair Martinez: Okay, if I may, one of the nice things I guess I want to say about being an Architect, 15 many nice things, I don’t want to be corrected by Commissioner Garber, is that we get to work in 16 different communities with a sort of different planning cultures, different needs and we get to see 17 things kind of through their eyes. When I work in a poor community in the East Bay its all about 18 what kind of incentives can we provide to attract development, any kind of development. When I 19 work in San Francisco, it’s all about housing and it’s not only the developer because every developer 20 wants to build housing. If they have a site they want to build housing because they know it will sell. 21 And the Planning Department, if you’re in a UMUA, an Urban Mixed Use Area, they’ll limit the 22 amount of office space 25,000 square feet or so, because they are promoting housing. You don’t 23 have to provide parking because they want the housing. They don’t want people to drive and it’s a 24 different culture than what we have here.25 26 Here, developers don’t want to talk about housing. They want to talk about office space and R&D 27 space and we may have a growth projection of 6,000 housing units that’s put upon us but I don’t see 28 where that’s coming from. We don’t have the land for it and all the things that Vice Chair Fineberg 29 said, we don’t have the will. There is nobody in the development community that wants to go that 30 way. In my couple of years on the Commission there’s been a couple of hundred housing units kind 31 of come by, if that. And so I see us in this discussion with MTC and ABAG about these growth 32 projections which we all don’t agree with but with these planning exercises and housing allocations 33 and job growth and you know creating these PDAs for something that isn’t going to happen and I was 34 greatly relieved when you said its only 4% of our greenhouse reduction requirement because its 35 going to be such a challenge to get even near that if we’re focusing on land use patterns so I’m 36 hoping that we’re not, and I know you a bit Curtis, I know you’re not but we’re not giving up this 37 fight, and not even a fight but a discussion of creating a paradigm that looks at not just what Palo 38 Alto allocation of this or that is but really look at on a region what’s really happening in terms of 39 housing growth and jobs growth based on the last 5 or 10 years and use that as a regional planning 40 exercise because we know its not going to happen here in Palo Alto and I’m hoping and trusting that 41 we’re going to get to the point after our regional governments have us do these exercises where we’ll 42 really be able to sit down and look at really realistic projections and opportunities for growth and 43 building near transit that somehow fits with what every city not only is capable of doing but really 44 wants to do that really hasn’t in practice, the vehicles in development and land availability and 45 housing needs and proximity to transit and all of that that allows us to go forth with this plan.46 47 What I see now I mean fine let’s vote to recommend the PDA on Cal Avenue but I don’t really see 48 the rest of it happening to the extent that its going to change Palo Alto or we need to change the way 49 Page 15 we think about Palo Alto because this is looming upon us. I just think it’s not going to happen. 1 Commissioner Keller.2 3 Commissioner Keller: So firstly, I agree with a lot of things people have said, in fact most of them 4 and in terms of El Camino Real PDA, don’t do it now and eventually if we do find it in our interest to 5 do it, think of the idea that beauty is skin deep and essentially a PDA should be a couple of parcels 6 deep and not much deeper than that.7 8 The next thing is that I am very pleased with the collaborative introspective process that we’re going 9 through for deciding additional PDAs because I recall that it was our previous City Manager who 10 proposed the Cal Ave. PDA, drew the maps themselves or with Staff only and then asked the Council 11 to ratify his decision without being able to amend the map, without being able to decide anything at 12 the last minute and I’m glad we’re not following that approach. We still don’t know the impact of 13 that PDA including the Fry’s area and whether that’s going to harm us in the future so I’m glad we’re 14 doing this deliberate process.15 16 We talk about Steve Jobs having had a reality distortion field. He accomplished things with his 17 reality distortion field and the people putting these together have reality distortion field but they’re 18 not going to accomplish anything except for messing things up. They’re not going to improve things 19 for the rest of us.20 21 In terms of the RHNA allocation, it makes no sense to have a linear division. You don’t divide by 3 22 because that is what’s called an arithmetic progression. Any growth scenario would actually be a 23 geometric progression which means that you’ve divided the first one is smaller, the next one is bigger 24 and then the next one is a little bigger than that. That is the way percentage and growth work so they 25 don’t even understand math.26 27 We already have bus light preemption on for example El Camino. That’s already been implemented. 28 In terms of, there was a comment by Commissioner Tuma that some growth is coming, there is a 29 comment by Chair that he doesn’t think people will build it. The evidence I’ve seen is that if we 30 zone for housing it will be built and it will be large and it will be large units on postal stamp land if 31 they can manage to build it but that’s not the building I think we need and in terms of Commissioner 32 Michael’s comment, we need housing for seniors, we need housing for young 20 and 30 somethings 33 without kids but that is not what developers are building. We need to zone for what we want and 34 have that.35 36 In terms of Prop 13 I’ve been a proponent for the split role. I don’t think we’re going to have 37 taxation on housing, is going to go off Prop 13, it ain't going to happen but when Prop 13 was passed, 38 commercial property paid 60 to 65%, somewhere in that range percent of property taxes and retail or 39 housing paid 35 to 40%, somewhere in that range and now its basically exactly the opposite because 40 commercial property turns over less frequently so that’s why Prop 13 reform for commercial property 41 makes a lot more sense.42 43 I agree with undergrounding our rail crossings. I think that’s very important and we should think 44 about that more. I’ll leave you with one thought and that is that there’s this notion in housing that no 45 good deed goes unpunished and I believe the more housing we build the more we encourage ABAG 46 to allocate us more housing. There are several reasons for that. I was shown by Councilmember 47 Burt, part of their analysis of how much housing to do is based on their projection of how much 48 growth is happening and so in some sense the fact that we’ve grown actually encourages them to 49 Page 16 think we can grow some more even though its not really that we can’t grow because of one time 1 events. He calculated in the last RHNA 50% of the amount of housing growth given to us was based 2 on this current RHNA was based on their projections of how much we should grow so that’s what 3 I’m concerned about.4 5 There’s the other issue that no good deed goes unpunished and that is when housing is actually built, 6 we have to in the next RHNA find even more sites to replace the sites that are on the housing 7 element. If we put all these sites on the housing element and none of the housing gets built we have 8 an easier job the following time so all this talk about incentives are building housing, I don’t think we 9 should have incentives, that makes our job even harder and that’s why I’m interested in the issue of 10 limits to market rate housing and limiting market rate housing to what’s in the RHNA for market rate 11 housing and once you build that you’re done until the next RHNA allocation and the reason for doing 12 that is in particular in order to save land for below market rate housing because once its gone, its 13 gone, and we know market rate housing is going to trump below market rate housing and we had a 14 discussion a month or two ago that that is a legal reason, that it is legal to limit market rate housing to 15 the market rate housing in the RHNA allocation with the express purpose of saving it for below 16 market rate so that’s a thing that we should certainly consider because if we zone for it they will try 17 to build it unless we put limits on that. Thank you.18 19 Chair Martinez: Okay Commissioner Garber, are you ready?20 21 Commissioner Garber: I’m assuming that the reason that we have proposed the PDA for California 22 Avenue is because we’ve already zoned that as a PTOD.23 24 Mr. Williams: Actually the two things happened very close together and technically the PDA 25 preceded the PTOD by just a little bit but they were both in the works at the same time but yes, they 26 connected.27 28 Commissioner Garber: So just a couple of my final thoughts here. To Commissioner Tuma’s 29 comment that growth is coming, I think one of the big learnings in going through the Stanford project 30 was looking at the traffic projections that were being cast on the intersections along El Camino and 31 recognizing that the project itself had very little impact compared to the amount of growth that’s 32 happening outside our borders and I’m talking about the growth and intensity of traffic. Short of 33 putting gates on our community, we are going to be impacted by what’s happening all around us but 34 even if we put a moratorium on all growth in Palo Alto we are still going to have intense impacts that 35 we need to manage. I think one of the most powerful learnings from me from hearing the Director’s 36 presentation and reading the plan, my sense is that the real impacts our community is going to feel 37 over the next 35 years have to do with the look and the feel that we have on our roads and not our 38 land. Yes, there is likely to be greater density and intensity along the transportation routes and at the 39 multimodal centers as we’ve all spoken about. I’ve argued and I know that many others on the 40 Commission have argued that the likelihood of the R1 zones changing in the City over the next 35 41 years is pretty close to zero. Will there be slight tweaks to zoning along El Camino and the rest of 42 that? Probably but as was reported we can change it some and potentially more than a little and have 43 very little impact on the ultimate goals of AB375 and greenhouse gasses and the real opportunities to 44 have those impacts really all occur on our roads and the policies we put in place for how we use our 45 roads and to that end, my only suggestions relative to some of the things that the Planning Director 46 was asking about is to yes, I would focus in on, especially for communities such as ours, which has 47 no open land, is to see if there’s an opportunity for us to get rid of the requirements the land 48 Page 17 requirements in favor of focusing in on the transportation ones because that’s where the real impacts 1 and the real opportunities for our community to have impacts on this.2 3 That presumably would not be the formula for a community that does not have open land or is a 4 much bigger community, I don’t know what those are. Maybe there’s a trade off to be made or a 5 different type of analysis for them to take to evaluate communities that are more like ours and have a 6 different set of criteria than those that do. 7 8 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Michael, final thoughts? Good. Commissioner Tuma? Good. 9 10 Commissioner Tuma: Only one which has to do with this notion about having open land or not 11 having open land and whether that is sort of dispositive of the issue of the ability to grow. When I 12 hear Chair Martinez talk about the growth in San Francisco and the housing being added in San 13 Francisco, we’re talking about a place with no open land. I think sometimes in Palo Alto we talk 14 about not having open land but it’s really on a relative scale. I think there is opportunity for and 15 whether its open land or redevelopment of existing land with more density in certain places, I hear 16 this often bantered about, we have no open land in Palo Alto and maybe that’s a one dimensional 17 view of land, maybe I look at it more as a three dimensional view of land which is the ability to go up 18 and so I do think its interesting to think about, I just don’t feel as if we are an entirely built out city 19 and certainly if San Francisco can be adding housing in significant numbers, I don’t want to be San 20 Francisco. I don’t want to have big high rises like San Francisco does but there’s somewhere in 21 between, particularly in certain locations and we’ve obviously already done some of those but I think 22 as the discussion progresses I tend to pull away from the notion that we’re an entirely built out city 23 with no open land because I think there are opportunities to develop what we have here in a planful 24 and thoughtful way.25 26 Chair Martinez: Thank you. That was nice. Vice Chair Fineberg.27 28 Vice Chair Fineberg: Commissioner Tuma brings up the good points about the redevelopment in San 29 Francisco. San Francisco has some types of land that simply don’t exist here. They’ve had huge 30 military base closures at Hunter’s Point, Southern Pacific Rail yard and the areas around south of 31 Market that were abandoned and derelict office buildings where they’ve had large numbers of 32 Brownfield developments. Our worst areas don’t qualify for redevelopment under the state’s 33 descriptions of derelict and redevelopment plans. I would agree we have some areas that would be 34 good for redevelopment but I think we should act in a way where we retain local control of whether 35 those areas should be developed in a way that’s in accordance with our Comprehensive Plan.36 37 So again, stressing that not designating the PDAs at this time until we further understand the future 38 consequences of having that designation so we can develop what we want where we want according 39 to our Comp Plan rather than a designation and requirements someone else imposes on us and we 40 don’t yet understand those requirements.41 42 For Staff, I’m very pleased to hear also that you’re engaging, I may not get the initials correct, EPS to 43 do the fiscal analysis. I think it’s an absolute imperative that Council and the public understand the 44 fiscal impacts of what the different scenarios require of Palo Alto. I think we need to understand 45 even some more basic numbers. We hear different members of the public, Mr. Moss said 46 multifamily housing costs the city a certain amount and I’ve heard other members of the public bandy 47 about different numbers and I’ve heard Commissioners make statements that housing costs more than 48 office and I’ve yet to see any real analysis of what the fiscal impacts of either are in making the 49 Page 18 policy decisions of do we want to build more houses, do we want to build more offices, do we want 1 more things that generate business revenue, what types of revenue would that be and where would 2 that be so we make the decisions based on facts and I don’t know if EPS is going to go that broad but 3 it certainly would be useful information and I think that the question of whether growth will come, 4 whether its going to be residential or commercial is one of those questions that you’re just going to 5 have competing experts that all are absolutely certain of the voracity of their claims. My reaction is 6 that the analysis that’s done by the economist for this visioning scenario use 2000 census data which 7 was during a period of absolute phenomenal, the 1990s was an unprecedented phenomenal period of 8 growth so the growth rate was very steep slope and then they basically extrapolated that out to 2035 9 and reality happened. The first decade of the 2000s happened and the reality was we had a crash in 10 2000 with the dot com bust and then in 2008 we had a housing bubble and a big recession so during 11 the entire decade the growth at the rate that had happened in the previous decade simply didn’t 12 happen and I think One Bay Area is acknowledging that when they are cancelling the demands for 13 the first, or reducing the demands for growth during that first third period but the question is if you 14 have that vertical growth curve and then it turns out the first part of it is essentially flat, is the 15 remaining growth an even steeper line or do you bring down the initial growth rate that was the target 16 at 2035 and then say the intervening period is less steep? I’m not hearing that they’re bringing down 17 the end point in 2035 because there’s nothing that’s going to lead us to really rapid growth in the 18 second two thirds of the scenario and so it points to the absolute importance of having this analysis 19 and the underlying assumptions that bring us to an end point to have those analyzed by peer 20 reviewers, whoever it would be, there are times when we look at high speed rail and the writership 21 studies and those types of things don’t hold true when there are outside observers that don’t have a 22 vested interest in an outcome and so absolutely important that there be good review of the underlying 23 assumptions to verify whether there will be growth and whether it’s a little growth or a lot of growth.24 25 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Keller.26 27 Commissioner Keller: First I entirely agree with Vice Chair Fineberg of the desirability of having 28 Economic and Planning Systems do a peer review and the comments I made should be considered 29 and some of the things that they should consider, but the interesting thing is that exponential growth, 30 infinite exponential growth is impossible and you get to a overshoot and collapse and that has 31 happened over fishing in the oceans, its happened in a variety of things and we don’t know the 32 carrying capacity of our land is being conceded in terms of what we can build on it and also in terms 33 of the water supply and food systems and things like that. There are limits to these things so 34 naturally as we’re already seeing there’s a dampening of that growth and I would expect a dampening 35 of that growth to continue and not to occur at historically earlier rates. 36 37 Considering the price of things is so expensive here we’re not going to see the kind of growth 38 because things are so expensive its hard to locate more growth here in an expensive community so 39 typically things start here and they go somewhere else where they are cheaper and that mitigates too 40 high a growth.41 42 The thing is this, there is a healthy amount of growth which a reasonably economist would consider 43 and then there is excessive growth or uncontrolled growth which some people consider to be cancer 44 so essentially what the One Bay Area plan is to try and put a cancer on us as opposed to a healthy 45 amount of growth and I’ll just leave that image at that.46 47 Chair Martinez: On that note, Commissioner Garber.48 49 Page 19 Commissioner Garber: I just wanted to acknowledge Commissioner Tuma’s comments regarding 1 growth. I do believe as you are aware that that growth and intensity in land is the future of Palo Alto 2 in the planful and thoughtful way that he was describing it but the real reason I wanted to be called on 3 last is to be able to have the last word and not Commissioner Keller.4 5 Chair Martinez: Well I’m going to try to finish on a lighter note if I can. Commissioner Keller 6 called it a cancer but this Draconian job growth and housing projection numbers sort of led me to 7 come up with a Planning proposal which I call Draconian measures to achieve community housing in 8 neighborhood environments or The Machine. Every planning proposal has to have an acronym. The 9 first is to build in the open space district. I said it was Draconian. The second is to require every 10 development to provide housing, every office building housing, every school, housing, every sewage 11 treatment plant, housing. The third is we mend the Density Bonus Law and we allow one of those 12 Dubai towers to be built near transit. The second is we allow our proposed concessions to 13 concessions. You can build up but you can also build down and the next one is we create a new 14 zoning district called R1 too many. That one kind of speaks for itself. And then I got this one from 15 Commissioner Keller, we built over streets and here, really thinking out of the box we incorporate 16 Mountain View because they love to build housing over there and its kind of a perfect fit.17 18 And then we amend the Living in Cars Ordinance to include driveways in our Housing Allocation 19 survey and then get a little creative with bookkeeping and we count two bedroom units twice and 20 then finally we abolish planning and we call it post-planning and then we’ll be there, wherever there 21 is. Thank you everyone.22 23 Mr. Williams: Send that on to us please. We’d like to post that as our goals for the coming year. We 24 do need a Motion if you wouldn’t mind on the issue of, I guess a non-Motion would mean you’re not 25 suggesting we request designation for PDAs on El Camino but I think it would be helpful to have a 26 Motion.27 28 Chair Martinez: You’re right. Commissioner Garber.29 30 MOTION31 32 Commissioner Garber: I move that we support Staff’s recommendation, both Staff’s 33 recommendation and the City Council’s subcommittee that there be no PDAs for either the 34 downtown or the El Camino corridor at this time.35 36 SECOND37 38 Commissioner Keller: Second.39 40 VOTE41 42 Chair Martinez: Okay Motion by Commissioner Garber and Second by Commissioner Keller. Do 43 you wish to speak to the Motion? Okay let’s call for a vote. All in favor? Aye (ayes).44 45 Chair Martinez: Okay Motion passes with Commissioner Garber, Michael, Keller, Chair Martinez, 46 Vice Chair Fineberg and Commissioner Tuma all voting in support of the Motion and Commissioner 47 Tanaka absent. Thank you.48 49 Page 20 MOTION PASSED (6 –0)1 2 Mr. Williams: I just have one more Motion to add to this topic. I was looking at this article I saw 3 today and I thought I’d clue you in on it and its titled SB375 Draws Ire of Tea Party so I don’t know 4 if you’ve seen and it has something to do with the disruption at these meetings but it basically says 5 the tea party movement has been trying to take back America on the national stage since the election 6 of Barack Obama. Tea party activists have also turned their attention to taking back California and 7 specifically Senate Bill 375, a 2008 law that seeks to combat climate change by promoting density in 8 the state’s metro regions.9 10 It says tea party activists have fought against local and regional planning efforts often invoking the 11 United Nations Agenda 21 sustainable development effort as the enemy. California tea party 12 representatives have increasingly turned up at regional statewide planning sessions including a recent 13 SB375 and One Bay Area workshop in Concord where they disrupted the meeting by challenging its 14 premise and it goes on and on like that so interesting turn of events a little bit but we’ll see where that 15 goes.16 17 1/26/2012 1 REGIONAL HOUSING MANDATE COMMITTEE Special Meeting January 26, 2012 The Regional Housing Mandate Committee met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 2:41 P.M. Present: Burt, Scharff, Schmid Absent:Holman Oral Communications None Agenda Items 1.Staff Update of Recent and Upcoming Meetings a.Bay Area Planning Directors –Economic Overview December 2, 2011 b.Community Meeting –January 18, 2018 c.Planning and Transportation Commission –January 25, 2012 d.Santa Clara County Planning Officials –February 1, 2012 e.Regional Advisory Working Group –February 7, 2012 f.RHNA Methodology Committee Meeting –February 23, 2012 Director of Planning and Community Environment, Curtis Williams explained the Regional Housing Mandate Committee (RHMC) had been formed to work with Staff and provide recommendations to the Council regarding housing issues from the regional planning meetings,those related to the Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) and Metro Transportation Commission (MTC) in particular. The RHMC had meetings prior to its formalization as a Standing Committee. There would be four Council Members and representation from the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD)seated on the Committee. The last 1/26/2012 2 time the RHMC met there was discussion of the Bay Area Planning Forum where there was an economic overview presented by Dena Belzer. She discussed assumptions of job growth in Bay Area being based on of 2.4 percent of the national job growth. A memo was also resurrected from ABAG showing where the job growth estimate came from. He attended an ABAG and MTC joint community meeting regarding sustainability community strategy in the Bay Area. The meetings had been substantially interrupted by groups with concerns of local control and property rights making it difficult to stick with the agenda items. Staff opinion held the agenda items were not focused on relevant topics. There was no representation of the alternatives nor was there an analysis of the alternatives or an opportunity to discuss alternatives. The Planning & Transportation Commission (P&TC)had agendized materials on January 25th for consideration to be discussed at the RHMC meeting; however their meeting went long and they were unable to provide recommendations for Agenda Item No. 2 of the RHMC agenda. The upcoming Santa Clara County Planning Officials meeting would focus on the One Bay Area Transportation Grant and whether the Bay Area Planning Directors want to take a particular position as a group. He explained the Regional Advisory Working Group was made up of multiple cities in the Bay Area and various organizations involved in business, environmental, and social equity groups had not been able to meet prior to the scheduled February 7, 2012 date. The objectives of the meeting were to discuss distribution of economic projections within the Bay Area, which were opposed to Palo Alto’s overall question on assumptions.He noted the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)Methodology Committee was scheduled to meet on February 23rd after not having met in over three months.He attended the Bay Area Planning Director’s Association Steering Committee meeting where the focus of the discussion was with the ABAG Planning Director regarding concerns over the issue of requiring housing compliance as a pre-requisite to the transportation grants having been voiced at the community meetings. No Action Taken 2.Consider Priority Development Area (PDA) Status for El Camino and Downtown Director of Planning and Community Environment,Curtis Williams recommended the Committee Members review Attachment C of the Planning Division At-Place Item. There was one planned priority development area in Palo Alto designated by the Council and it was 1/26/2012 3 California Avenue.When the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) projected future developments around transit stations and transit corridors their focus was in the Planned Development Areas (PDA’s). However there was not ample PDA’s to accommodate developments around the Bay Area. The two groups identified Growth Opportunity Areas (GOA) and proceeded to ask cities to unofficially designate the areas they felt fit into the category. Palo Alto’s response included the Downtown area, University Avenue near the transit station, and all of El Camino Real.ABAG and MTC used those recommendations as modeling alternatives. The Transportation Grant Program established priorities for transportation grants in areas that were designated as PDA’s. As a result if these grants occurred today California Avenue would be the only area eligible for the grant funding. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)had nominated the entire El Camino Real Corridor through the county, but it was not an official designation as a PDA for the City unless there was a Resolution passed. The MTC had asked if Palo Alto was interested in designating any of the areas mentioned as PDA’s officially; if so the designation would make them eligible for future grants. Since the VTA completed the work on the El Camino Real designation,Palo Alto would only need to adopt a Resolution agreeing with the designation.Staff was inquiring whether there was interest from the Council to designate the El Camino Real corridor or Downtown as a PDA. He acknowledged the Downtown area was not part of the VTA proposal and there would be numerous amounts of detailed information that would need to be prepared to designate an area. He was not positive that the grant funding opportunities balanced against the amount of Staff time involved. Staff recommendation was to not pursue the Downtown area. The El Camino Real corridor was a different matter in that the amount of Staff time was minimal since the VTA had completed most of the designation work necessary. Although he did not see a negative impact if the Council chose not to designate either area. Chair Schmid asked what Staff was looking for from the RHMC. Mr. Williams stated Staff needed direction to not proceed and would be presenting a report to the full Council on February 21,2012. Vice Mayor Scharff said it was Staff’s original recommendation to go with El Camino as a PDA designation but now after further development it was to not move forward with the designation. 1/26/2012 4 Mr. Williams stated the initial thought was to move forward but at the present time the situation was in a state of flux and he felt the City had more benefit if they did not designate the area. He reviewed the chart within the At-Place items from the Planning Division in Attachment C; the 2010 U.S. Census showed 754 households in the designated California Avenue PDA. Focus Growth was one of three scenarios consistent with most of the development was designated in the PDA area with some allowed developmental spillage in the outlying area, Constrained Core Concentration was consistent with compacting all of the growth into the PDA area, then Outward Growth which encompassed more disbursal of growth in the Bay Area. Council Member Burt asked for clarification on the sub area between the VTA, Palo Alto, and California Avenue. Mr. Williams stated Staff mapped out how the VTA showed the California Avenue area. The VTA had compiled a radius around the transit station which included some single family developments. Palo Alto Staff considered the area outside of the City’s PDA boundary but the VTA included it within their PDA designation. Vice Mayor Scharff asked whether Palo Alto or ABAG identified the GOA. Mr. Williams stated the City identified the area and generally what the Comprehensive Plan allowed. Vice Mayor Scharff asked if the City could UN-identify GOA’s. Mr. Williams stated by not designating the areas as PDA’s essentially the City was un-identifying the areas. Vice Mayor Scharff asked if the areas were not identified the goal was to reduce the ABAG numbers in both the El Camino Real and Downtown areas. In terms of grants, not identifying the additional two areas would not affect California Avenue. Mr. Williams stated not identifying other areas would not affect the grant possibilities for California Avenue. Chair Schmid said the critical question was surrounding the El Camino/Charleston/Arastradero intersection; it was a critical east/west corridor. He asked for confirmation if there was not a PDA then there 1/26/2012 5 would not be grants available but if there were a PDA it might encourage more mandates to develop along the corridor. Mr. Williams confirmed if there were no PDA’s there would be no grants offered. MOTION:Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Chair Schmid for the Regional Housing Mandate Committee to recommend that Staff not move forward with the designation for either the Downtown area or the El Camino Real Corridor as a PDA. Vice Mayor Scharff stated it was not worth the risk,Palo Alto should proceed slowly,and not encourage more housing along the areas as suggested by ABAG. Chair Schmid asked if California Avenue included part of the eastern side of El Camino Real. Mr. Williams stated the designation included the western side of El Camino Real. The designation language said “connecting to or related to”so if there was a part of El Camino that connected to California Avenue there would be a good case for inclusion. Chair Schmid asked if ABAG was double counting where the El Camino corridor and California Avenue areas crossed over. Mr. Williams said it was a reasonable question to ask ABAG but he did not believe so. Council Member Burt said since there was not a previous discussion of the Downtown area becoming a PDA there was not an understanding of the advantages or disadvantages. Given the existing developmental restrictions on the Downtown area,if it was designated as a PDA,how would the scenario work with the development cap on commercial, residential, and office being less than 300,000 square feet. Mr. Williams corrected the cap was less than 175,000 square feet. Council Member Burt said there was a low Floor Area Ratio (FAR) comparative for Downtown so the things being built were from transfer development rights or Planned Communities (PC). How would designating Downtown as a PDA affect compliance with state law requiring grants such as housing bonuses. For example, if market forces downtown were driving office development not housing and it 1/26/2012 6 was designated as a PDA was there information on how ABAG would reconcile the constraints of building height and FAR. Mr. Williams stated his fear was ABAG was not reconciling the issues and the City would be arguing with them regarding the constraints and why their numbers would not be workable in the Downtown area. His thought was if the Downtown area was designated ABAG was likely to project 36,000 new units be built Downtown over the next 30 years. He noted those numbers were unrealistic. The issue was if the numbers were in ABAG’s calculations the City’s Housing Element would no longer be based on the 25-year horizon but would be chopped up into 3 8-year housing periods. Council Member Burt said under the state housing bonuses,in theory, existing development in those areas could come back and apply for the housing bonuses under existing zoning. Mr. Williams stated yes, the bonuses in the scheme were not going to add up. Council Member Burt asked if potential housing sites were where existing zoning developers could come in and demand the housing bonuses.Mr. Williams stated Staff had been applying mixed-use criteria which he felt were more units than most cities would try to get with the bonuses. The numbers in Attachment C did not allow the developer to take a site that was existing office or was restricted from residential. Council Member Burt clarified the restrictions on the Downtown development did not permit residential. Mr. Williams stated the mixed-use amount allowed Downtown to have a limit. The bonus had a limit of 20 to 30 percent above the developmental limit. Staff had assumed generally 20 units per acre on sites with mixed-use which appeared to be able to accommodate redevelopment. Council Member Burt asked why the City was restricted on identifying only those sites likely to accommodate the development. He also asked if the City could use housing near transit for the required housing supply. 1/26/2012 7 Mr. Williams stated he believed there was a reason for not doing the development in that manner. He said he would return to the RHMC with a response when he had one. Council Member Burt acknowledged the market forces in Palo Alto were strong and explained no one would have predicted the East Meadow area would be transformed from commercial to residential. So realistically the test market forces were off. Whether it was the California Avenue area or other areas under consideration for that type of zoning with maximum FAR but minimum density was basically driving towards smaller units to better accommodate seniors or young professionals without families. ABAG counted a 5,000 square footage home the same as an 800 square footage townhouse equally. Mr. Williams stated Staff had worked the square footage issue into the Housing Element policies and that was the reason why they were setting 20 units per acre as the starting point for development. Council Member Burt was uncertain if that policy provided the proper achievement. His preference was to review the desired outcome. He asked whether the zoning method created would achieve those outcomes. Mr. Williams thought part of the Housing Element recommendations were to establish the minimum density and maximum unit size to achieve smaller units which would be the basis of the unit estimates. He noted parking was a constraint frequently used. The requirement of sufficient parking was not particularly restrictive on achieving the housing numbers. MOTION PASSED 3-0 Holman absent 3.Staff Response on RHNA Allocation to Sphere of Influence Rules Re: Stanford Director of Planning and Community Environment, Curtis Williams spoke to the Regional Housing Mandate Committee (RHMC) regarding the housing allocations coming out and explained the last time the information was released, the City objected because some of the allocations being counted against the City were from the Stanford campus.By acknowledging the error Staff reduced the overall housing element by 600 units and a letter was sent to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) requesting the reduction. Santa Clara County had written a similar letter to ABAG regarding the Stanford 1/26/2012 8 units needing to be allocated to them. He was uncertain when ABAG would be making the changes but he would report back to Council after his meeting with them on February 23rd. No Action Required 4.Review of Alternative Scenarios Director of Planning and Community Environment, Curtis Williams said the agencies had completed calculations as shown on Attachment A of the Planning Division report. The report was a presentation that ran through the performance measures. The goal that had been set for the effort in the Bay Area was set by the Air Quality Board that the City would reduce green house gas emissions by 7 percent by the year 2020 and a minimum of 15 percent by the year 2035. The chart reflected a 9 percent goal as a best result and an 8 percent reduction as the worst case scenario. There had been discussion around the delta between the reductions and how effective it would be if the outward growth scenario was only a 1 percent difference.The Air Quality Board required a number of other transportation,pricing, parking, and other measures regionally that helped reduce green house gasses from vehicles and light trucks. Council Member Burt discussed the California Bay Area Resources Board meeting scheduled that week. They would be considering what vehicle standards should be set by 2050. 87 percent of the vehicles would be at zero emissions and some may be of the plug-in nature but a radical transformation in vehicle emissions which would make the report completely inconsequential. He asked if Staff was considering vehicle changes or transportation pattern changes. Mr. Williams stated yes he was aware of the meeting and they were to specify the number of lower emission vehicles during the discussion. He stated the report only reflected transportation changes based on land use. SB375 only focused on the 9 percent of the total 100 percent reduction that AB32 was attempting to achieve. Council Member Burt said AB32 acknowledges the issue and in a manner SB375 was a subset of their objectives. Mr. Williams stated there were a number of other criteria that ABAG and MTC tried to measure with committees’ that had been established over time for the various projects. What they needed to review was the carbon dioxide number. Staff had performed an analysis of the 1/26/2012 9 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) charted numbers which showed each city and Planned Development Area (PDA) with each alternative and the number of housing and jobs then projected out to the year 2040. Staff had performed an analysis of the transportation zones within the City in an effort to locate where the housing and jobs were coming from because the charts by ABAG and MTC had them located in the center of single family residential areas. When asked,ABAG replied they had randomly located information and the cities could place the real location within their PDA’s. Chair Schmid requested Staff look at the ABAG/MTC chart as alternate scenarios with each one having a high population,household growth, and job rate which were well over what the Bay Area and state had experienced over the past twelve years. He found it difficult to vote for any of the scenarios because that would be endorsing a high growth outcome. Council Member Burt said a number of Council Members had broached the subject of societal pattern changes based on technologies that were causing trip avoidance. For example; the company Webex had a carbon calculator which provided the calculations of carbon reduction as a result of having a virtual conference rather than traveling to the office. There was a degree to which there was trip avoidance by use of technology which was pervasive and under acknowledged. The technology measure was an under-acknowledged trend. No Action Taken 5.Staff Update of One Bay Area Transportation Grant Proposal Criteria Director of Planning and Community Environment, Curtis Williams said the One Bay Area grant proposal had changed but Staff was preparing a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Board and focus on the issue while simultaneously get the Santa Clara County Planning Directors to take a stance as a group. No Action Taken 6.Outreach Re: Demographic/Economic Assumptions Council Member Burt and others had discussion around the fourth scenario in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the 1/26/2012 10 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)chart where there was an extrapolation of growth trends over the last 2 decades. Their demographers stated this was an anomaly, Palo Alto Staff believed it to be a trend. They had been consistently inaccurate and now had come up with a scenario where they would need to project realistically. He asked how to move forward in a concrete manner to establish the fourth scenario.He noted there was an intellectual capital in the community so enlisting those powers could have a significant positive impact on any situation. Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD)Chief Business Official, Bob Golton said whenever there was an issue with the District there was incredible expertise that came forward to assist.He felt partnering with the Regional Housing Mandate Committee (RHMC)was important to them because the impact of the ABAG numbers on the enrollment in the future with limited land and resources within the City. Council Member Burt suggested a summary to frame the different scenarios in terms of impacts on the schools.According to ABAG there would be a 50 percent increase in population in the coming decade where the alternatives would have a drastically lower impact. He felt there was a need to leverage Palo Alto’s resources as a community with actively engaged members of the school community. Mr. Golton noted the impact of the numbers was profound to the PAUSD and they needed to be active participants in the planning of the future. He said the demographers current and past made short-term projections of approximately 12 years. However the projections were shorter term because what they were based on information of development and there was no information on developments that far in advance. Council Member Burt asked why the PAUSD allowed the demographers to project so far in advance that information could not be validated. Mr. Golton said the PAUSD received information from the City’s Planning Department Staff that would allow them to modify the projections moving forward. Mr. Williams met last week with the PAUSD and their demographer and created a letter that was currently being reviewed by the City Manager’s office that will then be sent to the PAUSD with three different growth scenarios.There was a low scenario was the current growth point played out of the historic time period, the second 1/26/2012 11 scenario was the outward growth which was the lowest,and the third was the highest so the PAUSD would have a range. Chair Schmid said ABAG was using a shift/share model which projected the total United States (U.S.) growth, implying the bay Area would maintain the same share of the growth. There were two critical assumptions in the model 1) that the U.S. growth rate would be high over that time period and 2) the static nature of the shift/share was that you hold your own share. If you took the same model and applied it to New York in 1950 and asked what they would have prepared for in 1980,they would have prepared for 6 million people that were not there. That was what ABAG was imposing the City do, to prepare for a future that was unrealistic. Long term population, household, or jobs forecasting could not be compiled without looking at ranges. Vice Mayor Scharff had concerns with the ranges discussed. The low growth scenario was what the City had experienced over the past ten years where there were two growth periods. Was that the time period Staff was suggesting was the low growth or was it the previous. Mr. Williams stated no. it was a 40 year spread or 140 units over four years. Vice Mayor Scharff the second scenario was the outer growth which was fairly high. Mr. Williams stated yes, it was 204 units compared to 149. Chair Schmid stated using the outer growth scenario was accepting the ABAG suggested growth for the Bay Area as a whole. The real challenge to ABAG was for the City to state their base growth rate was not acceptable. Mr. Williams said ABAG was creating a range of alternatives, but they were all exceedingly high projections. Chair Schmid understood but said the range needed to be based on assumptions that made sense to capture the range of options. Vice Mayor Scharff wondered if there was a third alternative for a different range. He said none of the scenarios being used were realistic and for the City to use two of them seemed to give undue weight to ABAG’s process. 1/26/2012 12 Mr. Williams said Staff could use the low and high ranges where the in between became high and the historic became the low range. Council Member Burt felt omitting a period of a decade of abnormally high growth was no more legitimate than ABAG omitting the periods of low growth. He felt a 40 year period provided the proper amount of growth cycles. There were two categories of impacts, the school impact and the community impact. It was important to present to the PAUSD the community impacts. The community impacts included traffic, public facilities resources, and infrastructure.Palo Alto was an anomaly in terms of having a school community experiencing rapid growth and as a basic aid district.The City needed to convey to the school community and leverage the resources, politically and through research. The City may leverage the information and prevail on the argument but if not it would have a negative impact on the schools. Mr. Golton said there were basic aid school districts where the property tax revenue exceeded the amount they would receive from their revenue; however, some basic aid school districts did not have a large amount of money where others had significant resources. Some basic aid school districts merely received a small amount of funding where as Palo Alto received a significant amount. The metric to look at would be growth and the ability to accommodate the growth. The analysis of ABAG was incomplete without the impact on the schools which was profound. Chair Schmid noted the City’s population was growing at 1 percent while the school population was growing at 2 percent. It was not only the City’s growth impacting the school but something else. In order to understand what was occurring there needed to be an age distribution of the population those citizens over 65 and 80 years of age who were heads of household and the second was school age children. What was taking place was there was an aging population still sitting within the Proposition 13 capped housing being displaced by families with young children who were drawn because of the school district. Mr. Golton said in the down period following the major economic downturn,Palo Alto was the only school district in the county that had assessed value growth. Chair Schmid had seen a map of houses that showed there had not been a change of ownership since the 1970’s implying the leverage change ratio would continue at least for another decade. 1/26/2012 13 Mr. Williams stated the Finance Division compiled the information when they were estimating the potential property tax increases. Chair Schmid asked for the map to be distributed to the Council. Vice Mayor Scharff said when single family homes turned over and off of the Proposition 13 assessment the difference went from $70,000 to $100,000 under Proposition 13 to several million dollars. He asked how much money the PAUSD needed per student if a property was turned over and the district received 3 new students what type of property tax increase was needed to cover the new students with the same services. Mr. Golton said they had yield numbers for various types of housing. As it related to the amount of money for each student required,there were two numbers. One was simply the simple division of school districts expenditures divided by the number of students. He felt that would be and interesting number to develop. Vice Mayor Scharff was not looking for the PAUSD to suffer under the City’s plan. He was curious as to how to set-up plans to develop the new housing stock. Council Member Burt said the numbers needed to reflect not only the expenditures but also the revenues. Mr. Golton acknowledged there was a balance needed which came in a couple of ways;the additional property tax and the developers fees received for new construction. He noted when there were no developers fees the property tax needed to not only cover the operating costs but also needed to cover the capital costs for the students. Council Member Burt mentioned the other revenue source was commercial. Chair Schmid said it was important to note the student yield out of the townhouses and condominiums was 50 to 60 percent higher than expected. Mr. Golton agreed the student yield was moving up and in addition, outsiders were continuously supposed by the yields in Palo Alto. 1/26/2012 14 Vice Mayor Scharff asked for comparison data for the unit size of housing, who was occupying the home. Mr. Williams will follow-up with the PAUSD on projections and outreach to work and identify those sources in the community who could assist. He noted the supplemental hand-out had an updated version of the key issues summary with the demographic and economic objections and emissions. Staff would restructure the key issues summary for the PAUSD to use. No Action Taken 7.Next Steps Director of Planning and Community Environment, Curtis Williams stated the next update would be on January 21st to the City Council with respect to the Regional Housing Mandate Committee’s (RHMC) recommendation on the Planned Development Area (PDA). He noted the next RHMC meeting would be February 23rd at 4:00 PM. Chief Business Official, Bob Golton stated the School Board would meet on the 31st to select a board member as a liaison to the RHMC. Chair Schmid said if there was an issue over a response he suggested having a short meeting to discuss the options before Staff met with Council. Vice Mayor Scharff felt it was helpful to have Mr. Golton in attendance and asked if there was a possibility he could staff the meeting as well as a School Board Member. Mr. Golton stated his intent was to be staff to the liaison. ADJOURNMENT:The meeting was adjourned at 4:17 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 2390) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 2/21/2012 February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 4 (ID # 2390) Summary Title: Mitchell Park Construction Contract Monthly Report Title: Submittal of Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Monthly Construction Contract Report and Council Direction to Staff to Continue Construction Contract Monthly Reports From:City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1)Accept this update on the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPL&CC) construction contract change orders; and 2)Direct staff to continue to submit monthly reports to Council and to take related actions which Council may direct. Executive Summary The MPL&CC construction is approximately 67% complete. Council has authorized a 20% construction contract contingency ceiling for unanticipated construction costs and established specific project reporting requirements in order to manage costs. Actual change orders approved to date total $1,622,146 or about 6.7% of the base construction contract amount. Background On September 12, 2011, Council authorized an increase in change order authority and a ceiling for the MPL&CC construction contract from 10% to 20% to cover unanticipated construction costs. Council also directed staff to provide Council with a Monthly Report on Change Orders with Flintco, the general contractor. Discussion To date, 13 change orders have been approved for a total amount of $1,622,146. This amount constitutes 6.7% of the base construction contract amount. Council has authorized change orders up to 20% of the contract amount, leaving 13.3% available of the Council approved 20%. A breakdown of the change orders and the key components of each are contained in Table 1 listed below with a brief description of each. Please recognize that change orders can include reductions and credits as well as new costs. You will see this, for example, reflected in Change Order #5 in Table 1 below. February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 4 (ID # 2390) Note: The last three change orders (11, 12, and 13) are newly approved since the last report to Council. Table 1 Change Order Amount Change Order Summary 1 $41,725 Eight extra work items including the pruning of trees, clean- up of the old building, and removing conduit found during site clearing and grading. 2 $33,102 Four extra work items including the rerouting of a storm drain around tree roots and the addition of a new manhole that the drawings showed being present but wasn’t. 3 $215,501 10 extra work items including an adjustment needed due to tree root interference, an upgrade in wall insulation capability, and design coordination needed for steel installation. 4 $242,754 11 extra work items including the installation of dowels at additional locations, the installation of thicker glass railings to increase stability, increased gas transmission line coordination, and extra concrete water protection. 5 $4,436 24 extra work items including an extra light fixture cost, fire safety drawing coordination, and a variety of additional required supplies totaling $70,536 minus credit given for three of the 24 work items including spare fixtures no longer required and reimbursed City of Palo Alto dump fees totaling $66,100. 6 $25,123 Seven extra work items including additional gas main protection, curb strengthening, and deck support for the Building A green roof. 7 $74,304 19 extra work items including HVAC driven floor adjustments, electrical system adjustments, data cable rerouting, and a new load break cabinet totaling $109,965 minus credit given for two of the 19 work items including stones for the Arch provided by the artist and value engineering totaling $35,661. 8 $385,251 10 extra work items including additional fill, perforated metal panel ceiling work, various waterproofing, and conduit. 9 $195,706 18 extra work items including multiple curb installations, a basketball court slab, and an art sculpture foundation. 10 $78,514 18 extra work items including a Flintco field staff supplement, waterproofing, plumbing and electrical system alterations, and tree protection measures totaling $79,226 minus credit given for one of the 18 work items identified as plumbing fixture changes totaling $712. February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 4 (ID # 2390) 11 $224,662 14 extra work items including beam strengthening, interior & exterior roof tank pipe supports, electric vehicle chargers, load break cabinet bollards, and additional steel. 12 $20,347 Seven extra work items including A/V work, electrical changes, and a roof access ladder. 13 $80,721 13 extra work items including metal stud framing, light fixtures, and miscellaneous electrical work. TOTAL $1,622,146 TOTAL CO’s 1-13 ***For further information about each of the change orders see the attached corresponding Contract Change Order Scopes of Work. (Attachment A) Change order requests submitted by the contractor are typically bundled together on a monthly basis and summarized in one single change order. On September 12, 2011, Council further directed staff to submit any change order request which exceeds $85,000 to Council for approval (Attachment B). Staff is interpreting this to mean an individual change order line item more than $85,000. (You may note over the course of a month a number of on-site decisions are made, in order to not slow the project down, which when complied later can add up to more than $85,000). Thus, there are no change order requests greater than $85,000 which staff is recommending Council approve at this time. (Bundled Change Order 11, for example, totals $224,662, but includes as series of change orders, none of which exceeds $85,000). Council further directed that staff report to Council on the activities of the related Oversight Committees. Therefore, attached are the most recent documents from both the Library Bond Oversight Committee (Attachment C) and the Library Bond Stakeholders Committee (Attachment D). On October 17, 2011, Council requested information on two other related topics and these are addressed below. 1)Expenditures for New Consultants The City Attorney’s Office has hired three relatively new Consultants to assist with the review of construction costs requested by Council. The table below shows the amount encumbered and the amount spent to date. Contract Amount Amount Expended ZFA Structural Engineers $25,000 $15,332.52 Jarvis Fay (Law Firm)$50,000 $14,946.68 Reidinger Consulting (Scheduling)$30,000 $30,000 2)Outstanding Change Orders Proposed by the Construction Contractor (Flintco) In addition to knowing the amount of the Change Orders approved to date by the City (above), Council members asked the value of the outstanding change orders proposed by Flintco but not yet approved or rejected. This information is contained in Attachment E. February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 4 (ID # 2390) The latest Monthly Report concerning all Library Projects (“Palo Alto Library Projects”) is included as Attachment F. These will no longer be forwarded to Council via a separate staff report. Resource Impact There are no resource impacts associated with providing the monthly reports to Council. The approved change orders are within the Capital Improvement Program Project (CIP) Budget PE- 09006 for the MPL&CC project. Policy Implications There are no policy implications in providing the monthly reports to Council. Environmental Review Providing monthly reports on this topic to Council does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: ·A -MPL COs # 1-13 (PDF) ·B -Staff Report #1711 Mitchell Park Contingency (PDF) ·C -LBOC Agenda_1-24-2012 (PDF) ·D -LBOC Minutes_10-25-2011 (PDF) ·E -Summary Charts_1-31-2012 (PDF) ·F -PAL Monthly Report -November and December 2011 (PDF) Prepared By:Philip L. Bobel, Interim Asst. Director, Engineering Services Department Head:J. Michael Sartor, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager City of Palo Alto (ID # 1711) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 9/12/2011 September 12, 2011 Page 1 of 7 (ID # 1711) Summary Title: Contingency increase to 25% Mitchell Park Lib/CC Title: Approval of Increase in Construction Contingency from 10% to 25% on Contract C11136473 with Flintco Pacific Construction, Inc. for Construction of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, PE-09006; and Approval of Two Contract Amendments for Additional Construction Management and Design Services: Amendment No. Three with Turner Construction, Inc., to Add $205,287 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $3,783,745 and Amendment No. Five with Group 4 Architecture, Inc. To Add $220,670 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $7,902,421 From:City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Executive Summary Several issues have or are projected to increase the construction costs of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC), including many underground utility conflicts and the overall complexity of the library itself, particularly the electrical-mechanical systems, which will contain cutting-edge technology. The building is expected to reach the level of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold or Platinum; a very positive aspect, but one which increases complexity even further. Due to these factors, actual and known projected contract change orders for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center construction through April have used 53 percent of the Council approved percent contingency amount while only 33 percent of the work is in place (see Attachment A for contingency graph). Based on the current usage rate, staff recommends that Council authorize increasing the contingency by an additional 15 percent for a total construction contingency of 25 percent. Having this amount available if necessary will help insure no disruption to the construction schedule. This added contract contingency will not change the Projected Project Cost of $41 million. Staff continues to estimate project savings (as calculated from the Engineer’s Estimate of $49,043,000) to be $7.4 million. These projections do not change because a larger contingency need had been anticipated in the Projected Project Cost. Recommendation Staff recommends that Council” September 12, 2011 Page 2 of 7 (ID # 1711) 1.The existing contingency for construction of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center PE-09006) (“MPLCC”) is 10 percent of the construction contract of $24,365,000, or $2,436,500. Staff recommends the construction contingency for contract C11136473 with Flintco Pacific, Inc., be increased by $3,654,750 an additional 15 percent of the Contract amount. The revised total contingency authorization for this contract would be $6,091,250 for a total contract contingency of 25 percent. 2.Approve and Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. Three (Attachment B) to contract C10131631 with Turner Construction, Inc., to add $205,297 for additional construction management services for a total contract amount of $3,783,745. This increase represents a 7.5 percent increase in the Additional Services budget. 3.Approve and Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. Five (Attachment C) to contract C09130744 with Group 4 Architecture, Inc., to add $220,670 for additional design services for a total contract amount of $7,902,421. This increase represents a 5 percent increase in the Additional Services budget. Background Measure N, which passed on November 4, 2008, includes funding for construction of a new and expanded Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC), renovation of the Downtown Library and renovation and expansion of the Main Library. Detailed history of the design development can be found in past City Manager’s Reports to Council (CMR:286:02, CMR:119:06, CMR:343:06, CMR:434:06, CMR:225:07, CMR:321:08, CMR:473:08, CMR:149:09, CMR:334:10 and CMR:435:10) that can be viewed at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/knowzone/reports/cmrs.asp). On August 5, 2010, Council awarded contract C11136473 to Flintco Pacific Inc., for construction of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center in the amount of $24,365,000. Council also authorized a 10 percent construction contingency in the amount of $2,436,500 for a total of $26,801,500. The construction costs are a component of the overall Projected MPLCC Project Cost of $41,566,317, as reported in the May, 2011 Palo Alto Library Projects Monthly Report. · ·Discussion The American Institute of Architects recommends a construction change order contingency of 10 to 12 percent on projects the size of the MPLCC. Contingency has varied on past on City building projects based on the nature of the project: the College Terrace Library had a 25 percent contingency; the Downtown Library has 15 percent contingency; and the two downtown parking structures had a 15 percent contingency. This request would increase the Mitchell Park Library contingency to 25 percent of Flintco Pacific Inc.’s original contract, more typical of the City’s recent, large construction contracts. The construction manager for the MPLCC project, Turner Construction, had originally recommended a 10 percent contingency since new buildings not in a downtown area are typically more straightforward projects than building remodels, which can have many unforeseen factors such as termites, dry rot, and features not shown on the older plans used to September 12, 2011 Page 3 of 7 (ID # 1711) develop the remodel. In the case of the MPLCC, however, the complexity and sophistication of the project that is being undertaken make it distinguishable from typical new construction projects. The MPLCC building will contain complex, cutting-edge technology (such as blinds that open and close automatically in response to the amount of sunlight available) and is expected to reach the level of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold or Platinum. As the complexity of a project goes up, it becomes more difficult for public “lump sum” bid documents to address every condition that will be encountered during construction. · ·In addition, significant unforeseen items have impacted the contingency budget to date. These items include issues related to the PG&E high-pressure gas transmission line, site utilities, foundations, and structural steel. Anticipated issues that may arise as construction continues and could potentially require increased contingency levels are the electrical and mechanical components. Details of the major categories impacting contingency are listed below: · ·PG&E High Pressure Gas Line ·The Notice to Proceed for construction was issued on September 7, 2010. Two days later, a PG&E gas transmission line exploded in San Bruno which led to a heightened awareness of gas line safety. A similar gas transmission line exists at the back of walk along Middlefield Road, including the frontage of this project and it was necessary to re-check the elevations and designs of all utilities crossing the gas line. Many underground utilities were in close proximity to the gas line and as a result, all members of the project team worked together to develop and implement additional, elevated safety protocols for working near that gas transmission line which included added cost for coordination meetings with all utilities and all relevant subcontractors. The safety protocols led to additional costs by requiring that more careful excavation methods, such as hand digging and vacuum excavation, be used near the gas line. These methods of excavating are also more expensive than standard methods that would have been reasonable to presume while bidding. · ·Structural Steel changes ·One of the unfortunate consequences of a competitive bid market and the weak economy is that many subcontractors find that they cannot meet the obligations of all the projects that they bid. This project has experienced more subcontractors pulling out than any other project that the City has done. One of the major components of a building like the MPLCC is that its structural steel frame is a significant portion of the work that needs to be done. Nearly all other components of the building are dependent on the completion of the structural steel frame. As a result, it becomes part of the critical path for scheduling and any delays to the progress of the structural steel frame delay the entire project. · ·One of the first subcontractors to withdraw from this project was the structural steel subcontractor. Such an action typically would cause a three month delay in the project. Through significant effort on the part of the general contractor, the construction manager, the design team, and the City, delays were avoided by approving a new subcontractor for the structural steel in an expeditious manner. In order to make up for some of the delay caused by September 12, 2011 Page 4 of 7 (ID # 1711) the three weeks that it took to find a new structural steel subcontractor, acceleration of the structural steel work was necessary, requiring overtime by the new structural steel subcontractor. In the process of working through all of the shop drawings necessary to get the structural steel done as quickly and efficiently as possible, modifications to the structural steel design were made. · ·Completeness of Design Plans and Specifications ·At the time of the public bidding process, it appears that certain areas of the design were not detailed to the level needed for actual construction. For example, while a detail was shown for the size of tube steel that would be needed to reinforce exterior walls, there was no mention of the spacing or length of said steel members. As a result, the steel actually necessary for construction was more than the amounts detailed in the design plans on which the contractor based its bid, and an additional approximately $250,000 was needed to reimburse the contractor for the additional steel that was needed for the building. · ·Other design areas where similar design plan issues have been identified relate to the means of connecting various parts of the building. The building is composed of a variety of angles and the angles may abut differing types of materials (stone to metal, etc). The way of connecting to one type of material is different from connecting to another type of material and the differing angles add complications. For the most part, the plans only showed a few standard details. · Staff is taking a two-fold approach to minimize potential delay resulting from these issues. First, Group 4 Architecture is working as quickly as possible to correct the plans and the contractor and construction manager are working together to implement them in the field. Second, Staff is reviewing the extent to which the change orders for this project were driven by the completeness of Group 4 Architecture’s design drawings and tracking related costs caused by the design changes. If it is determined that the number and type of deficiencies in the design work was atypical and resulted in significant delay or other change order costs, appropriate follow-up actions will be taken. · ·However, it is important to note that the additional costs associated with the steel and connections could likely not have been avoided. These are critical components of the building. If the details had been fully shown in the plans at the time of the bid, the contractor would probably have accounted for those details in the bid and the City would have likely paid a higher price for the building at the time of contract award. · ·Exterior Cladding of the Building ·The exterior cladding (skin) of the building has been more challenging to build than anticipated. The purpose of the exterior skin is keep the elements out, but also to provide the level of thermal and moisture protection necessary for efficient energy usage. The basis of design for the exterior skin required the development of a performance specification of specific structural and thermal properties which were incorporated into the building’s design. After September 12, 2011 Page 5 of 7 (ID # 1711) construction started, however, the project team came to the conclusion that the only way to meet the performance specification was to use a proprietary system instead of conventional framing. Additional effort by the contractor, construction manager, and design team was needed to detail how all of the parts would fit together since standard details do not necessarily apply to a proprietary system. Additionally, numerous openings in the exterior skin require coordination with other parts such as the book drops for the automated materials handling equipment, anchorage for art work, signs and plaques at the entrance, in addition to the doors and windows of the entrance. Since all of these parts were being designed by many different parties as the construction got underway, adjustments and interconnections required additional care, effort, and thought. · ·Interiors and Electrical-Mechanical Systems ·Interiors and electrical-mechanical systems are the two significant areas remaining to be addressed that have the potential to trigger the need for additional contingency funding. These areas are where the advanced building technology is most present, so it is possible that additional unexpected issues might arise. The rate at which the contingency is used should ease off after the electrical-mechanical issues are addressed · Analysis Actual and projected potential contract change orders for the MPLCC construction have thus far used 53 percent of the contingency while only 33 percent of the work is in place (Attachment A). During the first eight months of construction, contingency usage averaged $160,000 per month. The current 10 percent contingency funding level allows only an average of $120,000 per month. Therefore, staff recommends that Council authorize increasing the contingency by another 15 percent, for a total of 25percent. Based on a review of the construction documents, field conditions and change orders to date, staff projects a 20 percent contingency authorization would likely cover projected additional work required through completion of the project. Increasing the contingency to 25 percent, however, provides the Director of Public Works with the authority to continue approval of change orders through conclusion of the contract and ensures a sufficient funding cushion to avoid the possibility of delays due to lack of contingency funding. Any unused funding at the end of the project returns to its source, in this case to Bond proceeds. Even with this added contingency amount, the projected MPLCC project cost will continue to be $41,566,317, as reported in the May, 2011, Palo Alto Library Projects Monthly Report. The projected savings (as calculated from the Engineers’ Estimate of $49,043,000) will continue to be $7,476,683. The amount being added to the construction contract contingency does not impact the projected project cost because a larger contingency had been anticipated in the engineering estimate. Council had authorized 15 percent contingency on the Downtown Library and 25 percent on the recent College Terrace Library project. Construction efforts to date reveal that the MPLCC is at that level of complexity where a 25 percent contingency is justified. Staff had requested September 12, 2011 Page 6 of 7 (ID # 1711) the 25 percent contingency on the College Terrace Library due to the low bids received and to the competitive bidding climate in which profit margins were very thin or non-existent so that contractors could secure work for their crews. When bids are substantially below the project budget, as was the case with the College Terrace Library and the MPLCC, there is no room for the contractor to provide anything but what is shown on the plans. For example, in the past a contractor might have provided additional landscaping in a small area where it had not been shown on the plans but in today’s market the owner would be asked to pay for that small amount of extra work. Given that construction climate, staff will reassess whether to recommend 15, 20 or even 25 percent contingencies on future projects that are significantly below the engineer’s estimated cost. Consultant Contract Amendments Staff recommends approval of Amendments No. 3 and 5, respectively, to contracts with Turner Construction and Group 4 Architecture. The Additional Services (contingency) budgets within these contracts have been increased to correspond to the issues described in this report and allow for increased flexibility in the future. The previous Additional Services budgets have been depleted by increasing both Turner and Group 4 Architecture staffing in order to respond to design and construction issues, thereby reducing the likelihood of construction delay claims by the contractor. If additional services are not needed by the consultants, the funding will not be spent. In addition to the 5 percent increase requested by Group 4 Architecture, Turner Construction is requesting a higher contingency amount of 7.5 percent in order to assist staff with the preparation of the numerous contract packages (furniture, signage, equipment, telecommunication, etc.) that are required for this project. Resource Impact Additional 15 percent construction contingency funding in the amount of $3,654,750 is available in the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center CIP, PE-09006. This funding amount was initially set aside and assumed for budgeting purposes that it would be used for project costs. Its use for increased construction and consultant costs will therefore have no impact on the projected project reserves of $7.41M. The Measure N contracts and contract amendments encumbered to date are as follows: Contract Group 4 Architecture Turner Construction Construction Original contract $3,827,280 $138,198 $24,365,000 Original Contingency -10%$2,436,500 Additional Contingency -15%$3,654,750 Amendment 1 $92,034 $432,000 Amendment 2 $312,396 $3,008,250 Amendment 3 $3,192,000 $205,297 Amendment 4 $258,041 n/a September 12, 2011 Page 7 of 7 (ID # 1711) Amendment 5 $220,670 n/a Subtotals: Total Contract Value to Date $7,902,421 $3,783,745 $30,456,250 Policy Implications Increasing the contingency to 25 percent for the construction contingency budget and for increased consultant services does not conflict with any current City policy. Timeline Construction of the new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center began in September of 2010 and construction is anticipated to be completed in the summer of 2012. After the construction is completed, library and community center staff will move materials and equipment back into the new facilities which are expected to re-open in the fall of 2012. Attachments: ·A -Contingency Analysis (PDF) ·B -Turner Construction, Amendment 3 (PDF) ·C -Group 4 Architecture, Amendment 5 (PDF) Prepared By:Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer Department Head:J. Michael Sartor, Interim Director City Manager Approval: James Keene, City Manager Mitchell Park Library Community Center Flintco Construction General Contract Contingency Analysis August 2011 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500 $5,000 $5,500 $6,000 Se p -10 Oc t -10 No v -10 De c -10 Ja n -11 Fe b -11 Ma r - 11 Ap r -11 Ma y - 11 Ju n -11 Ju l -11 Au g - 11 Se p -11 Oc t -11 No v -11 De c -11 Ja n -12 Fe b -12 Ma r - 12 Ap r - 12 Ma y - 12 Ju n -12 Ju l -12 Au g - 12 Average monthly use 10% contingency Average monthly use 25% contingency Changes Orders approved to date Potential Change Orders 10 % Contingency 25%Contingency AMENDMENT NO.3 TO CONTRACT NO. CI0131631 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY This Amendment No.3 to Contract No. C10131631 ("Contract") is entered into on 12th day of September, 2011, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California ("CITY"), and TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a California corporation, located at 60 S. Market Street, STE 1100, San Jose, CA 95113 ("CONTRACTOR"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center construction services; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract to add funding for additional services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions ofthis Amendment, the parties agree: Section 1. Section 4 of the contract. Not to exceed compensation. is hereby amended to read as follows: "The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit "A", including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Million Two Hundred Fifty-four Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-seven Dollars ($3,254,337.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the TOTAL compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed ($3,783,745). Section 2. The following exhibits to the Contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachments to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit "A" entitled "Scope of Work Mitchell Park LibrarylCommunity Center, Renovation of the. Downtown Library, Renovation and Addition to the Main Library & Temporary Library Design Services". b. Exhibit "B" entitled "EXHIBIT "B" SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE". c. Exhibit "c" entitled "EXHIBIT "c" COMPENSATION". Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. II II July 21, 2011. Page 1 of21 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. APPROVED: City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": EXHIBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": SCOPE OF SERVICES PROJECT SCHEDULE COMPENSATION TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BY:~~ T~ Name: ~~ J. Prr. fndt Title: VUL {Jr4.'} O\~. July 21, 2011 Page 2 of21 EXHIBIT" A" SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. INTRODUCTION In November 2008, voters approved Measure N, which provided for the upgrade, replacement and/or expansion of three libraries in Palo Alto. These libraries are the Downtown Library, the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC) and the Main Library. Environmental clearance has been completed and approved for the three sites. The design plans, which are currently approximately 50 percent complete, have been reviewed by City boards and commissions and have been presented to the community, although additional public meetings are scheduled. I>owntownLibrafY Improvements to the I>owntown Library, located at 270 Forest Ave, consist primarily of accessibility improvements, code required upgrades, electrical and mechanical systems upgrades, and interior space remodeling. The estimated 2008 construction cost was $2.4 million which was based upon 35% completed plans. The construction cost estimate excludes d'esign costs, contingency, inflation escalation, permits, testing, fixtures and furnishing. Environmental clearance has been completed and approved for the project. The Downtown Library will not be a certified LEED building but will follow the City's Green Building Policy and submittal requirements. Mitchell Park LibrafY and Community Center The existing Mitchell Park Library building is located at 3700 Middlefield Road and the adjacent Community Center building is located at 3800 Middlefield Road. The existing library building is less than 10,000 square feet. The existing community center building is approximately 10,000 square feet. Construction will entail demolition and removal of the existing buildings and parking lots, construction of a combined library and community center building and associated site amenities including parking. The new building'S total area will be approximately 51,000 square feet, of which 36,000 square feet will be a two-story library and 15,000 square feet will be a single-story community center around a heritage oak tree. The 2008 estimated construction cost was $28.1 million which was based upon the 35% plan design. The construction cost estimate excludes design costs, contingency, inflation escalation, permits, testing, fixtures and furnishing. The MPLCC will be designed to U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy Efficiency and I>esign (LEEI> ®) Gold standard. I>uring construction, the library services and the community center will be relocated to a temporary facility or facilities. Design of the temporary facility is underway and construction management services for that facility will be performed by Public Works staff. Main Library (Potential Future Phase) Construction management services for the Main Library are not included at this time, as design of improvements to the Main Library will not begin until approximately early 2011. The City reserves the right to negotiate a fee for and enter into a contract (amendment) with Turner Construction Company (hereinafter "Consultant") for these services, or to issue a new Request for Proposals for the services. July 21, 2011 Page 3 of21 The Main Library, located on Newell Road, will have both an interior renovation and an expansion. The renovation to the existing historic structure will consist of seismic, accessibility, and systems upgrades as well as minor expansions and reconfigurations. In addition, a detached building of approximately 4,500 square feet will be constructed. The 2008 estimated construction cost was $9 million which was based upon the 35% plan design. The construction cost estimate excludes design costs, contingency, inflation escalation, permits, testing, fixtures and furnishing. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES All work described below will be done in conjunction with the City's ongoing review and approval process for the projects described above. The Consultant's services shall include full Construction Management Services as required to assist staff in the management of the design and construction of the above projects. If at any time, the City is not satisfied with the performance of Consultant's staff, the City reserves the right to request the services of a different individual. If for any reason the Consultant proposes a change of staffing during the course of the project, the City reserves the right to approve any new staff. Additional Services must be approved in advance of services, in writing, by the City Project Manager. Office space, computers, cell phones, furnishings and other equipment needed for Consultant's staff shall be provided by the Consultant. These costs shall be included in the Consultant fee proposal. Downtown Library Phase I -Design Phase Staff support for this library will be primarily by City staff. During the design phase, Consultant services are primarily required for specialty (mechanical, electrical) and for pre-qualifiction of contractors and key subcontractors. A. Preconstruction Document and Constructability review Consultant shall: • become familiar with the project history, plans, and specifications. • review plans, specifications and cost estimates submitted for City review. Review by Consultant shall be performed by engineers or contractors who have experience in relevant fields. Review of documents shall be done at the current and 100% completion stage of Design Development and at 60%, 95% and 100% of Construction Development. • provide a constructability review for the project documents and make appropriate cost and/or time-savings recommendations to the City. • provide an independent opinion of probable cost. • analyze and document the costs and benefits associated with combining construction of the Downtown Library with the MPLCC. • coordinate as-needed and directed with the ArchitectlEngineers (AE) firm, City staff, City boards and commission members, and community members. July 21, 2011 Page 4 of21 • assist the City's Contracts Manager with the preparation of the "Instructions to Bidders" which will define the scope of work that must be included in the bid packages and other related bid documents needed to ensure a complete bid package. The AE will prepare technical specifications. • become familiar with the various City department functions and requirements for project coordination. Contractor and Key Subcontractor Pre qualification Prior to the construction bid phase, the Consultant shall prepare, and obtain approval from the City of Palo Alto, to advertise forms required for Contractor and key subcontractor Pre qualification. Consultant shall administer the feedback from same, including but not limited to: answering questions from contractors and subcontractors, coordinating responses with the City's Purchasing Division, preparing spreadsheets or other documentation necessary to compile and compare contractor responses, preparing a recommended bidder's list with a brief report summarizing findings, assisting in representing the City in any subsequent hearings challenging the validity of the results and any follow-up documentation resulting from said hearings. The City Purchasing Division will verify Consultant's recommendation in order to finalize the decision. Additional Services Additional Services include, but are not limited to, attendence at meetings, value engineering, calculations and reimbursable expenses not included in the base fee. Phase II -Construction Phase Services -Downtown Library A. Turner Staff Services General: Consultant shall be the point of contact for the project's contractor (Contractor), and shall endeavor to enforce compliance with all of Contractor's contractual requirements, as follows: Daily Construction Management: Consultant shall oversee the day-to-day construction work performed by the Contractor. Consultant shall track the construction process, logistics, Request For Information (RFI), Change Order (CO) and other information or requests. Consultant shall oversee the construction activities and ensure that all aspects of LEED ® construction requirements are followed and documented and shall work closely with the project's Commissioning Agent and design consultant, Group 4 Architecture (ARCHITECT), in that regard. City shall approve Additional Services requests and other items that are part of the City's contract with the ARCHITECT firm. Consultant shall work with the Contractor and any involved parties to implement logistical and communications measures to minimize any impacts to the nearby residential neighborhood, park, fire station, and the various pre-school, elementary, middle, special needs, and charter schools on that block. Consultant shall implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Consultant shall handle the coordination between the City staff, Contractor, and ARCHITECT. If night time, holiday or weekend work is required periodically to minimize impacts or due to delay in schedule, Consultant services shall still be required in full effect, but will be compensated as additional services, for costs incurred. Consultant shall assume that the third Monday in January (Martin Luther King Day), the second Monday in October (Columbus Day) July 21, 2011 Page 5 of21 and November 11 (Veteran's Day) of each year shall be a working day for the contractor and for the Consultant. December 24 (Christmas Eve) and the Friday following Thanksgiving Day (the fourth Thursday in November) shall also be considered to be regular working days. Consultant shall install, advertise, and maintain a hot-line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Advertisement, equipment and other related costs shall be included in the Reimbursables cost section below. Consultant shall liaison with City staff and assist Contractor as-needed in the connection of a Contractor-installed video camera(s) that will be connected to a website to monitor site progress. Documentation: Consultant shall oversee and manage the Contractor's preparation and/or review of all necessary documentation for the project including, but not limited to, daily logs and inspection progress reports, photos/videos, RFI, correspondence, shop drawings, and other contractor submittals. Consultant shall maintain all files and documentation related to managing the project. Consultant shall track all RFI, correspondence, and submittal status. Responses, approvals, and decisions relative to Contractor's documents shall be provided in a timely manner and as required in the construction documents. Consultant shall review and comment on any project-related correspondence as requested by the City. Routine correspondence that is related to product information or minor design issues may be prepared and answered by Consultant on its letterhead, with a copy of the response directed to PM and ARCHITECT. Correspondence requiring City response, including but not limited to correspondence with residents, cost or contractual issues, may be drafted by Consultant but shall be signed only by City. Submittals: Consultant shall manage, log and track all project submittals (i.e. shop drawings, product information, substitution request, and samples) for approval in timely manner as required by the construction documents and in order to prevent any delays to the project. Comments from different reviewers of the submittal shall be compiled before being returned to the Contractor for revisions. All submittals shall be sent directly between the Contractor and the Design team, with copies, documentation and management reports submitted to and managed by the Consultant. Construction Schedule: Consultant shall review the Contractor's construction schedule. Consultant shall analyze, monitor, and request updates for the master schedule as the project progresses. Consultant shall analyze the schedule for logical construction, constraints, level of critical activities and to verify progress in conjunction with the analysis of pay applications. Consultant shall review Contractors' individual Critical Path Method (CPM) schedules, monitor the contractor's progress, notify the City of any slippage, and coordinate contractor recovery plans. Progress Payments: Consultant shall review progress payment requests submitted by Contractor, within five (5) days of receipt and verify the accuracy and percentage of completion against the schedule, and resolve any discrepancies in the invoices. Consultant shall review the invoices and backup for completeness and compliance with contract documents and make a recommendation to PM for payment of the progress payment requests. Change Order Monitoring and Processing: Consultant shall review and evaluate all Contractor extra work requests. Consultant shall review the contract documents to determine entitlement, complete an independent estimate of the cost of the changes, and reconcile with the contractor's change order request. Consultant shall prepare contract change order authorizations for City July 21, 2011 Page 6 of21 approval and track all scope and schedule changes. Consultant shall also implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Claims: Consultant shall analyze any claims from the contractors (i.e., compensation and delay) as to whether they are excusable, inexcusable, or compensable and prepare a response for City. Meetings: Throughout the construction process, Consultant shall be prepared to address comments and concerns of the construction contractors, ARCHITECT, PM, the City Staff, and the general public on an as-needed basis. Consultant shall set up and conduct weekly progress meetings and any other meetings necessary to facilitate the project work. Consultant shall write and distribute the meeting agendas, and meeting minutes, including: City-Consultant meetings, regular site meetings, and meetings with the City staff, contractors, various City departments, and also the public. The meeting minutes will explicitly track who has the responsibility for each action item with expected completion dates. Consultant shall coordinate the logistics related to a ground-breaking and to a ribbon-cutting ceremony, including working with committees, identifying power sources, etc. Costs for beverages, materials, photographs shall not be the responsibility of the Consultant. Soils-related testing shall be under the Consultant's . contract. Physical oversight of the geotechnical aspects of the construction project shall be contracted by the ARCHITECT firm. Miscellaneous: Consultant shall monitor Contractor's compliance in general with the construction documents and contract. Consultant shall address comments and concerns of the contractors and the ARCHITECT as needed. During construction, the Consultant's office space shall be provided, maintained and removed by the Contractor, including offices, furniture and office equipment. Quality Control and Assurance: Consultant shall monitor and document the Contractors' work for any deviations in scope, schedule, or performance and keep the City informed of and assist in resolving any issues that may arise. Record Drawings: Consultant shall coordinate the preparation of record drawings with the Contractors and ARCHITECT on a regular basis, both during the construction and post construction phases, and review the drawings for "as-built" accuracy. Training: Consultant shall set up and coordinate contractor-provided training of City staff as required by the contract documents and as necessary to ensure that the appropriate City personnel are adequately trained and familiar with the new equipment and systems. Commissioning: Consultant shall work with the commissioning agent, design consultants, and the Contractors to ensure that all new equipment have been installed in accordance with the contract documents, are working properly as stand-alone equipment, and are working properly as part of a complete system. Substantial Completion: As per the construction contract, once the Contractor requests substantial completion and it is determined to be warranted, Consultant shall prepare and compile a project punch list with the assistance from the City and ARCHITECT to be forwarded to the Contractor. Consultant shall oversee the completion of the punch list items before the final notice of completion is issued. July 21, 2011 Page 7 of21 As-Built drawings shall be scanned by Consultant for archiving by City. Close Out: Consultant shall ensure completion and delivery of all required close out documentations including operation and maintenance (O&M) manuals, record drawings, and warranties. Consultant shall review all these materials for compliance with the contract documents and for completeness, and report any deficiencies or discrepancies to Contractor for corrections and re-submittal. Consultant shall work under the direction of the Project Manager to resolve any contract claim issues that may arise (stop work notices, bonding, delays, extra work, etc). Files: Consultant shall consolidate and deliver all project files and documentation maintained to be retained by the City B. Testing Laboratories and Special Inspections: Testing and Special Inspections: A testing agency shall be under contract with and paid for by the Consultant. Consultant shall coordinate with the Contractor in scheduling the testing agency services for materials testing and special inspections needed for the life of the project. This testing includes, but is not limited to, collecting and running geotechnical tests, concrete strength and weld inspection. Consultant shall ensure that all required sign-offs are reviewed and distributed and are in compliance with the specifications and the California' Building Codes. Geotechnical Engineering is included by the Architect, and is not included by the Consultant. C. Electronic Documents: Electronic Documents: Consultant shall provide electronic, fully addressable and cross referenced electronic document filing system. It will be developed and used as the project filing system during construction and will be updated with all closeout documentation, and cross referenced for simple search and retrieve functionality for all project documentation for City's use after construction. Consultant will provide Labor to input all documentation, and to train City in the use and access to all electronic project files. Any monthly service fees shall be included herein and not in Reimbursables. D. Additional Services: Additional Services: Include, but are not limited to, additional meetings, additional public outreach, unforeseen testing or inspection needs. E. Reimbursables: Reimbursables: Travel and meal expenses shall not be Reimbursable items but shall be considered as included in the fee for associated work items. Any temporary trailers, computers, copiers, printers and office supplies are not considered as a Reimbursable expense, but will be provided to the Consultant under the Contractor's Contract. City may, at its option, provide working space and computer connection for Consultant. Printing of plans and specifications shall be paid by City. Consultant shall, at the direction of the Project Manager, install, advertise, and maintain a hot- line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Printing of flyers, presentation boards, advertisement, equipment and other related outreach material costs shall considered a Reimbursable expense, the cost for which shall be approved in writing in advance by the Project July 21, 2011 Page 8 of21 Manager. Phase III-Post Construction Services -Downtown F. Post Construction Services Post Construction and Warranty Services: Consultant shall meet with Library, Community Services and Public Works staff (Staff) monthly for three months commencing after the building is open to the public in order to complete any remaining punch-list items and/or to contact the Contractor for any warranty issues that might arise. After the initial three month period, Consultant shall contact the Staff quarterly for a period of nine months to determine whether any new building or systems issues have been identified. Systems deficiencies that cannot be resolved by the Contractor shall be reported to the Commissioning Agent. Commissioning Verification: Consultant shall participate in the post-construction activities of the Commissioning Agent as follows: Participate in an off-season testing (Le., testing the heating system prior to winter) session and work with the Contractor to correct any deficiencies. Compile the final testing documentation for the Commissioning Record and O&M manuals. Return to the site at month 10 of the 12 month warranty period and review operating conditions with City facility staff and the Commissioning Agent in order to identify any outstanding issues related to the original and seasonal commissioning. The Commissioning Agent will interview facility staff and identify problems or concerns that they have with operating the building as originally intended. The Commissioning Agent will make suggestions for improvements and for recording these changes in the O&M manuals. The Commissioning Agent will identify areas that may come under warranty or under the original construction contract. The Construction Management Consultant shall work with the Contractor to resolve any warranty issues. Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Phase I -Design Phase A. Preconstruction Document and Constructability review Consultant shall: • become familiar with the project history, plans and specifications • review plans, specifications and prepare cost estimates submitted for City review. Review by Consultant shall be performed by engineers or contractors who have experience in relevant fields. Review of documents shall be done at the current and 100% completion stage of Design Development and at 60%, 95% and 100% of Construction Development. • provide a constructability review for the project documents and make appropriate cost and/or time-savings recommendations to the City. • provide an independent opinion of probable construction cost. • coordinate as-needed and directed with the ArchitectlEngineers (AE) firm, City staff, City boards and commission members and community members. • assist the City's Contracts Manager with the preparation of the "Instructions to Bidders" which July 21, 2011 Page 9 of21 will define the scope of work that must be included in the bid packages and other related bid documents needed to ensure a complete bid package. The AE will prepare technical specifications. • become familiar with the various City department functions and requirements for project coordination. Community Outreach The Consultant shall collect information and prepare community, City Manager, oversight committee, boards and commission and any other needed updates, presentations or reports not provided by the AE. The Consultant shall attend community meetings to update various civic orginazations (Kiwanas, school groups, etc.) or community meetings on the project progress. Fee for this service shall be included in 'Meetings'. Seven public meetings are currently scheduled from Sept 22,2009 through January 26, 2010, however, Consultant shall budget for up to five (5) additional public meetings. Contractor and Key Subcontractor Pregualification Prior to the construction bid phase, the City shall prepare, with City of Palo Alto approval, and advertise forms required for Contractor and key subcontractor Prequalification. Consultant shall administer the feedback from same, including but not limited to: answering questions from contractors and subcontractors, coordinating responses with the City's Purchasing Division, preparing spreadsheets or other documentation necessary to compile and compare contractor responses, prepare a recommended bidder's list with a brief report summarizing findings, assist in representing the City in any subsequent hearings challenging the validity of the results, and any follow-up documentation reSUlting from said hearings. Bidding: Consultant shall organize and manage contractor participation. Consultant shall review the contractor bids for compliance with the technical portions of the bid requirements as set forth in the specifications and make a recommendation for award or rejection. Consultant shall assist with the bid period work items including clarifications, and bid evaluation relative to the contract documen!s. Consultant shall review the subcontractor list for completeness and compliance with the bid documents. The City Purchasing Division will verify Consultant's recommendation in order to finalize the decision. Pre-bid Conference and Pre-construction Meeting: Consultant shall coordinate and facilitate the Pre-bid Conference and Pre-construction Meeting including preparation of the agendas and meeting minutes Addenda: If changes to the construction documents are required during the bidding period, Consultant shall prepare the addenda items with the assistance from the AE. The City will issue the addenda. Budget: Consultant shall work with the City to develop a construction budget format and tracking system. Hazardous Material Abatement: Hazardous materials may be removed from the existing structures prior to their demolition (under City contract) or may be included as part of the construction bid package. Consultant shall assume that the abatement will be done by City contract and Consultant shall prepare, assist in the bidding of and coordinate the remediation contract. A third party consultant shall be employed by the City to survey, test, develop and July 21, 2011 Page 10 of21 implement removal procedures, monitor abatement and report. Relocation of Existing Library Services The Consultant shall provide CM Services to support the City of Palo Alto in relocating library services to a temporary facility. It is estimated the move coordination for the Consultant wi11last approximately 3 weeks. Meetings: Throughout the design process, Consultant shall be prepared to address comments and concerns of the contractors interested in bidding on the project, AE, City Staff, boards and commissions and the general public on an as-needed basis. Consultant shall schedule and conduct weekly progress meetings and any other meetings necessary to facilitate the project work. City will provide the administrative support to provide a meeting room and invite attendees. Consultant shall write and distribute the meeting agendas, and meeting minutes, including: City-Consultant meetings, regular site meetings, and meetings with the City staff, contractors, various City departments and also the public. The meeting minutes will explicitly track who has the responsibility for each action item with expected completion dates. Additional Services Additional Services include, but are not limited to, attendence at meetings, value engineering, calculations and reimbursable expenses not included in the base fee. Phase II -Construction Phase Services -MPLCC A. Turner Staff Services General: Consultant shall be the point of contact for the project's contractor (Contractor), and shall endeavor to enforce compliance with all of Contractor's contractual requirements, as follows: Daily Construction Management: Consultant shall oversee the day-to-day construction work performed by the Contractor. Consultant shall track the construction process, logistics, Request For Information (RFI), Change Order (CO) and other information or requests. Consultant shall oversee the construction activities and ensure that all aspects of LEED ® construction requirements are followed and documented and shall work closely with the project's Commissioning Agent and design consultant, Group 4 Architecture (ARCHITECT), in that regard. City shall approve Additional Services requests and other items that are part of the City's contract with the ARCHITECT firm. Consultant shall work with the Contractor and any involved parties to implement logistical and communications measures to minimize any impacts to the nearby residential neighborhood, park, fire station, and the various pre-school, elementary, middle, special needs, and charter schools on that block. Consultant shall implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Consultant shall handle the coordination between the City staff, Contractor, and ARCHITECT. If night time, holiday or weekend work is required periodically to minimize impacts or due to delay in schedule, Consultant services shall still be required in full effect, but will be compensated as additional services, for costs incurred. Consultant shall assume that the third July 21, 2011 Page 11 of21 Monday in January (Martin Luther King Day), the second Monday in October (Columbus Day) and November 11 (Veteran's Day) of each year shall be a working day for the contractor and for the Consultant. December 24 (Christmas Eve) and the Friday following Thanksgiving Day (the fourth Thursday in November) shall also be considered to be regular working days. Consultant shall install, advertise, and maintain a hot-line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Advertisement, equipment and other related costs shall be included in the Reimbursables cost section below. Consultant shall liaison with City staff and assist Contractor as-needed in the connection of a Contractor-installed video camera(s) that will be connected to a website to monitor site progress. Field Inspection and Supervision: For Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, the Consultant, whose title shall be CM Field Superintendent (CMFS), shall maintain a field presence whenever work is under way by the Contractor. The role of the CMFS will be to enforce the Contract daily in the field to ensure that the work is being constructed in compliance with the contract documents, the approved shop drawings, the current RFI answers, etc, and in general, 'to protect the interest of the City of Palo Alto daily in the field. The CMFS will also observe and report daily field problems with respect to quality, cost and schedule. The CMFS will develop and maintain deficiency, incomplete work item, and preliminary punch list reports and will maintain a daily construction report, as the daily history of the project, to include significant jobsite field events that occur each day. The CMFS will not be responsible for means and methods of the general Contractor, nor for safety of any of the contractor's employees, but will have the authority, but not the responsibility, to observe and report concerns with regard to such issues. Documentation: Consultant shall oversee and manage the Contractor's preparation and/or review of all necessary documentation for the project including, but. not limited to, daily logs and inspection progress reports, photos/videos, RFI, correspondence, shop drawings, and other contractor submittals. Consultant shall maintain all files and documentation related to managing the project. Consultant shall track all RFI, correspondence, and submittal status. Responses, approvals, and decisions relative to Contractor's documents shall be provided in a timely manner and as required in the construction documents. Consultant shall review and comment on any project-related correspondence as requested by the City. Routine correspondence that is related to product information or minor design issues may be prepared and answered by Consultant on its letterhead, with a copy of the response directed to PM and ARCHITECT. Correspondence requiring City response, including but not limited to correspondence with residents, cost or contractual issues, may be drafted by Consultant but shall be signed only by City. . Submittals: Consultant shall manage, log and track all project submittals (i.e. shop drawings, product information, substitution request, and samples) for approval in timely manner as required by the construction documents and in order to prevent any delays to the project. Comments from different reviewers of the submittal shall be compiled before being returned to the Contractor for revisions. All submittals shall be sent directly between the Contractor and the Design team, with copies, documentation and management reports submitted to and managed by the Consultant. Construction Schedule: Consultant shall review the Contractor's construction schedule. Consultant shall analyze, monitor, and request updates for the master schedule as the project progresses. Consultant shall analyze the schedule for logical construction, constraints, level of July 21, 2011 Page 12 of21 critical activities and to verify progress in conjunction with the analysis of pay applications. Consultant shall review Contractors' individual Critical Path Method (CPM) schedules, monitor the contractor's progress, notify the City of any slippage, and coordinate contractor recovery plans. . Progress Payments: Consultant shall review progress payment requests submitted by Contractor, within five (5) days of receipt and verify the accuracy and percentage of completion against the schedule, and resolve any discrepancies in the invoices. Consultant shall review the invoices and backup for completeness and compliance with contract documents and make a recommendation to PM for payment of the progress payment requests. Change Order Monitoring and Processing: Consultant shall review and evaluate all Contractor extra work requests. Consultant shall review the contract documents to determine entitlement, complete an independent estimate of the cost of the changes, and reconcile with the contractor's change order request. Consultant shall prepare contract change order authorizations for City approval and track all scope and schedule changes. Consultant shall also implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Claims: Consultant shall analyze any claims from the contractors (Le., compensation and delay) as to whether they are excusable, inexcusable, or compensable and prepare a response for City. Meetings: Throughout the construction process, Consultant shall be prepared to address comments and concerns of the construction contractors, ARCHITECT, PM, the City Staff, and the general public on an as-needed basis. Consultant shall set up and conduct weekly progress meetings and any other meetings necessary to facilitate the project work. Consultant shall write and distribute the meeting agendas, and meeting minutes, including: City-Consultant meetings, regular site meetings, and meetings with the City staff, contractors, various City departments, and also the public. The meeting minutes will explicitly track who has the responsibility for each action item with expected completion dates. Consultant shall coordinate the logistics related to a ground-breaking and to a ribbon-cutting ceremony, including working with committees, identifying power sources, etc. Costs for beverages, materials, photographs shall not be the responsibility of the Consultant. Consultant shall, at the direction of the Project Manager, install, advertise, and maintain a hot- line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Printing of flyers, presentation boards, advertisement, equipment and other related outreach material costs shall considered a Reimbursable expense, the cost for which shall be approved in writing in advance by the Project Manager. Miscellaneous: Consultant shall monitor Contractor's compliance in general with the construction documents and contract. Consultant shall address comments and concerns of the contractors and the ARCHITECT as needed. During construction, the Consultant's office space shall be provided, maintained and removed by the Contractor, including offices, furniture and office equipment. Ouality Control and Assurance: Consultant shall monitor and document the Contractors' work for any deviations in scope, schedule, or performance and keep the City informed of and assist in resolving any issues that may arise. July 21, 2011 Page 13 of21 Record Drawings: Consultant shall coordinate the preparation of record drawings with the Contractors and ARCHITECT on a regular basis, both during the construction and post construction phases, and review the drawings for "as-built" accuracy. Training: Consultant shall set up and coordinate contractor-provided training of City staff as required by'the contract documents and as necessary to ensure that the appropriate City personnel are adequately trained and familiar with the new equipment and systems. Commissioning: Consultant shall work with the commissioning agent, design consultants, and the Contractors to ensure that all new equipment have been installed in accordance with the contract documents, are working properly as stand-alone equipment, and are working properly as part of a complete system. Substantial Completion: As per the construction contract, once the Contractor requests substantial completion and it is determined to be warranted, Consultant shall prepare and compile a project punch list with the assistance from the City and ARCHITECT to be forwarded to the Contractor. Consultant shall oversee the completion of the punch list items before the final notice of completion is issued. Close Out: Consultant shall ensure completion and delivery of all required close out documentations including operation and maintenance (O&M) manuals, record drawings, and warranties. Consultant shall review all these materials for compliance with the contract documents and for completeness, and report any deficiencies or discrepancies to Contractor for corrections and re-submittal. Consultant shall work under the direction of the Project Manager to resolve any contract claim issues that may arise (stop work notices, bonding, delays, extra work, etc). As-Built drawings shall be scanned by Consultant for archiving by City. Files: Consultant shall consolidate and deliver all project files and documentation maintained to be retained by the City. Additional Services: Include, but are not limited to, additional meetings, additional public outreach, unforeseen testing or inspection needs. Reimbursables: Travel and meal expenses shall not be Reimbursable items but shall be considered as included in the fee for associated work items. Temporary trailers, computers, copiers, printers and office supplies are not considered as a Reimbursable expense, but will be provided to the Consultant under the Contractor's Contract. Printing of plans and specifications shall be paid by City. Printing of flyers, presentation boards, telephone hotlines and other communication materials needed to fulfill outreach as described herein shall be budgeted for and provided as a Reimbursable item by Consultant. Job site safety fencing is a reimbursable expense. B. Testing and Special Inspections Testing and Special Inspections: A testing agency shall be under contract with and paid for by the Consultant. Consultant shall coordinate with the Contractor in scheduling the testing agency services for materials testing and special inspections needed for the life of the project. This testing includes, but is not limited to, collecting and running geotechnical tests, concrete strength and weld inspection. Consultant shall ensure that all required sign-offs are reviewed and July 21, 2011 Page 14 of21 distributed and are in compliance with the specifications and· the California Building Codes. Geotechnical In~pections are included by the Architect, and are not included by the Consultant. Building Code Inspection Services -Mitchell Park Library and Community Center: Consultant shall provide all building code inspection services for construction phases for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center. Inspectors shall have a minimum of 5 years of experience as inspectors and be certified by the International Code Council (ICC) or International Building Code Officials (IBC) as inspectors. The City reserves the right to review the qualifications of the inspectors, approve their working on the project, and to request a change of inspectors at any time. Soils-related testing shall be under the Consultant's contract. Physical oversight of the geotechnical aspects of the construction project shall be contracted by the ARCHITECT firm. C. -Electronic Documentation and Photograph Recording Electronic Documents: Consultant shall provide electronic, fully addressable and cross referenced electronic document filing system. It will be developed and used as the project filing system during construction and will be updated with all closeout documentation, and cross referenced for simple search and retrieve functionality for all project documentation for City's use after construction. Consultant will provide Labor to input all documentation, and to train City in the use and access to all electronic project files. Any monthly service fees shall be included herein and not in Reimbursables. Project Documentation -Photographic Record: Based upon a build period of twenty three (23) months, provide a photographic pre-construction site-survey of existing conditions; twenty three (23) maximum exterior progressions; interior progressions; six (6) maximum interior mechanical, electrical and plumbing; pre-concrete slab pour; exterior elevation, including window-flashing and waterproofing; three (3) maximum roofing exact built showing the roof at various stages of the project; and finished condition prior to occupancy. All documentation shall include consultations with City identifying project-specific needs, appropriate photographic intervals, schedules, determination of optimal locations based on the site plans, a representative number of digital photographs at such intervals and for such durations and at the specified milestones; linking each photo set to the appropriate location on the site plans and floor plans; online web hosting of the documentation on the Multivista website for the construction period covered by the documentation and for a minimum period of I-year thereafter; password protected access to the documentation and two CD or DVD ROM copies of the entire documentation upon completion. D -Extended Construction Duration Provide Construction Phase services for extended construction duration, if not caused by the CONSULTANT. Services in this category are to be provided and compensated only with the approval of the CITY Project Manager. Schedule C includes 30 working days of extended duration. Phase III: Post Construction Services A -Turner Staff Services: July 21, 2011 Page 15 of21 Post Construction and Warranty Services: Consultant shall meet with Library, Community Services and Public Works staff (Staff) monthly for three months commencing after the building is open to the public in order to complete any remaining punch-list items and/or to contact the Contractor for any warranty issues that might arise. After the initial three month period, Consultant shall contact the Staff quarterly for a period of nine months to determine whether any new building or systems issues have been identified. Systems deficiencies that cannot be resolved by the Contractor shall be reported to the Commissioning Agent. Commissioning Verification: Consultant shall participate in the post-construction activities of the Commissioning Agent as follows: Participate in an off-season testing (i.e., testing the heating system prior to winter) session and work with the Contractor to correct any deficiencies. Compile the final testing documentation for the Commissioning Record and O&M manuals. 12 Month Warranty Follow Up: Return to the site at month 10 of the 12 month warranty period and review operating conditions with City facility staff and the Commissioning Agent in order to identify any outstanding issues related to the original and seasonal commissioning. The Commissioning Agent will interview facility staff and identify problems or concerns that they have with operating the building as originally intended. The Commissioning Agent will make suggestions for improvements and for recording these changes in the O&M manuals. The Commissioning Agent will identify areas that may come under warranty or under the original construction contract. The Construction Management Consultant shall work with the Contractor to resolve any warranty issues. MAIN LIBRARY Phase I -Design Phase -Main Library A.l -Turner Staff Services for Temporary Library (Conceptual Design Phase Only) The ARCHITECT will research a location for a temporary Main Library site for use during the construction of the Main Library renovation and expansion. The temporary Main Library would consist of a space approximately 8,000 to 10,000 square feet. The ARCHITECT will develop schematic electrical and mechanical plans, floor plans, signage landscaping and cost estimates for said facility. The Consultant shall participate and assist in the selection of a temporary Main Library site, review and comment on designs prepared by ARCHITECT and prepare independent construction cost estimates. Consultant shall attend meetings with staff and ARCHITECT, which include two (2) technical meetings and three (3) project management team meetings. Fee for these meetings shall be included in the cost for the Temporary Main Library item. Detailed design on any temporary library will not proceed until Council reviews and approves the cost, size, location and other information related to the temporary library. If Council approves completing the design of a temporary library, a scope and fee will be negotiated with Consultant for services related to oversight of the design phase. A.2 -Turner Staff Services for permanent Main Library July 21, 2011 Page 16 of21 Design of the Main Library expansion and renovation is anticipated to begin in mid to late 2010 or early 2011 Consultant shall provide three (3) construction cost estimates: One at 100% Schematic Design, one at 100% Design Development and one at 50% Construction Documents. Consultant shall perform constructability and design document review at the Design Development Phase Consultant shall develop and grade pre-qualification forms, attend any protest hearings and defend findings . . Consultant shall review overall project schedule and budget development and update same. Contractor Prequalification Prior to the construction bid phase, the Consultant shall prepare,and obtain approval from the City of Palo Alto, to advertise forms required for Contractor Prequalification. Consultant shall administer the feedback from same, including but not limited to: answering questions from contractors and subcontractors, coordinating responses with the City's Purchasing Division, preparing spreadsheets or other documentation necessary to compile and compare contractor responses, preparing a recommended bidder's list with a brief report summarizing findings, assisting in representing the City in any subsequent hearings challenging the validity of the results and any follow-up documentation resulting from said hearings. The City Purchasing Division will verify Consultant's recommendation in order to finalize the decision. Additional Services Additional Services include, but are not limited to, attendence at meetings, value engineering, calculations and reimbursable expenses not included in the base fee. Phase II -Construction Phase Services (Potential Future Phase) -Main Library Services and Fee for Construction Administration services may, at the City's sole discretion, be negotiated prior to the start of construction for the Main Library. July 21, 2011 Page 17 of21 EXHIBIT "C" (page 1 of 3) COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-l up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. For Subconsultants, such as Inspections, special inspections, electronic document services, and photographic documentation services, the CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the actual cost of the sub consultant, plus a fee of 5%, up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhjbit "A" ("Basic Services") and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $3,254,337,00 .. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $3,783,745.00. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a t6talexceediiigthe lllaxil11umamourifbf compensation set forth herein shall beat no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY's project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $3,254,337.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $529,408.00 . July 21, 2011 Page 19 of21 EXHIBIT "C" (page 2 of 3) COMPENSATION DESCRIPTION: NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BASIC SERVICES Downtown Library Phase I -Design Phase A Pre-construction Phase Downtown Library Phase II -Construction Phase A Turner Staff Services B Testing and Special Inspections C Electronic Documents Downtown Library Phase III Post Construction & Warranty Phase F Turner Staff Services TOTAL DOWNTOWN LIBRARY BASIC SERVICES Mitchell Park Phase I Design Phase A Preconstruction Mitchell Park Phase II Construction Phase A Turner Staff Services B Testing and Special Inspections C Electronic Documents & Photo Recording D Extended Construction Duration Mitchell Park Phase III Post-Construction Phase A Turner Staff Services TOTAL MITCHELL PARK BASIC SERVICES Main Library Phase I $17,545 $345,000 $12,000 $20,000 $10,000 $404,545 $107,292 $1,835,000 $445,000 $135,000 $115,000 $45,000 $2,682,292 . (Design Phase for Main Library & Concept Design Phase for Temporary Main Library) A.l A.2 Turner Staff Services -Temporary Library for Main Turner Staff Services -Permanent Main Library TOTAL MAIN LIBRARY BASIC SERVICES (Design Phase Only) ALLOWANCE FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES DT Library (not to exceed) MP Library (not to exceed) Main Library Total Allowance for Reimbursables TOTAL BASIC SERVICES (including Allowance for Reimbursables July 21, 2011 $15,000 $90,500 $105,500 $5,000 $55,000 $2,000 $62,000 $3,254,337 Page 20 of21 EXHIBIT "C" (Page 3 of 3) COMPENSATION DESCRIPTION: NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT ADJ>ITIONAIJ SERVICES: ALLOWANCE FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES-Not to Exceed DTLibrary MPLCC Main Library TOTAL ALLOWANCE FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $42,632 $476,026 $10,750 $529,408 $ 3.783.745 The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY's project manager's request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT's proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY's project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. July 21, 2011 Page 21 of21 1 110829 sm 010 AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING INC. This Amendment No. 5 to Contract No. C09130744 (“Contract”) is entered into on ___ of September, 2011, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY”), and Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc., a California corporation, located at 211 Linden Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080 (“CONTRACTOR”). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of design services forthe Mitchell Park Library and community center, rehabilitation of the Downtown Library, Main Libraries, and Community Center, and provide temporary facilities during the construction of the other projects; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract to add funding for additional services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: Section 1. Section 4 of the Contract,. Not to exceed compensation. is hereby amended to read as follows: “The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Seven Million Six Thousand One hundred Eighty-Nine Dollars ($7,006,189). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed same ($7,902,421). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement.” Section 2. The following exhibits to the Contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachments to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit “A” entitled “Scope of Work Mitchell Park Library/Community Center, Renovation of the Downtown Library, Renovation and Addition to the Main Library & Temporary Library Design Services”. b. Exhibit “B” entitled “EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. c. Exhibit “C” entitled “EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION”. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 3 110829 Scope of Work Mitchell Park Library/Community Center, Renovation of the Downtown Library, Renovation and Addition to the Main Library & Temporary Library Design Services I. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL INFORMATION 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 The “Palo Alto Libraries Schematic Design Report” and drawings, dated May 2008, were prepared by Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc. (CONSULTANT) for the City of Palo Alto (CITY). These reports include the schematic design documents for three libraries in Palo Alto: the renovation of the Downtown Library, the renovation and addition to the Main Library and the design for the new Mitchell Park Library/Community Center. The building programs for these projects are documented in an earlier Conceptual Design Report also prepared by Group 4 and dated October 2007. The scope of work included in this contract is for preparation of construction documents for the renovation, construction administration, record documents and project closeout for the Downtown Library; the preparation of construction documents, bidding and award, construction administration, record documents and project closeout for the new Mitchell Park Library/Community Center; construction documents for the renovation and construction administration for the Mitchell Park Library Temporary Library Facilities, ; the preparation of construction documents, bidding and award, for the renovation and addition to the Main Library and the preparation of the site analysis and preliminary design for the Temporary Main Library, this work is based on the approved designs for these projects documented in the aforementioned reports. 1.2 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services shall include: 1.2.1 For the new Mitchell Park Library/Community Center preparation of Design Development Documents, Construction Documents, assistance with Bidding and Award, Construction Administration and Project Closeout Services.. 1.2.2 For the renovation of the Downtown Library programming, budgeting, space planning, Construction Documents, assistance with Bidding and Award, Construction Administration and Record Documents and Project Closeout Services. 1.2.3 For the renovation of the Cubberley Auditorium into the Mitchell Park Temporary Library Construction Documents and Construction Administration Services. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 4 110829 1.2.4 For the renovation and addition to the Main Library - preparation of Design Development Documents, Construction Documents, and assistance with Bidding and Award. 1.2.5 For the Temporary Main Library Site Analysis and Preliminary Design. 1.3 Participation for the projects shall include presentations and meetings as directed by the CITY to the CITY’s Council, Boards and Commissions at appropriate phases in the projects to solicit feedback and comments on the progress of the design(s). 1.4 In selecting the CONSULTANT, the CITY recognizes that the CONSULTANT has qualifications to provide additional planning, architecture, and interior design services including construction phase services specifically related to the renovation and addition of the Main Library and the design documentation for the Temporary Main Library. The CITY, at its discretion, may choose to amend this contract to add these services to the CONSULTANT’s Scope of Services for Additional Compensation if mutually agreed to by the CITY and the CONSULTANT. 2.0 THE PROJECT 2.1 The project includes the new Mitchell Park Library/Community center, the Downtown Library renovation, the Temporary Mitchell Park Library and Library Technical Services Facility, the Main Library renovation and new addition and the site analysis and preliminary design for the Temporary Main Library (collectively, the “Project”). 2.2 The new Mitchell Park Library/Community Center (the “Mitchell Park Project”) is located at 3800 Middlefield Road at the site of the existing Mitchell Park Library and Community Center buildings. The new joint use facility will include a separate 36,254 sf library and a 16,291 sf community center, new parking lots, the realignment of Mayfair Avenue, and associated signal work, and site work. The Mitchell Park Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED Gold certification by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). 2.3 The Downtown Library is located at 270 Forest Avenue in downtown Palo Alto. The 9000 square foot building was constructed in 1971. The CITY’s LSMAR and Group 4’s space study recommendations for this branch include a major interior renovation of the building, including its architecture, structure, electrical (power, lighting, data) and mechanical systems. The Downtown Library Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED certification by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). 2.4 The Temporary Mitchell Park Library and Technical Services facility is CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 5 110829 located at the Cubberley Community Center at 4000 Middlefield Road in the existing Auditorium Building. 2.5 The Main Library is located at 1213 Newell Road in Palo Alto. The original building was designed by Edward Durell Stone and constructed in 1956, then in 1982-84 the building was renovated and a 2,200 square foot addition completed. The project includes the renovation of the existing building structure, mechanical, electrical and interior finishes as well as additions to accommodate a new program room, group study rooms and new public restrooms. The new additions will add approximately 4,200 square feet. The existing Main Library is 21,313 square feet on grade with a 5,000 square foot basement. The Main Library Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED certification by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). 2.5.1 In addition to the work described above, the following deferred maintenance items shall be included in the Construction Documents phase of the project: 2.5.1.1 Replace or the existing wood shake roof 2.5.1.2 Replace or provide new site pedestrian paving and site landscaping 2.5.1.3 Replace the existing fire sprinkler system 2.5.1.4 Replace the existing exterior plywood walls at the staff area 2.5.1.5 Replace basement sump pumps 2.5.1.6 Upgrade stormwater treatment system 2.5.1.7 Upgrade parking lot lighting 2.5.1.8 Provide for separate access to the Teen room conference area 2.5.1.9 Outfit the library to function as a broadcast center for the local television station. 2.5.1.10 Develop concepts to analyze the integration of the Art Center and Main Library sites and prepare design documents and cost estimates for the parking lots, pedestrian plaza and landscaping to the south and south east of the library (between the library, Art Center and Community Gardens). CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 6 110829 2.6 The Temporary Main Library will be located at a site yet to be determined by the CITY. The work includes site selection services, facility and site option analysis, building programming; budgeting and schematic design. 3.0 CITY DUTIES 3.1 During the term of CONSULTANT’s professional services under this AGREEMENT the following items will be the responsibilities of the CITY: 3.1.1 The CITY’s Project Manager or authorized designee shall manage the CONSULTANT’s performance under the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall receive final direction only from the Project Manager or his or her authorized designee. The Project Manager shall resolve any conflicting direction from other groups, departments or agencies. 3.1.2 The CITY shall provide evaluation, mitigation design and administration of work for hazardous materials at each site and in the existing building. 3.1.3 The CITY shall provide reviews and comment on what may be necessary to complete design milestones, and/or approve completion of design milestones and cost estimates. At the completion of each phase, the CITY shall provide written authorization to the CONSULTANT to proceed to the next phase. Said written authorization shall require the signature(s) of the CITY's Project Manager or his/her authorized designee. 3.1.4 CITY shall provide record drawings of existing project facilities (when available). 3.1.5 CITY shall provide all applicable building permits. 3.1.6 CITY shall provide Division 0 and 1 specifications (front-end), in Microsoft Word format to CONSULTANT for review and comment. 3.1.7 CITY shall print and provide construction contractors with copies of bid documents (Plans and Specifications). 3.1.8 CITY shall advertise and award construction contracts. 3.1.9 CITY shall manage the construction of the Project and provide building code and quality control inspections. 3.1.10 The CITY shall oversee and manage the artist selection process, CITY and artist agreements, artwork approvals, budgets and schedule, coordination of artwork with the building design, and artwork installation. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 7 110829 3.1.11 The CITY may prequalify general contractors and key subcontractors and limit bidding to only those firms that have been deemed by the CITY to be qualified. CITY shall actively market the project to general contractors and major trades to increase likelihood of receiving competitive bids. 3.1.12 The CITY shall manage all construction and procurement contracts related to the overall project and shall oversee and coordinate each of the budgets. Within the overall project budget the CITY shall determine with input from the CONSULTANT the specific budgets for each of the procurement contracts including, but not limited to:  Site development  Site preparation  Building and garage construction  Furniture procurement, including multiple contracts for custom, general, systems and miscellaneous furniture  Construction management services  Public art  Moving  Publicity  Computer systems  Telecommunication systems. 3.1.13 CITY shall identify, select and procure all equipment such as copy machines, vending machines, miscellaneous office equipment, etc. that is not included in the technology package. 4.0 CONSULTANT’S DUTIES The CONSULTANT shall keep the Project Manager updated on the status of the Project including but not limited to reviewing the Project schedule and budget, suggesting changes and identifying significant milestones and duration of major tasks needed to complete the work in its entirety, including work components not identified in the CONSULTANT’s scope of services. The CONSULTANT shall periodically update the Project Manager on the validity and responsiveness of the information furnished by the CONSULTANT and its various subconsultants under this agreement, including the schedule requirements and the budget for the cost of the Project. The CONSULTANT shall periodically review such information and advise the Project Manager of any additional or updated information that may be required. II. CONSULTANT’S BASIC SERVICES The CONSULTANT’s scope of basic services for the CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 8 110829 Project is divided into six parts: Basic Services for the Mitchell Park Project; Basic Services for the Downtown Library Project; Basic Services for the Temporary Mitchell Park Library Project, Basic Services for the Main Library; Basic Services for the Temporary Main Library and Participation Services 1.0 MITCHELL PARK PROJECT 1.1 GENERAL 1.1.1 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for the New Mitchell Park Library/Community Center (“Mitchell Park Project”) consist of five Tasks: Task D1 Design Development; Task E1 Construction Documents; Task F1 Bidding and Award; Task G1 Construction Administration and Task H1 Record Documents and Project Closeout. 1.1.2 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services include the services of a civil engineer, structural engineer, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer/lighting designer, landscape architect, cost consultant, audio visual/acoustical engineer, energy analysis engineer, commissioning agent, and library programmer. 1.1.3 The CITY intends that the Mitchell Park Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED Gold or higher certification by the USGBC. 1.1.3.1 CONSULTANT shall design the Mitchell Park Project to meet the requirements for LEED V2.2 certification at the Gold or higher level. 1.1.3.2 CONSULTANT shall provide LEED project management services needed for the CITY to obtain LEED certification of the Mitchell Park Project, develop specifications consistent with LEED and the CITY’s policies, and provide the templates, documentation, calculations, and energy modeling studies necessary to obtain LEED certification. 1.1.3.3 CONSULTANT shall include a LEED accredited professional on the design team to support Project Sustainable Building/ Green Building design criteria as required to achieve LEED certification. 1.1.3.4 CONSULTANT shall include in the construction documents appropriate provisions requiring the CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 9 110829 contractor to meet the requirements for CITY’s submittal to USGBC for LEED Gold certification. 1.2 TASK D1: MITCHELL PARK PROJECT DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 1.2.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Design Development phase and coordinate with the Project Manager or authorized designee, key departments, including but not limited to CITY’s Building, Public Works, and Engineering staff. 1.2.2 CONSULTANT shall prepare, refine and update project design schedule which identifies all major tasks, key milestones, key meetings, submittal dates and review periods for the CITY’s review and comment. CONSULTANT shall provide updated design schedule at the beginning of each project phase. 1.2.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare Design Development documents based on refinement and further development of the approved schematic design, including preliminary furniture layouts, built-in fixtures, and equipment selections. 1.2.4 CONSULTANT shall refine design development plans based on comments received from the CITY’s review of the 100% SD and 50% DD submittal. 1.2.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare estimates of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 50% and the 100% Design Development submittals. 1.2.6 CONSULTANT shall have the Mitchell Park Project’s LEED commissioning agent review the design, back-check review comments, and develop a commissioning plan, specifications, and checklists. 1.2.7 CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY to review the estimate of probable construction cost and to confirm that the design is still within the CITY’s approved construction budget. Should the design not be within the budget, CONSULTANT shall revise the design as directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee at no additional fee to bring the design within the approved budget. 1.2.8 CONSULTANT shall provide all other normal and customary services related to Design Development that the CONSULTANT, the Project Manager or her authorized designee finds necessary or that will lead toward the timely delivery of other phases of work in this Agreement. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 10 110829 1.2.9 Meetings 1.2.9.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate up to seven (7) PMT meetings, two (2) Technical-Planning meetings, two (2) Technical-Library Meetings, two (2) Technical Building Department meetings, two (2) Artist Coordination meetings, one (1) Technical-Technology meeting, one (1) Technical-Traffic meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Mitchell Park Project. 1.2.9.2 CONSULTANT shall coordinate meetings with reviewing agencies as required. 1.2.9.3 CONSULTANT shall attend up to two meetings with the Palo Alto Arts Commission and/or other public art committee for coordination of an arts program. 1.2.10 Deliverables 1.2.10.1 CONSULTANT shall submit document packages at the 50% and 100% completion of Design Development for review by the CITY. Design Development packages shall illustrate and describe the refinement of the design of the Mitchell Park Project, establishing its scope, relationships, forms, size and appearance. 1.2.10.2 Site plans and floor plans for all major disciplines. 1.2.10.3 Preliminary furniture layout plan. 1.2.10.4 Preliminary finish, materials and equipment schedules. 1.2.10.5 Outline specifications shall identify the major materials and systems and shall establish their general quality levels. Specifications shall be consistent with the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) format, the version of which shall be determined by CONSULTANT. 1.2.10.6 Engineering documents shall include single line diagrams describing structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems. 1.2.10.7 Principal interior and exterior elevations showing preliminary locations of all electrical and mechanical CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 11 110829 controls, telecommunications, security, as well as life- safety devices for coordination with furniture layout. 1.2.10.8 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 50% and 100% Design Development submittals. 1.3 TASK E1: MITCHELL PARK PROJECT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 1.3.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Construction Documents phase. 1.3.2 Upon written notice to proceed by the CITY, CONSULTANT shall refine and further develop the approved Design Development package based upon the CITY’s comments and the constructability review comments on the 100% Design Development package. 1.3.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 60% Construction Documents package to the CITY. 1.3.4 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 60% Construction Documents submittal. 1.3.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 95% Construction Documents package, with CITY’s comments from the 60% package incorporated into the documents. 1.3.6 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 95% Construction Documents submittal. 1.3.7 CONSULTANT shall prepare a Construction Documents package for Building and Fire department plan check review and permitting. 1.3.8 CONSULTANT shall prepare the 100% Construction Documents package with final quality control comments from CITY’s Building and Fire department review incorporated. 1.3.9 CONSULTANT shall prepare a Project Manual that includes the Conditions of the Contract for Construction provided by the CITY, Technical Specifications, and bidding requirements and sample forms furnished by the CITY. 1.3.10 CONSULTANT shall maintain the LEED matrix and design documentation. 1.3.11 LEED Fundamental and Enhanced Commissioning: CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 12 110829 CONSULTANT shall have the project’s commissioning agent review the design and back-check their review comments, develop a commissioning plan, commissioning specification, and commissioning checklists. 1.3.12 CONSULTANT shall provide, if necessary and as directed by the Project Manager or authorized designee, bid alternates up to a cumulative maximum amount of 1% of the estimate of probable construction cost. 1.3.13 One or more “independent checks” of the plans, specifications and bid documents may be performed by an independent party commissioned by the CITY prior to the 100% Construction Document submittal. CONSULTANT shall incorporate revisions or comments from these reviews, provided by the CITY in a single, compiled, and coordinated document, in the final bid documents, unless CONSULTANT deems them to be inappropriate or in error in which case, CONSULTANT shall communicate concern to the Project Manager or her authorized designee for consideration and further direction. These checks may include architectural peer reviews and/or constructability reviews. These independent checks are to be performed strictly for the benefit of the CITY, and they shall not relieve the CONSULTANT from its obligations under this Agreement. The CITY is not obligated to perform any independent check, and the CONSULTANT shall not rely upon it for any quality or quantitative check or review. 1.3.14 Meetings 1.3.14.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate twelve (12) PMT meetings, two (2) artist coordination meetings, two (2) Technical-Planning meetings, four (4) Technical- Library meetings, three Technical-Building Department meetings, one (1) Technical-Technology meeting, one (1) Technical-Traffic meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Mitchell Park Project. 1.3.14.2 CONSULTANT shall attend two (2) meetings with the Arts Commission and/or Public Art committee for coordination of the arts program in the construction documents. 1.3.15 Deliverables 1.3.15.1 60%, 95%, and 100% Construction Documents packages setting forth in detail the requirements for CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 13 110829 construction of the Mitchell Park Project, including drawings and specifications that establish in detail the quality levels of required materials and systems. The Construction Documents package shall include drawings and technical specifications from all disciplines, executed to a level of detail appropriate for open public bidding. They shall include plans overlaying voice and data cabling with furniture layout as necessary, elevations reflecting relationships between furnishings and items affecting their placement. Site improvements shall include all details necessary to coordinate and properly locate utilities, driveways, roadways, at-grade parking, curbs and gutters, landscape, irrigation and hardscape design. The Construction Documents shall conform to the applicable California Building Code, Title 24, ADA, and all other applicable local, State and Federal codes, regulations, permit requirements, and conditions necessary for issuance of a building permit. 1.3.15.2 Project Manual 1.3.15.3 Detailed technical specifications that are coordinated with the plans and all the design disciplines. 1.3.15.4 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 60% and 95% Construction Documents submittals. 1.3.15.5 CONSULTANT shall submit one set of reproducible documents and one set of electronic digital documents at 60%, 95% and 100% completion of Construction Documents. CONSULTANT shall provide a full-sized original set, wet-stamped and signed, as required by the CITY, by all the appropriate licensed design disciplines. CONSULTANT shall also provide digital plot files directly to CITY’s printing company for printing bid sets. 1.4 TASK F1 MITCHELL PARK PROJECT BIDDING AND AWARD 1.4.1 CONSULTANT shall assist CITY during bid solicitation process. 1.4.2 CONSULTANT shall prepare a full-sized original set(s), and provide a digital plot bid package for CITY’s use in printing, and shall make available to the CITY an electronic version of the Construction Documents. 1.4.3 CONSULTANT shall provide bid phase services, as requested by CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 14 110829 the CITY, through award of the Contract for Construction. Service include assistance with responses to bidders' inquiries; preparation of addenda; attendance at one (1) prequalification and (1) pre-bid meeting; and assistance in the CITY’s evaluation of bids. 1.4.4 In preparing estimates of the cost of the work, the CONSULTANT shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation; to determine what materials, equipment, component systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents; to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Documents alternate bids as may be necessary to adjust the estimated Cost of the Work to meet the CITY's budget for the Cost of the Work. If an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of the Contract between the CITY and the Contractor causes the budget for the Cost of the Work to be exceeded, that budget shall be increased accordingly. 1.4.5 CONSULTANT will include in its estimate a contingency for bid/market conditions based on competitive bidding with a minimum of 3 bidders for all major items of subcontracted work and 3-5 general contractor bids. The CITY recognizes that the CONSULTANT has no control over competitive bidding or market conditions. If CITY anticipates less favorable bidding conditions or wishes to take a more conservative approach, CITY will cooperate with CONSULTANT to increase bid contingency and either reduce project scope or increase the project budget accordingly. 1.4.6 If bidding has not commenced within 90 days after CONSULTANT submits 95%Construction Documents to the CITY, CONSULTANT shall adjust at no additional cost to CITY, the estimate of probable construction cost to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the construction industry. Should the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost exceed the CITY approved construction budget at this point, any subsequent changes in the plans or value engineering services necessary to align the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost with the CITY approved construction budget shall be considered Additional Services as noted in EXHIBT C of this Agreement. 1.4.7 Deliverables: one reproducible (hard copy for Construction Document contract file) and digital plot set of Construction Documents “Conform” package revised with all addenda, CITY reviews and plan check comments, including Fire Department, incorporated and ready for Award, and Construction. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 15 110829 1.5 TASK G1 MITCHELL PARK PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 1.5.1 CONSULTANT’s responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with CITY's issuance of a Notice to Proceed with the Contract for Construction and will end 730 calendar days from that date or upon commencement by the CONSULTANT of the Substantial Completion Correction (“Punch”) list, as mutually agreed upon by CONSULTANT, the CITY’s Construction Manager and CITY, whichever comes first. If the punch list does not commence within 730 calendar days of the Notice to Proceed, any further time and effort spent on behalf of the project shall be an Additional Service provided on a time and materials basis. Consultant will not be obligated to provide any work beyond the 730 calendar days unless directed by CITY in writing. 1.5.2 CONSULTANT shall be a representative of and shall advise and consult with the CITY during the provision of the Contract Administration Services. The CONSULTANT shall have authority to act on behalf of the CITY only to the extent provided in this Agreement unless otherwise modified by written amendment. 1.5.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the CONSULTANT under this phase shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the CITY. 1.5.4 CONSULTANT shall neither have control over or charge of, nor be responsible for, the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, since these are solely the Contractor’s rights and responsibilities under the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT will not be responsible for the Contractor’s schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT will not have control over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the work.CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 1.5.5 CONSULTANT will have access to the work at all times wherever it is in preparation or progress within 24 hours of notifying the CITY.. 1.5.6 CONSULTANT shall revise Bid Documents for issuance as Conform Set Contract Documents that incorporate addenda, and clarifications. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 16 110829 1.5.7 CONSULTANT shall attend the pre-construction conference. 1.5.8 Project Meetings and Site Visits 1.5.8.1 CONSULTANT shall attend up to 104 site construction meetings. The CONSULTANT as a representative of the CITY, shall visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of the Contractor’s operations, or as otherwise agreed by the Project Manager or authorized designee and the CONSULTANT (1) to become generally familiar with and to keep the CITY informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, (2) to endeavor to guard the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the Work, and (3) to determine in general if the Work is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the CONSULTANT shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. 1.5.8.2 CONSULTANT shall report to the CITY observable and known deviations from the Contract Documents by the Contractor. 1.5.8.3 CONSULTANT shall at all times have access to the work wherever it is in preparation or progress. 1.5.8.4 CONSULTANT shall have authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever the CONSULTANT considers it necessary or advisable, the CONSULTANT will have authority to require inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of the CONSULTANT nor a decision made in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibility of the CONSULTANT to the Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers, their agents or employees or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 1.5.8.5 CONSULTANT shall be responsible for scheduling the Sub CONSULTANTs visits to the site in coordination with and or as directed by CITY. 1.5.9 On the basis of on-site observations as a CONSULTANT, and through information provided to the CONSULTANT by the CITY’s Project Manager, the CONSULTANT shall keep the CITY informed of the quality of the work. 1.5.10 Submittals: CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 17 110829 1.5.10.1 CONSULTANT will review Contractor’s submittals, including Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay in the work, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT’s judgment to permit adequate review unless otherwise agreed to. Submittals critical to work flow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance equipment or systems designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s review shall not constitute review of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the CONSULTANT, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The CONSULTANT’s review of specific items shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon such certification to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the Contract Documents. 1.5.10.2 CONSULTANT shall maintain copies of submittals supplied by the Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. Reviewed submittals shall be stamped with appropriate action to be taken with notes and comments initialed and dated. 1.5.11 If professional design services or certifications by a design professional related to systems, materials or equipment are specifically required of the Contractor by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall specify appropriate performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. Shop Drawings and other submittals related to the Work designed or certified by the design professional retained by the Contractor shall bear such professional’s written approval when submitted to the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon the adequacy, accuracy and completeness of the services; certifications or approvals performed by such design professionals. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 18 110829 1.5.12 Request for Information (RFI) & Architectural Supplement Information (ASI) 1.5.12.1 CONSULTANT shall review properly prepared, timely requests by the Contractor for Request For Information (RFI) about the Contract Documents. A properly prepared RFI about the Contract Documents shall be in a form prepared or approved by the CONSULTANT and shall include a detailed written statement that indicates the specific Drawings or Specifications in need of clarification and the nature of the clarification requested. 1.5.12.2 If deemed appropriate by the CONSULTANT or if directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee, the CONSULTANT shall on the CITY’s behalf prepare, reproduce and distribute supplemental Drawings and Specifications (Architectural Supplemental Information (ASI)) in response to RFI by the Contractor or because of a need determined by CONSULTANT to achieve the intent of the Contract Documents. 1.5.12.3 Interpretations and decisions of the CONSULTANT shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the CONSULTANT shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both CITY and Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be liable for the results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith. 1.5.12.4 CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work or in the activities of the CITY, Contractor or separate contractors, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT s professional judgment to permit adequate review. RFI’s critical to workflow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. 1.5.13 CONSULTANT shall review for compliance, any items submitted by the Contractor for consistency with the contract documents, including but not limited to submittals, O&M Manuals, written guarantees, instruction books, diagrams and charts, etc,. 1.5.14 Review and recommend approval or rejection of substitutions for conformance with the project design concept and for compliance with Contract Documents. CONSULTANT shall briefly review each substitution at no additional cost to the CITY and provide the CITY’s Project Manager with a fee and time schedule for detailed review of each substitution. Time and cost for detailed review of substitutions shall be negotiated with Contractor on a case-by-case CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 19 110829 basis. Detailed review of each substitution cannot begin until authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager. Detailed review of substitutions is subject to the requirements of Additional Services when approved and authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager prior to beginning the detailed review. 1.5.15 Changes in the Work 1.5.15.1 Change Order Review and Negotiation: All changes to the Contract between the CITY and Contractor shall be only by change orders executed by the CITY. 1.5.15.2 CITY and its designee shall review the contents of all Contractor-requested changes to the contract time or price, endeavor to determine the cause of the request, and assemble and evaluate information concerning the request. CITY and its designee shall in its evaluations of the Contractor’s request consider the CONSULTANT’s comments regarding the proposed changes. 1.5.15.3 All proposed CONSULTANT and CITY -initiated changes shall first be described in detail by the CITY and its designee in a request for a proposal issued to the Contractor. The request shall be accompanied by drawings and specifications prepared by the CONSULTANT. In response to the request for a proposal, the Contractor shall submit to the CITY and its designee for evaluation detailed information concerning. The price and time adjustments, if any, as may be necessary to perform the proposed change order work. The CITY and its designee shall review the Contractor’s proposal, shall discuss the proposed change order with the Contractor, and endeavor to determine the Contractor’s basis for the price and time proposed to perform the work. All work by CONSULTANT related to CITY -initiated changes will be performed as Additional Services on a Time and Material Basis or mutually agreed lump sum. 1.5.15.4 The CITY and its designee shall negotiate change requests on behalf of the CITY. CITY and its designee shall prepare and issue to the Contractor appropriate change order documents, reviewed and signed by the CONSULTANT as required by contract. 1.5.16 Furniture, Custom Casework, Shelving and Signage 1.5.16.1 During the Construction Administration Phases the CONSULTANT shall provide the following services related to Furniture, Custom Casework and Signage: CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 20 110829 1.5.16.2 Staff area systems furniture will be specified in general terms showing layout, major components, and finishes. CONSULTANT shall specify that systems furniture vendor to provide detailed systems design and component selection. 1.5.16.3 CONSULTANT shall specify performance requirements for seismic bracing of cantilevered shelving with shelving vendor to provide engineering submittals. 1.5.16.4 If so requested by the CITY’s Project Manager or authorized designee, the CONSULTANT shall prepare up to a total of five different bid packages for furniture, custom casework, building signage and shelving. Each bid package will be suitable for a public bid process or negotiated purchase order by CITY or Library. 1.5.16.5 CONSULTANT shall provide up to two alternative design concepts for custom furniture and casework. 1.5.16.6 CONSULTANT shall prepare for the CITY’s review functional layout drawings of library service desks and custom casework for the Library and the Community Center. 1.5.16.7 CONSULTANT shall conduct up to eight interiors Project Management Team meetings to set direction on furniture and casework. 1.5.16.8 CONSULTANT shall lead up to one day-long furniture review meeting with the furniture committee. 1.5.16.9 CONSULTANT shall prepare a 90% Bid Documents submittal for CITY and Library review. 1.5.16.10 CONSULTANT shall prepare 100% Bid Documents. 1.5.16.11 CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in reviewing bidder questions and provide written addenda as required for each bid package. 1.5.16.12 CONSULTANT shall be available for up to three days to advise on furniture and custom casework placement and punch list services. 1.5.16.13 CONSULTANT shall provide a sign location drawing and sign copy schedule for the site identification, exterior building signage, site wayfinding, and interior signage. 1.5.16.14 CONSULTANT shall provide a 60% and 95% Design Intent Signage Documents for the CITY’s review. And a 100% Bid Design Intent Signage Document. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 21 110829 1.5.16.15 CONSULTAN provide updated estimates of probable construction costs to the CITY at the 60% and 95% Design Intent submittals.. 1.5.16.16 CONSULTAN shall provide written responses to the CITY’s review comments. 1.5.16.17 CONSULTAN conduct up to two signage design review meetings with the CITY. 1.5.16.18 CONSULTANT shall attend a signage pre-installation meeting with the signage contractor. 1.6 TASK H1 MITCHELL PARK PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS AND PROJECT CLOSEOUT 1.6.1 Project Closeout, will begin with the commencement by CONSULTANT of the Punch List as mutually determined by CONSULTANT, CITY and CITY’s Construction Manager, and will end 90 calendar days from that date CONSULTANT shall complete all items over which the CONSULTANT has control indicated in the scope of Project Closeout within the 90 calendar day period. CONSULTANT Closeout Services after 90 days will be provided as an Additional Service on a Time & Materials basis. 1.6.2 CONSULTANT shall receive from the Contractor and forward to the CITY, for the CITY’s review and records, written warranties and related documents required by the Contract Documents and assembled by the Contractor. 1.6.3 CONSULTANT’s shall conduct “Punch List“inspection to check conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents and to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list submitted by the Contractor of Work to be completed or corrected. 1.6.4 CONSULTANT shall complete and distribute the project punch list in a timely manner from the CITY’s request for inspection in either MSWord or Excel format. 1.6.5 CONSULTANT shall review the work to determine whether the punch list items have been completed and are in conformance with the Construction Documents 1.6.6 CONSULTANT’s shall conduct Final Completion observation with the CITY to check for general conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents package and to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list submitted by the Contractor of Work to be completed or corrected. 1.6.7 CONSULTANT shall incorporate information provided by the Contractor and information gained during site visits throughout the Project construction, and prepare record drawings and specifications based on record field construction documents CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 22 110829 package. Prior to acceptance of the Project by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall review the contractor’s “as-built” drawings and specifications, and shall return them to contractor for revision if they are not complete, or otherwise known to not represent facts known to the CONSULTANT. Apart from reviewing Contractor’s as-built documents, CONSULTANT shall prepare and sign the CONSULTANT’s Record Drawings submit both a hard copy on Mylar and an electronic copy on Compact Disc (CD) to the CITY. 2.0 DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT 2.1 GENERAL 2.1.1 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for the renovated Downtown Library (“Downtown Library Project”) consist of five Tasks: Task D2 Design Development; Task E2 Construction Documents; Task F2 Bidding and Award, Task G2 Construction Administration and Task H2 Record Documents and Project Closeout. 2.1.2 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services include the services of a civil engineer, structural engineer, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer/lighting designer, landscape architect, cost consultant, audio visual/acoustical engineer, and library programmer. 2.2 TASK D2: DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 2.2.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Design Development phase and coordinate with the Project Manager or authorized designee, key departments, including but not limited to CITY’s Building, Public Works, and Engineering staff. 2.2.2 CONSULTANT shall prepare, refine and update project design schedule which identifies all major tasks, key milestones, key meetings, submittal dates and review periods for the CITY’s review and comment. CONSULTANT shall provide updated design schedule at the beginning of each project phase. 2.2.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare Design Development documents based on refinement and further development of the approved schematic design, including preliminary furniture layouts, built-in fixtures, and equipment selections. 2.2.4 CONSULTANT shall refine design development plans based on comments received from the CITY’s review of the 100% SD submittal. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 23 110829 2.2.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 100% Design Development submittal. 2.2.6 CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY to review the estimate of probable construction cost and to confirm that the design is still within the CITY’s approved construction budget. Should the design not be within the budget, CONSULTANT shall revise the design as directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee at no additional fee to bring the design within the approved budget. 2.2.7 CONSULTANT shall provide all other normal and customary services related to Design Development that the CONSULTANT, the Project Manager or her authorized designee finds necessary or that will lead toward the timely delivery of other phases of work in this Agreement. 2.2.8 Meetings 2.2.8.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate up to seven (7) PMT meetings, two (2) Technical-Library Meetings, two (2) Technical-Building Department meetings, one (1) Technical-Technology meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Downtown Library Project. 2.2.8.2 CONSULTANT shall coordinate meetings with reviewing agencies as required. 2.2.9 Deliverables 2.2.9.1 CONSULTANT shall submit a Design Development package at 100% completion of Design Development for review by the CITY. The Design Development package shall illustrate and describe the refinement of the design of the Downtown Library Project, establishing its scope, relationships, forms, size and appearance. 2.2.9.2 Site plans and floor plans for all major disciplines. 2.2.9.3 Preliminary furniture layout plan. 2.2.9.4 Preliminary finish, materials and equipment schedules. 2.2.9.5 Outline specifications shall identify the major materials and systems and shall establish their general quality levels. Specifications shall be consistent with the Construction CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 24 110829 Specifications Institute (CSI) format, the version of which shall be determined by CONSULTANT. 2.2.9.6 Engineering documents shall include single line diagrams describing structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems. 2.2.9.7 Principal interior and exterior elevations showing preliminary locations of all electrical and mechanical controls, telecommunications, security, as well as life- safety devices for coordination with furniture layout. 2.2.9.8 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 100% Design Development submittal. 2.2.9.9 Presentation materials for meetings. 2.3 TASK E2: DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 2.3.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Construction Documents phase. 2.3.2 Upon written notice to proceed by the CITY, CONSULTANT shall refine and further develop the approved Design Development package based upon the CITY’s comments and the constructability review comments on the 100% Design Development package. 2.3.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 60% Construction Documents package to the CITY. 2.3.4 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 60% Construction Documents submittal. 2.3.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 95% Construction Documents package, with CITY’s comments from the 60% package incorporated into the documents. 2.3.6 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 95% Construction Documents submittal. 2.3.7 CONSULTANT shall prepare a Construction Documents package for Building and Fire department plan check review and permitting. 2.3.8 CONSULTANT shall prepare the 100% Construction Documents CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 25 110829 package with final quality control comments from CITY’s Building and Fire department review incorporated. 2.3.9 CONSULTANT shall prepare a Project Manual that includes the Conditions of the Contract for Construction provided by the CITY, Technical Specifications, and bidding requirements and sample forms furnished by the CITY. 2.3.10 CONSULTANT shall provide, if necessary and as directed by the Project Manager or authorized designee, bid alternates up to a cumulative maximum amount of 5% of the estimate of probable construction cost. 2.3.11 One or more “independent checks” of the plans, specifications and bid documents may be performed by an independent party commissioned by the CITY prior to the 100% Construction Document submittal. CONSULTANT shall incorporate revisions or comments from these reviews, provided by the CITY in a single, compiled, and coordinated document, in the final bid documents, unless CONSULTANT deems them to be inappropriate or in error in which case, CONSULTANT shall communicate concern to the Project Manager or her authorized designee for consideration and further direction. These checks may include architectural peer reviews and/or constructability reviews. These independent checks are to be performed strictly for the benefit of the CITY, and they shall not relieve the CONSULTANT from its obligations under this Agreement. The CITY is not obligated to perform any independent check, and the CONSULTANT shall not rely upon it for any quality or quantitative check or review. 2.3.12 Meetings 2.3.12.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate twelve (12) PMT meetings, four (4) Technical-Library meetings, two (2) Technical-Building Department meetings, one (1) Technical-Technology meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Downtown Library Project. 2.3.12.2 Consultant shall attend other meetings as specified in Section 4.0, Participation. 2.3.13 Deliverables 2.3.13.1 60%, 95%, and 100% Construction Documents packages setting forth in detail the requirements for construction of the Downtown Library Project, including drawings and specifications that establish in detail the CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 26 110829 quality levels of required materials and systems. The Construction Documents package shall include drawings and technical specifications from all disciplines, executed to a level of detail appropriate for open public bidding. They shall include plans overlaying voice and data cabling with furniture layout as necessary, elevations reflecting relationships between furnishings and items affecting their placement. Site improvements shall include all details necessary to coordinate and properly locate utilities, driveways, roadways, at-grade parking, curbs and gutters, landscape, irrigation and hardscape design. The Construction Documents shall conform to the applicable California Building Code, Title 24, ADA, and all other applicable local, State and Federal codes, regulations, permit requirements, and conditions necessary for issuance of a building permit. 2.3.13.2 Project Manual 2.3.13.3 Detailed technical specifications that are coordinated with the plans and all the design disciplines. 2.3.13.4 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 60% and 95% Construction Documents submittals. 2.3.13.5 CONSULTANT shall submit one set of reproducible documents and one set of electronic digital documents at 60%, 95% and 100% completion of Construction Documents. CONSULTANT shall provide a full-sized original set, wet-stamped and signed, as required by the CITY, by all the appropriate licensed design disciplines. CONSULTANT shall also provide digital plot files directly to CITY’s printing company for printing bid sets. 2.4 TASK F2: DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT BIDDING AND AWARD 2.4.1 CONSULTANT shall prepare a full-sized original set(s), and provide a digital plot bid package for CITY’s use in printing, and shall make available to the CITY an electronic version of the Construction Documents. 2.4.2 CONSULTANT shall provide bid phase services, as requested by the CITY, through award of the Contract for Construction. Service include assistance with responses to bidders' inquiries; preparation of addenda; attendance at one (1) prequalification and (1) pre-bid meeting; and assistance in the CITY’s evaluation of bids. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 27 110829 2.4.3 In preparing estimates of the cost of the work, the CONSULTANT shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation; to determine what materials, equipment, component systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents; to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Documents alternate bids as may be necessary to adjust the estimated Cost of the Work to meet the CITY's budget for the Cost of the Work. If an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of the Contract between the CITY and the Contractor causes the budget for the Cost of the Work to be exceeded, that budget shall be increased accordingly. 2.4.4 CONSULTANT will include in its estimate a contingency for bid/market conditions based on competitive bidding with a minimum of 3 bidders for all major items of subcontracted work and 3-5 general contractor bids. The CITY recognizes that the CONSULTANT has no control over competitive bidding or market conditions. If CITY anticipates less favorable bidding conditions or wishes to take a more conservative approach, CITY will cooperate with CONSULTANT to increase bid contingency and either reduce project scope or increase the project budget accordingly. 2.4.5 If bidding has not commenced within 90 days after CONSULTANT submits 95%Construction Documents to the CITY, CONSULTANT shall adjust at no additional cost to CITY, the estimate of probable construction cost to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the construction industry. Should the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost exceed the CITY approved construction budget at this point, any subsequent changes in the plans or value engineering services necessary to align the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost with the CITY approved construction budget shall be considered Additional Services as noted in EXHIBT C of this Agreement. 2.4.6 Deliverables: one (1) 100% reproducible (hard copy for Construction Document contract file) and digital plot set of Construction Documents “Conform” package revised with all addenda, CITY reviews and plan check, including Fire Department, ready for Award, and Construction. 2.5 TASK G2 DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 2.5.1 The CONSULTANT’s responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with CITY's issuance of a Notice to Proceed CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 28 110829 with the Contract for Construction and will end 365 calendar days from that date or upon commencement by the CONSULTANT of the Substantial Completion Correction (“Punch”) list, as mutually agreed upon by CONSULTANT, the CITY’s Construction Manager and CITY, whichever comes first. If the punch list does not commence within 365 calendar days of the Notice to Proceed, any further time and effort spent on behalf of the project shall be an Additional Service provided on a time and materials basis. Consultant will not be obligated to provide any work beyond the 365 calendar days unless directed by CITY in writing. 2.5.2 The CONSULTANT shall be a representative of and shall advise and consult with the CITY during the provision of the Contract Administration Services. The CONSULTANT shall have authority to act on behalf of the CITY only to the extent provided in this Agreement unless otherwise modified by written amendment. 2.5.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the CONSULTANT under this phase shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the CITY. 2.5.4 The CONSULTANT shall neither have control over or charge of, nor be responsible for, the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, since these are solely the Contractor’s rights and responsibilities under the Contract Documents. 2.5.5 The CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 2.5.6 Project Meetings and Site Visits 2.5.6.1 The CONSULTANT shall attend up to 52 site construction meetings. The CONSULTANT as a representative of the CITY, shall visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of the Contractor’s operations, or as otherwise agreed by the Project Manager or authorized designee and the CONSULTANT (1) to become generally familiar with and to keep the CITY informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, (2) to endeavor to guard the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the Work, and (3) to determine in general if the Work is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the CONSULTANT shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 29 110829 2.5.6.2 The CONSULTANT shall report to the CITY known deviations from the Contract Documents. 2.5.6.3 The CONSULTANT shall at all times have access to the work within 24 hours wherever it is in preparation or progress. 2.5.6.4 The CONSULTANT shall have authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever the CONSULTANT considers it necessary or advisable, the CONSULTANT will have authority to require inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of the CONSULTANT or a decision made in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibility of the CONSULTANT to the Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers, their agents or employees or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 2.5.6.5 The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for scheduling the subconsultants visits to the site in coordination with and or as directed by the CITY. 2.5.7 On the basis of on-site observations as a CONSULTANT, and through information provided to the CONSULTANT by the CITY’s Project Manager, the CONSULTANT shall keep the CITY informed of the quality of the work. 2.5.8 Submittals: 2.5.8.1 The CONSULTANT will review Contractor’s submittals, including Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay in the work, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT’s judgment to permit adequate review unless otherwise agreed to. Submittals critical to work flow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance equipment or systems designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s review shall not constitute review of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the CONSULTANT, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 30 110829 CONSULTANT’s review of specific items shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon such certification to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the Contract Documents. 2.5.8.2 The CONSULTANT shall maintain copies of submittals supplied by the Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. Reviewed submittals shall be stamped with appropriate action to be taken with notes and comments initialed and dated. 2.5.8.3 If professional design services or certifications by a design professional related to systems, materials or equipment are specifically required of the Contractor by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall specify appropriate performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. Shop Drawings and other submittals related to the Work designed or certified by the design professional retained by the Contractor shall bear such professional’s written approval when submitted to the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon the adequacy, accuracy and completeness of the services; certifications or approvals performed by such design professionals. 2.5.9 Request for Information (RFI) & Architectural Supplement Information (ASI) 2.5.9.1 The CONSULTANT shall review properly prepared, timely requests by the Contractor for for information (RFI) about the Contract Documents. A properly prepared RFI about the Contract Documents shall be in a form prepared or approved by the CONSULTANT and shall include a detailed written statement that indicates the specific Drawings or Specifications in need of clarification and the nature of the clarification requested. 2.5.9.2 If deemed appropriate by the CONSULTANT or if directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee, the CONSULTANT shall on the CITY’s behalf prepare, reproduce and distribute supplemental Drawings and Specifications (Architectural Supplemental Information (ASI)) in response to RFI by the Contractor or because of a need determined by CONSULTANT to achieve the intent of the Contract Documents.. 2.5.9.3 Interpretations and decisions of the CONSULTANT shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 31 110829 of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the CONSULTANT shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both CITY and Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be liable for the results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith. 2.5.9.4 The CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work or in the activities of the CITY, Contractor or separate contractors, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT s professional judgment to permit adequate review. RFI’s critical to workflow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. 2.5.10 CONSULTANT shall review for compliance, any items submitted by the Contractor for consistency with the contract documents, including but not limited to submittals, O&M Manuals, written guarantees, instruction books, diagrams and charts, etc,. 2.5.11 Review and recommend approval or rejection of substitutions for conformance with the project design concept and for compliance with Contract Documents. CONSULTANT shall briefly review each substitution at no additional cost to the CITY and provide the CITY’s Project Manager with a fee and time schedule for detailed review of each substitution. Time and cost for detailed review of substitutions shall be negotiated with Contractor on a case-by-case basis. Detailed review of each substitution cannot begin until authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager. Detailed review of substitutions is subject to the requirements of Additional Services when approved and authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager prior to beginning the detailed review. 2.5.12 Changes in the Work 2.5.12.1 Change Order Review and Negotiation: All changes to the Contract between the CITY and Contractor shall be only by change orders executed by the CITY. 2.5.12.2 CITY and its designee shall review the contents of all Contractor-requested changes to the contract time or price, endeavor to determine the cause of the request, and assemble and evaluate information concerning the request CITY and its designee shall in its evaluations of the Contractor’s request consider the CONSULTANT’s comments regarding the proposed changes. 2.5.12.3 All proposed CONSULTANT and CITY -initiated changes shall first be described in detail by the CITY and its designee in a request for a proposal issued to the Contractor. The request shall be accompanied by drawings CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 32 110829 and specifications prepared by the CONSULTANT. In response to the request for a proposal, the Contractor shall submit to the CITY and its designee for evaluation detailed information concerning. The price and time adjustments, if any, as may be necessary to perform the proposed change order work. The CITY and its designee shall review the Contractor’s proposal, shall discuss the proposed change order with the Contractor, and endeavor to determine the Contractor’s basis for the price and time proposed to perform the work. All work by CONSULTANT related to CITY -initiated changes will be performed as Additional Services on a Time and Material Basis or mutually agreed lump sum. CITY and its designee shall negotiate change requests on behalf of the CITY. CITY and its designee shall prepare and issue to the Contractor appropriate change order documents, reviewed and signed by the CONSULTANT as required by contract. 2.6 TASK G2.1 DOWNTOWN LIBRARY LEED DESIGN AND DOCUMENTATION 2.6.1 The CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit LEED documentation for the Downtown Library for certification purposes based on the LEED Commercial Interiors 2009 for LEED certified level. The work includes preparing and submitting all required design submittal documentation for the LEED credits as identified on the LEED Matrix fated February 2010. 2.6.2 The CONSULTANT shall provide fundamental commissioning services during the design phase construction phases of the project. 2.6.3 The CONSULTANT shall provide design intent information and clarifications to the Contractor during the construction phase of the project. 2.6.4 The CONSULTANT shall provide Construction Administration services which include review of Contractor-provided LEED submittals required for the Construction submittal by the Contractor. 2.7 TASK G2.2 DOWNTOWN STANDARD LIBRARY AND OFFICE FURNITURE 2.7.1 During the Construction Administration Phases the CONSULTANT shall provide the following services related to Standard Library and Office Furniture: 2.7.2 Building Staff area systems furniture will be specified in general terms showing layout, major components, and finishes. CONSULTANT shall specify that systems furniture vendor to provide detailed systems design and component selection. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 33 110829 2.7.3 CONSULTANT shall specify performance requirements for seismic bracing of cantilevered shelving with shelving vendor to provide engineering submittals. 2.7.4 If so requested by the CITY’s Project Manager or authorized designee, the CONSULTANT shall prepare up to a total of five different specification packages for furniture. Each package will be suitable for a negotiated purchase order by CITY or Library. 2.7.5 The CONSULTANT shall provide up to two alternative design concepts for standard furniture. 2.7.6 The CONSULTANT shall conduct up to four furniture meetings to set direction on furniture, casework and signage. 2.7.7 The CONSULTANT shall lead up to one day-long furniture review with the furniture committee. 2.7.8 The CONSULTANT shall prepare a 90% Specification Documents submittal for CITY and Library review. 2.7.9 The CONSULTANT shall prepare 100% Specification Documents. 2.7.10 The CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in reviewing bidder questions and provide written addendum as required for each bid package. 2.7.11 The CONSULTANT shall be available for up to two days to advise on furniture and punch list services. 2.8 TASK H2 DOWNTOWN LIBRARY PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS AND PROJECT CLOSEOUT 2.8.1 Project Closeout, will begin with the commencement by CONSULTANT of the Punch list as mutually determined by CONSULTANT, CITY and CITY’s Construction Manager, and will end 60 calendar days from that date CONSULTANT shall complete all items over which the CONSULTANT has control indicated in the scope of Project Closeout within the 60 calendar day period. CONSULTANT Closeout Services after 60 days will be provided as an Additional Service on a Time & Materials basis. 2.8.2 The CONSULTANT shall receive from the Contractor and forward to the CITY, for the CITY’s review and records, written warranties and related documents required by the Contract Documents and assembled by the Contractor. 2.8.3 The CONSULTANT’s shall conduct “Punch List” inspection to check conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents and to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 34 110829 submitted by the Contractor of Work to be completed or corrected. 2.8.4 The CONSULTANT shall complete and distribute the project punch list in a timely manner from the CITY’s request for inspection in either MSWord or Excel format. 2.8.5 CONSULTANT shall review the work to determine whether the punch list items have been completed and are in conformance with the Construction Documents 2.8.6 CONSULTANT’s shall conduct Final Completion observation with the CITY to check for general conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents package and to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list submitted by the Contractor of Work to be completed or corrected. 2.8.7 The CONSULTANT shall incorporate information provided by the Contractor and information gained during site visits throughout the Project construction, and prepare record drawings and specifications based on record field construction documents package. Prior to acceptance of the Project by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall review the contractor’s “as-built” drawings and specifications, and shall return them to contractor for revision if they are not complete, or otherwise known to not represent facts known to the CONSULTANT. Apart from reviewing Contractor’s as-builts documents, CONSULTANT shall prepare and sign the CONSULTANT’s Record Drawings submit both a hard copy on Mylar and an electronic copy on Compact Disc (CD) to the CITY. 3.0 TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY PROJECT 3.1 GENERAL 3.1.1 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for Temporary Library Facilities (“Temporary Library Facilities Project”) consist of one Task: Temporary Library Facilities Project Design. 3.1.2 The CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for the Temporary Library Facilities Project include the services of a, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer/lighting designer, landscape architect, cost estimator and library programmer. 3.2 TASK D3: TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY FACILITIES PROJECT DESIGN 3.2.1 The CONSULTANT shall develop conceptual design floor plans, with input from the CITY. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 35 110829 3.2.2 The CONSULTANT shall: 3.2.3 Develop a comprehensive building program for temporary library and community center services in the range of 8,000 to 10,000 total square feet spread between different locations yet to be determined by the CITY, Program size is based on the anticipated use of existing CITY facilities as temporary library and community center facilities during the renovation of the Downtown Library and the construction of the Mitchell Park Library. 3.2.4 Provide dimensions and notes to describe the scale and principal features of the interior of the temporary facilities on the conceptual floor plans. The conceptual floor plans will show the desired location and approximate size of the new or relocated windows and doors. 3.3 TASK E3: TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 3.3.1 The CONSULTANT shall develop construction documents for the temporary library and technical services with input from the CITY. 3.3.2 The CONSULTANT shall: 3.3.2.1 Recommend finishes for the CITY’s approval. 3.3.2.2 Prepare drawings and other documents describing signage and graphics for the new temporary library 3.3.2.3 Prepare technical specifications for the architectural portions of the Temporary Library Facilities Project. 3.3.2.4 Review CITY-provided schedule of existing furniture indicating which furniture is to be reused for the Project and assist the CITY in the selection and specification of new furniture. Prepare a drawing showing the new furniture locations. 3.3.2.5 The CONSULTANT will provide drawings and other project documents to describe the scope of the project in sufficient detail for the CITY to publicly bid the Temporary Library Facilities Project. 3.3.2.6 Deliverables: Contract Document drawings, building program and other project documents to describe the scope of the project for the CITY coordinate and repurpose existing facilities for temporary library, to move existing CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 36 110829 furniture and purchase new furniture; updated project budget. 3.3.2.7 Meetings included in this phase (may be shared with other phases and/or meetings): two (2) Technical meetings; three (3) PMT meetings. 3.4 TASK F3: TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY PROJECT BIDDING AND AWARD 3.4.1 CONSULTANT shall prepare a full-sized original set(s), and provide a digital plot bid package for CITY’s use in printing, and shall make available to the CITY an electronic version of the Construction Documents. 3.4.2 CONSULTANT shall provide bid phase services, as requested by the CITY, through award of the Contract for Construction. Service include assistance with responses to bidders' inquiries; preparation of addenda; attendance at one (1) prequalification and (1) pre-bid meeting; and assistance in the CITY’s evaluation of bids. 3.4.3 In preparing estimates of the cost of the work, the CONSULTANT shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation; to determine what materials, equipment, component systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents; to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Documents alternate bids as may be necessary to adjust the estimated Cost of the Work to meet the CITY's budget for the Cost of the Work. If an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of the Contract between the CITY and the Contractor causes the budget for the Cost of the Work to be exceeded, that budget shall be increased accordingly. 3.4.4 CONSULTANT will include in its estimate a contingency for bid/market conditions based on competitive bidding with a minimum of 3 bidders for all major items of subcontracted work and 3-5 general contractor bids. The CITY recognizes that the CONSULTANT has no control over competitive bidding or market conditions. If CITY anticipates less favorable bidding conditions or wishes to take a more conservative approach, CITY will cooperate with CONSULTANT to increase bid contingency and either reduce project scope or increase the project budget accordingly. 3.4.5 If bidding has not commenced within 90 days after CONSULTANT submits 95%Construction Documents to the CITY, CONSULTANT shall adjust at no additional cost to CITY, the estimate of probable construction cost to reflect changes in the general level of prices in CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 37 110829 the construction industry. Should the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost exceed the CITY approved construction budget at this point, any subsequent changes in the plans or value engineering services necessary to align the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost with the CITY approved construction budget shall be considered Additional Services as noted in EXHIBT C of this Agreement. 3.4.6 Deliverables: one (1) 100% reproducible (hard copy of Construction Document contract file for Bidding), digital plot set, and all project addenda. 3.5 TASK G3: TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 3.5.1 The Consultant’s responsibility to provide Basic Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with CITY's award of a general contract for the construction of the Project and terminates 90 calendar days later or on the original date of Substantial Completion of the Work, whichever comes first. 3.5.2 The CONSULTANT shall revise Bid Documents for issuance as Conform Set Contract Documents that incorporate addenda, and clarifications. 3.5.3 The CONSULTANT shall attend the pre-construction conference. 3.5.4 The CONSULTANT may visit the site approximately once every two weeks or at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction or as otherwise agreed by the CITY and CONSULTANT to attend Project meetings and to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the work completed and to determine, in general, if the work is being performed in a manner indicating that the work when completed will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the CONSULTANT shall not be required to make exhaustive continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the work. 3.5.5 On the basis of on-site observations as a CONSULTANT, and through information provided to the CONSULTANT by the CITY’s Project Manager, the CONSULTANT shall keep the CITY informed of the progress and quality of the work. 3.5.6 The CONSULTANT will review Contractor’s submittals, including Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 38 110829 design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay in the work, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT’s judgment to permit adequate review unless otherwise agreed to. The CONSULTANT will be allowed a maximum of 14 calendar days in most cases except for large submittals per review, exclusive of substitution. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance equipment or systems designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s review shall not constitute review of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the CONSULTANT, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The CONSULTANT’s review of specific items shall not indicated approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon such certification to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the Contract Documents. 3.5.7 The CONSULTANT will respond to Contractor’s Requests For Information (RFI). Interpretations and decisions of the CONSULTANT shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the CONSULTANT shall secure faithful performance by both CITY and Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith. CONSULTANT will be allowed a maximum of 14 calendar days in most cases except for large RFI per request for responses. 3.5.8 CONSULTANT shall review for compliance, any items submitted by the Contractor for consistency with the contract documents, including but not limited to submittals, O&M Manuals, written guarantees, instruction books, diagrams and charts, etc, within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt. 3.5.9 Review and recommend approval or rejection of substitutions for conformance with the project design concept and for compliance with Contract Documents. CONSULTANT shall briefly review each substitution at no additional cost to the CITY and provide the CITY’s Project Manager with a fee and time schedule for detailed review of CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 39 110829 each substitution. Time and cost for detailed review of substitutions shall be negotiated with Contractor on a case-by-case basis. Detailed review of each substitution cannot begin until authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager. Detailed review of substitutions is subject to the requirements of Additional Services when approved and authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager prior to beginning the detailed review. 3.5.10 The CONSULTANT will not have control over or charge of and will not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or safety precautions and programs in connection with the work, since these are solely the Contractor’s responsibility under the Contract for Construction. The CONSULTANT will not be responsible for the Contractor’s schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT will not have control over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the work. The CONSULTANT will at all times have access to the work wherever it is in preparation or progress. Duties, responsibilities and limitation of authority of the CONSULTANT shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the CITY and CONSULTANT. 4 MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT 4.1 GENERAL 4.1.1 CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for the Renovation and Addition to the Main Library (“Main library Project”) consist of three Tasks: Task D4 Design Development; Task E4 Construction Documents; and Task F4 Bidding and Award. 4.1.2 CONSULTANT’s Basic Services include the services of a civil engineer, structural engineer, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer/lighting designer, landscape architect, cost consultant, audio visual/acoustical engineer, energy analysis engineer, commissioning agent, historical architect and library programmer. 4.1.3 The CITY intends that the Main library Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED Certified or higher rating by the USGBC. 4.1.3.1 CONSULTANT shall design the Main Library Project to meet the requirements for LEED V2009 certification at the Certified or higher CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 40 110829 level. 4.1.3.2 CONSULTANT shall provide LEED project management services needed for the CITY to obtain LEED certification of the Main Library Project, develop specifications consistent with LEED and the CITY’s policies, and provide the templates, documentation, calculations, and energy modeling studies necessary to obtain LEED certification. 4.1.3.3 CONSULTANT shall include a LEED accredited professional on the design team to support Project Sustainable Building/ Green Building design criteria as required to achieve LEED certification. 4.1.3.4 CONSULTANT shall include in the construction documents appropriate provisions requiring the contractor to meet the requirements for CITY’s submittal to USGBC for LEED Certified or higher level of certification. 4.2 TASK D4: MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 4.2.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Design Development phase and coordinate with the Project Manager or authorized designee, key departments, including but not limited to CITY’s Building, Public Works, and Engineering staff. 4.2.2 CONSULTANT shall prepare, refine and update project design schedule which identifies all major tasks, key milestones, key meetings, submittal dates and review periods for the CITY’s review and comment. CONSULTANT shall provide updated design schedule at the beginning of each project phase. 4.2.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare Design Development documents based on refinement and further development of the approved schematic design, including preliminary furniture layouts, built-in fixtures, and equipment selections. 4.2.4 CONSULTANT shall refine design development plans based on comments received from the CITY’s review of the 100% SD and 50% DD submittal. 4.2.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare estimates of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 50% and the 100% Design Development submittals. 4.2.6 CONSULTANT shall have the Main Library Project’s LEED commissioning agent review the design, back-check review comments, and develop a CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 41 110829 commissioning plan, specifications, and checklists. 4.2.7 CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY to review the estimate of probable construction cost and to confirm that the design is still within the CITY’s approved construction budget. Should the design not be within the budget, CONSULTANT shall revise the design as directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee at no additional fee to bring the design within the approved budget. 4.2.8 CONSULTANT shall provide all other normal and customary services related to Design Development that the CONSULTANT, the Project Manager or her authorized designee finds necessary or that will lead toward the timely delivery of other phases of work in this Agreement. 4.2.9 Meetings 4.2.9.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate up to five (5) PMT meetings, two (2) Technical-Planning meetings, two (2) Technical- Library Meetings, two (2) Technical Building Department meetings, two (2) Artist Coordination meetings, one (1) Technical-Technology meeting, one (1) Technical-Traffic meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Main Library Project. 4.2.9.2 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate meetings with reviewing agencies as required. 4.2.9.3 CONSULTANT shall attend up to two meetings with the Palo Alto Arts Commission and/or other public art committee for coordination of an arts program. 4.2.10 Deliverables 4.2.10.1 CONSULTANT shall submit document packages at the 50% and 100% completion of Design Development for review by the CITY. Design Development packages shall illustrate and describe the refinement of the design of the Mitchell Park Project, establishing its scope, relationships, forms, size and appearance. 4.2.10.2 Site plans and floor plans for all major disciplines. 4.2.10.3 Preliminary furniture layout plan. 4.2.10.4 Preliminary finish, materials and equipment schedules. 4.2.10.5 Outline specifications shall identify the major materials and CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 42 110829 systems and shall establish their general quality levels. Specifications shall be consistent with the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) format, the version of which shall be determined by CONSULTANT. 4.2.10.6 Engineering documents shall include single line diagrams describing structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems. 4.2.10.7 Principal interior and exterior elevations showing preliminary locations of all electrical and mechanical controls, telecommunications, security, as well as life-safety devices for coordination with furniture layout. 4.2.10.8 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 50% and 100% Design Development submittals. 4.3 TASK E4: MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 4.3.1 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Construction Documents phase. 4.3.2 Upon written notice to proceed by the CITY, CONSULTANT shall refine and further develop the approved Design Development package based upon the CITY’s comments and the constructability review comments on the 100% Design Development package. 4.3.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 60% Construction Documents package to the CITY. 4.3.4 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 60% Construction Documents submittal. 4.3.5 CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a 95% Construction Documents package, with CITY’s comments from the 60% package incorporated into the documents. 4.3.6 CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with the 95% Construction Documents submittal. 4.3.7 CONSULTANT shall prepare a Construction Documents package for Building and Fire department plan check review and permitting. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 43 110829 4.3.8 CONSULTANT shall prepare the 100% Construction Documents package with final quality control comments from CITY’s Building and Fire department review incorporated. 4.3.9 The CONSULTANT shall prepare a Project Manual that includes the Conditions of the Contract for Construction provided by the CITY, Technical Specifications, and bidding requirements and sample forms furnished by the CITY. 4.3.10 CONSULTANT shall maintain the LEED matrix and design documentation. 4.3.11 LEED Fundamental and Enhanced Commissioning: CONSULTANT shall have the project’s commissioning agent review the design and back-check their review comments, develop a commissioning plan, commissioning specification, and commissioning checklists. 4.3.12 CONSULTANT shall provide, if necessary and as directed by the Project Manager or authorized designee, bid alternates up to a cumulative maximum amount of 1% of the estimate of probable construction cost. 4.3.13 One or more “independent checks” of the plans, specifications and bid documents may be performed by an independent party commissioned by the CITY prior to the 100% Construction Document submittal. CONSULTANT shall incorporate revisions or comments from these reviews, provided by the CITY in a single, compiled, and coordinated document, in the final bid documents, unless CONSULTANT deems them to be inappropriate or in error in which case, CONSULTANT shall communicate concern to the Project Manager or her authorized designee for consideration and further direction. These checks may include architectural peer reviews and/or constructability reviews. These independent checks are to be performed strictly for the benefit of the CITY, and they shall not relieve the CONSULTANT from its obligations under this Agreement. The CITY is not obligated to perform any independent check, and the CONSULTANT shall not rely upon it for any quality or quantitative check or review. 4.3.14 Meetings 4.3.14.1 CONSULTANT shall attend and coordinate eight (8) PMT meetings, two (2) artist coordination meetings, two (2) Technical- Planning meetings, four (4) Technical-Library meetings, three Technical-Building Department meetings, one (1) Technical- Technology meeting, one (1) Technical-Traffic meeting, one (1) Integrated Design Workshop, and other technical meetings as reasonably required for the Main Library Project. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 44 110829 4.3.14.2 CONSULTANT shall attend two (2) meetings with the Arts Commission and/or Public Art committee for coordination of the arts program in the construction documents. 4.3.14.3 CONSULTANT shall attend up to seven public meetings related to the integration of the Main Library and the Art Center. 4.3.15 Deliverables 4.3.15.1 60%, 95%, and 100% Construction Documents packages setting forth in detail the requirements for construction of the Main Library Park Project, including drawings and specifications that establish in detail the quality levels of required materials and systems. The Construction Documents package shall include drawings and technical specifications from all disciplines, executed to a level of detail appropriate for open public bidding. They shall include plans overlaying voice and data cabling with furniture layout as necessary, elevations reflecting relationships between furnishings and items affecting their placement. Site improvements shall include all details necessary to coordinate and properly locate utilities, driveways, roadways, at-grade parking, curbs and gutters, landscape, irrigation and hardscape design. The Construction Documents shall conform to the applicable California Building Code, Title 24, ADA, and all other applicable local, State and Federal codes, regulations, permit requirements, and conditions necessary for issuance of a building permit. 4.3.15.2 Project Manual 4.3.15.3 Detailed technical specifications that are coordinated with the plans and all the design disciplines. 4.3.15.4 Estimates of probable construction cost associated with the 60% and 95% Construction Documents submittals. 4.3.15.5 The CONSULTANT shall submit one set of reproducible documents and one set of electronic digital documents at 60%, 95% and 100% completion of Construction Documents. CONSULTANT shall provide a full-sized original set, wet-stamped and signed, as required by the CITY, by all the appropriate licensed design disciplines. CONSULTANT shall also provide digital plot files directly to CITY’s printing company for printing bid sets. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 45 110829 4.4 TASK F4 MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT BIDDING AND AWARD 4.4.1 CONSULTANT shall assist CITY during bid solicitation process. 4.4.2 CONSULTANT shall prepare a full-sized original set(s), and provide a digital plot bid package for CITY’s use in printing, and shall make available to the CITY an electronic version of the Construction Documents. 4.4.3 CONSULTANT shall provide bid phase services, as requested by the CITY, through award of the Contract for Construction. Service include assistance with responses to bidders' inquiries; preparation of addenda; attendance at one (1) prequalification and (1) pre-bid meeting; and assistance in the CITY’s evaluation of bids. 4.4.4 In preparing estimates of the cost of the work, the CONSULTANT shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation; to determine what materials, equipment, component systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents; to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Documents alternate bids as may be necessary to adjust the estimated Cost of the Work to meet the CITY's budget for the Cost of the Work. If an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of the Contract between the CITY and the Contractor causes the budget for the Cost of the Work to be exceeded, that budget shall be increased accordingly. 4.4.5 CONSULTANT will include in its estimate a contingency for bid/market conditions based on competitive bidding with a minimum of 3 bidders for all major items of subcontracted work and 3-5 general contractor bids. The CITY recognizes that the CONSULTANT has no control over competitive bidding or market conditions. If CITY anticipates less favorable bidding conditions or wishes to take a more conservative approach, CITY will cooperate with CONSULTANT to increase bid contingency and either reduce project scope or increase the project budget accordingly. 4.4.6 If bidding has not commenced within 90 days after CONSULTANT submits 95%Construction Documents to the CITY, CONSULTANT shall adjust at no additional cost to CITY, the estimate of probable construction cost to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the construction industry. Should the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost exceed the CITY approved construction budget at this point, any subsequent changes in the plans or value engineering services necessary to align the adjusted estimate of probable construction cost with the CITY approved construction budget shall be considered Additional Services as noted in EXHIBT C of this Agreement. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 46 110829 4.4.7 Deliverables: one reproducible (hard copy for Construction Document contract file) and digital plot set of Construction Documents “Conform” package revised with all addenda, CITY reviews and plan check comments, including Fire Department, incorporated and ready for Award, and Construction. 5 TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT 5.1 GENERAL 5.1.1 CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for Temporary Main Library (“Temporary Main Library Project”) consist of three tasks: Task A5 Temporary Main Library Site Analysis Phase, Task C5 Temporary Main Library Design Phase, and Task E5 Temporary Main Library Construction Documents Phase. 5.1.2 CONSULTANT’s Basic Services for the Temporary Main Library Project include the services of a mechanical engineer, electrical engineer/lighting designer, cost estimator and library programmer. 5.2 TASK A5: TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY SITE ANALYSIS PHASE 5.2.1 CONSULTANT shall review and analyze potential sites and existing buildings for the appropriateness of being a Temporary Main Library. The potential sites and buildings shall be identified by the CITY and provided to the CONSULTANT. 5.2.2 CONSULTANT shall review the potential sites and buildings for the following criteria; site capacity, community access, code compliance, building capacity, and availability. 5.2.3 The CONSULTANT shall develop up to two preliminary building programs for the Temporary Main Library to be used in conjunction with the site analysis the programs shall range in size from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet. 5.2.4 CONSULTANT shall develop preliminary project budgets for up to three sites. 5.2.5 CITY and the CONSULTANT shall review the potential sites and analyze them based on the established criteria; a preferred option will be selected. 5.3 TASK C5: TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE 5.3.1 CONSULTANT shall develop Preliminary Design Documents for the CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 47 110829 preferred site option for the Temporary Main Library. 5.3.2 CONSULTANT shall coordinate and manage its subconsultants throughout the Preliminary Design phase and coordinate with the Project Manager or authorized designee, key departments, including but not limited to CITY’s Planning, Building, Public Works, and Engineering staff. 5.3.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare, refine and update project design schedule which identifies all major tasks, key milestones, key meetings, submittal dates and review periods for the CITY’s review and comment. 5.3.4 CONSULTANT shall prepare Preliminary Design documents based on refinement and further development of the site option including site plans, building plans, furniture and shelving layouts, and electrical, lighting and mechanical plans. 5.3.5 CONSULTANT shall refine design plans based on comments received from the CITY’s review of the Preliminary Design Documents. 5.3.6 CONSULTANT shall prepare estimates of probable construction cost for review by CITY in association with Preliminary Design submittals. 5.3.7 CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY to review the estimate of probable construction cost. 5.3.8 Based on the approved Preliminary Design Documents the CONSULTANT shall finalize the building program for the Temporary Main Library Project in the range of 10,000 to 15,000 total square feet. 5.3.8.1 Provide dimensions and notes to describe the scale and principal features of the interior of the temporary facilities on the floor plans. The floor plans will show the desired location and approximate size of the new or relocated windows and doors. 5.4 TASK E5: TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BIDDING AND AWARDPHASES 5.4.1 CONSULTANT shall provide the required documentation, drawings and specifications for Construction Documents through the end of the Bid Phase. 5.4.2 CONSULTANT is adding the following sub-consultant who will oversee and execute the majority of work of this section of the Scope of Work: 5.4.2.1 Mark Cavagnero Associates (MCA), Architecture. MCA will contract directly with the following sub-sub-consultants: 5.4.2.1.1 Gayner Engineers, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Engineering. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 48 110829 5.4.2.1.2 Siverman & Light, Lighting Design & Energy Documentation. 5.4.2.1.3 Stansen Specifications, Technical Specifications. 5.4.3 CONSULTANT will assist with coordination through consultation with the Library in the selection and placement of furniture and equipment. 5.4.4 Based on the Preliminary Design Documents, , CONSULTANT shall complete the documentation of Architectural interior finishes, including all floor, wall and ceiling finishes, including trim, to a minimum level appropriate to a temporary library facility to be in use approximately 2-years. 5.4.5 CONSULTANT shall provide documentation for power circuits and outlets, data cabling, connections and jacks, and lighting to provide functionality to the conceptual design 5.4.6 CONSULTANT shall provide documents to Library representative(s) to keep them informed, but CONSULTANT shall consult with and coordinate finishes, power, data and lighting with the Palo Alto Arts Center staff. 5.4.7 CONSULTANT shall coordinate elements that are being incorporated into the facility for the temporary library keeping in mind the long term need and use of the facility by the Art Center on a permanent basis. 5.4.8 CONSULTANT shall plan and detail all Library specific improvements that will need to be removed at the end of the temporary use of the space as a library in a manner such that selective demolition, removal and patching can reasonably be accomplished to allow the space to be returned to use by the Art Center. 5.4.9 All work shall be done to meet current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as it applies to the use of the facility as a temporary library. 5.4.10 Meetings included in this phase (may be shared with other phases and/or meetings): two (2) Technical meetings; three (3) PMT meetings. 5.4.11 CONSULTANT shall prepare full-sized original drawings of the Temporary Main Library spaces to be incorporated into the Art Center Renovation Project Construction Documents, and provide as a part of the Art Center Renovation Project Construction Documents a digital plot bid package for CITY’s use in printing, and shall make available to the CITY an electronic version of the Construction Documents. 5.4.12 CONSULTANT shall provide bid phase services for the Temporary Main Library as part of the Art Center Renovation Project, as requested by the CITY, through award of the Contract for Construction. Service include CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 49 110829 assistance with responses to bidders' inquiries; preparation of addenda; attendance at one (1) prequalification and (1) pre-bid meeting; and assistance in the CITY’s evaluation of bids. 5.4.13 Deliverables: one (1) 100% reproducible (hard copy of Temporary Main Library Construction Document contract file as a portion of the Art Center Renovation Project Construction Document contract file for Bidding), digital plot set, and all project addenda. 6 PARTICIPATION 6.1 CONSULTANT shall at the CITY’s direction make presentation(s) to the CITY’s Commissions or Boards. 6.2 CONSULTANT shall at the CITY’s direction make presentations to the CITY Council. 6.3 CONSULTANT shall at the CITY’s direction conduct public meeting(s). III. SUPPLEMENTAL AND OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES 1.0 SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES The following services are not part of the CONSULTANT’s Basic Services and shall be performed by the CONSULTANT as Supplemental Services as directed by the CITY. 1.1 LEED design or documentation for credits other than those identified in the LEED matrix included in the May 2008 Mitchell Park Library/Community Center Schematic Design Report. 1.2 Construction Administration services and Project Closeout Services for the Main Library Project. 1.3 FF&E and Signage services for the Main Library Project. 1.4 Construction Administration Services for the Temporary Main Library Project. 2.0 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following services are not part of the CONSULTANT’s Basic Services and shall be performed by the CONSULTANT as Additional Services only if and when authorized by the CITY in writing: 2.1 Additional meetings or presentations. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 50 110829 2.2 Developing and preparation of information kiosks. 2.3 Developing a project flyers and public information posters. 2.4 Providing an architectural scaled presentation model. 2.5 Analyses of other sites or buildings. 2.6 Other participation services not described in Basic Services or Supplemental Services above. 2.7 Other services not specifically identified under Basic Services or Supplemental Services above. 2.8 Making changes in the design or documentation that is contrary to prior direction provided by the CITY. 2.9 Preparing bid alternates other than described in CONSULTANT’s Basic Services. 2.10 Preparing CITY-initiated change orders during construction. 2.11 Providing more than two reviews of each submittal. 2.12 Detailed review of substitution request. 2.13 Work required to correct non-conforming work of contractor. 2.14 Increasing Professional Liability Insurance from the CONSULTANT’s standard two million ($2,000,000) coverage. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 51 110829 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion No. of Weeks From NTP MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY/ COMMUNITY CENTER Task D1: Design Development Week 24 Task E1: Construction Documents Week 50 (26 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Design Development Task) Task F1: Bidding & Award Week 63 (13 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Construction Documents Task) Task G1: Construction Administration 104 weeks starting from General Contractors Authorization to Proceed Task H1: Project Closeout & Record Documents 90 days starting from General Contractors receipt of substantial completion. RENOVATED DOWNTOWN LIBRARY Task D2: Design Development Week 22 Task E2: Construction Documents Week 44 (22 weeks from receipt of CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 52 110829 authorization to proceed from Design Development Task) Task F2: Bidding & Award Week 53 (9 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Construction Documents Task) Task G2: Construction Administration 52 Weeks starting from General Contractors authorization to proceed. Task H2: Project Closeout and Record Documents 60 days starting from General Contractors receipt of substantial completion TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY BUILDING Task D3: Schematic Design & Design Week 13 from NTP Task E3: Plan Check Submittal August 17, 2009 100% Permit Set September 14, 2009Task F3: Bidding & Award 45 Days (from NTP for the additional scope added with Amendment #1) Task G3: Construction Administration 90 Days (from NTP for the additional scope added with Amendment #1) MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT Task D4: Design Development Week 32 from NTP for Amendment 3 Task E4: Construction Documents Week 64 (32 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Design Development Task) Task E4.1 Library and Art Center Concurrent with Construction Site Integration Documents (Design and Construction Documents) Task E4.1: Plan Check City dependent based upon plan check review process. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 53 110829 Task F4: Bidding & Award City Dependent, planned for Summer 2012. TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY BUILDING Task A5: Site Analysis Week 6 from NTP for Amendment 3 Task C5: Preliminary Design Documents Week 12 from NTP for Amendment 3 Task E5: Construction Documents, Completed by July, 2011 Bidding & Award Spring 2012 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 54 110829 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be paid to the CONSULTANT on a lump sum basis for Mitchell Park Library Task D1, E1, F1, and Renovated Downtown Library Task D2, E2, F2, G2, and H2. Compensation for Temporary Library Task D3, E3, F3, and G3 shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedules attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the Not to Exceed amount set forth below. Compensation for Participation Task D4 shall be on a per meeting basis as indentified in attached Exhibit C-1 up to the Not to Exceed amount set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A”, (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $7,006,189. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $7,901,751. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $7,006,189 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $1,045,562. CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 55 110829 BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BASIS MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY/COMMUNITY CENTER Task D1 $845,456 Lump Sum (Design Development) Task E1 $1,882,656 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task F1 $150,437 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Task G1 (Construction Administration, FFE & Signage $1,156,517 Lump Sum Task H1 (Project Closeout & Record Documents $143.339 Lump Sum Subtotal $4,178,405 RENOVATED DOWNTOWN LIBRARY Task D2 $88,383 Lump Sum (Design Development) Task E2 $227,882 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task F2 $14,941 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Task G2 $146,100 Lump Sum (Construction Administration) Task G2.1 $81,796 Lump Sum (LEED Design & Documentation) Task G2.2 $20,000 Lump Sum (Furniture) CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 56 110829 Task H2 $25,500 Lump Sum (Project Closeout and Record Documents) Subtotal $604,602 TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY Task D3 (Schematic Design & Design Build Bid Package) $12,688 Time & Materials to a maximum Task E3 (Construction Documents) $95,916 Lump Sum Task F3 (Bidding & Award) $9,440 Lump Sum Task G3 (Construction Administration) $24,415 Lump Sum Subtotal $142, 459 MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT Task D4 (Design Development) $488,307 Lump Sum Task E4 (Construction Documents) $892,814 Lump Sum Task E4.1 Library and Art Center Site Integration (Design and Construction Documents) $41,948 Lump Sum Task F4 (Bidding & Award) $90,749 Lump Sum Subtotal $1,513,818 TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY Task A5 & C5 (Site Analysis & Prelim Design Documents) $39,725 T&M to a maximum Task E5 (Construction Documents, Bidding & Award) $22,410 Lump Sum Subtotal $62,135 ART CENTER RENOVATION Task E4.2 Library and Art Center Site Integration (Design and Construction Documents) $41,948 Lump Sum Subtotal $41,948 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 57 110829 PARTICIPATION Task D6 Mitchell Park Library Main Library Art Center $75,000 82,000 7,000 Lump Sum Allowance Subtotal $164,000 Subtotal Basic Services $6,707,367 Reimbursable Expenses Allowance: Mitchell Park Library $160,000 Downtown Library $ 56,000 Temporary MP Library $ 13,500 Main Library $ 50,000 Temporary Main Library $ 19,322 Subtotal Reimbursable Expenses $ 298,822 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $7,006,189 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) Mitchell Park Library: $654,510 Downtown Library $56,000 Temporary MP Library $15,600 Main Library: $157,082 Temporary Main Library: $8,145 Art Center $4,895 Subtotal Additional Services $ 896,232 Amendment 4 Maximum Total Compensation $7,681,751 Added in Amendment 5 (MPLCC Add Services only) $220,670 Amendment 5 Maximum Total Compensation: $7,902,421 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 58 110829 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost not to exceed the total amount shown above. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are:  Outside service printing/copying of drawings and documents of any size.  In-house printing of CAD check sets and presentation drawings larger than 11”x 17”: $2.00 per square foot.  In-house black & white photocopying for draft and final reports and specifications: $.20 per page.  In-house color and grayscale printing and photocopying up to 11”x 17” for in-house, consultant or client use: $1.25 per page.  Software purchase and licensure on behalf of the client.  Postage, delivery and messenger service.  Photographic and digital imaging.  Architectural renderings and scale models.  Travel expenses  Subconsultant costs over and above those included in Basic Services.  Presentation boards.  Facilitation tools.  Workshop accessories.  Workshop facilitation materials All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $1,000.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 59 110829 and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. . Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Work required because the following conditions are not satisfied or are exceeded shall be considered as additional services. 1. If any of the following circumstances affect the CONSULTANT’s services for the Project, the CONSULTANT may be entitled to an appropriate adjustment in the CONSULTANT’s schedule and compensation: a. Change in the instructions or approvals given by the CITY that necessitate revisions in design drawings and which are not caused by CONSULTANT’s negligence; b. Enactment or revision of codes, laws, or regulations or official interpretations which necessitate significant changes to previously prepared drawings; c. Material delay caused by the CITY beyond CONSULTANT’s reasonable control; d. Significant change in the Project including, but not limited to, size, complexity, the Owner’s schedule or budget, or procurement method; e. Preparation for and attendance at a dispute resolution proceeding or a legal proceeding except where the CONSULTANT is a party thereto; f. Substantial change in the information contained in Exhibit A. Additional services may also include, meetings exceeding those outlined in Exhibit A as Basic Services. CONSULTANT Hourly Rates and Meeting Rates for Additional Services CONSULTANT’s hourly and meeting rate schedule shall be: Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc. Position Hourly Rate Principal $165 Associate $145 Project Manager $135 Professional I $125 Professional II $115 Professional III $105 Technical I $110 Technical II $100 Technical III $90 Technical IV $80 Project Support $70 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Focus Group $1,500 Meeting Type (Architect Only) Per Meeting Steering Committee Meetings $2,500 Boards & Commission Meetings $2,500 Community Meetings $4,000 City Council Meetings $2,500 Meeting Type (Architect + Per Meeting Steering Committee Meetings $3,000 Boards & Commission Meetings $3,000 Focus Group $2,000 Community Meetings $5,000 City Council Meetings $3,000 Page + Moris (Library Programmer) Position Hourly Rate Principal $200 Programming Assistant $75 Project Manager 135 AutoCAD Drafting $45 Project Assistant $35 BKF Engineering (Civil) Position Hourly Rate Engineering: Associate Project Manager Engineer IV Engineer I, II, III $162 $153-$158 $142 $101-$116- $132 Planning: Planner I, II, III $101-$116- $132 Surveying: Project Manager $153 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 60 110829 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 61 110829 Surveyor I, II, III, IV Survey Party Chief Survey Chainman Apprentice I, II, III, IV $101-116- 132-142 $127 $100 $53-73-83-93 Design & Drafting: Technician I, II, III Drafter I, II, III, IV Student Engineer/Surveyor $96-104-113 $75-83-91- 100 $53 Construction Administration: Senior Construction Administration Resident Engineer Field Engineer I, II, III $150 $110 $101-116-132 Services & Expenses: Project Assistant Clerical/Admin Assistant $65 $56 Rutherford & Chekene (Structural) Position Hourly Rate* Executive Principal $215 Principals $180-$190 Senior Engineers $140-$180 Engineers $115-$140 Designers $90-$115 CADD Specialists $85-$135 *rates subject to change on 7/1/09 Guttmann & Blaevoet (Mechanical) Position Hourly Rate Principal $210 Associate Principal $200 Associate $175 Senior Engineer $160 Engineer $130 CAD Manager $120 Designer $115 Drafter $105 Administrative $63 O’Mahony & Myer (Electrical + Lighting) Position Hourly Rate Founding Principal $225 Principals $190 Project Electrical Engineer $125 Project Lighting Designer $125 Electrical/Lighting Designer $110 CAD Supervisor $95 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT FIVE Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 62 110829 CAD Technician $85 Administrative $65 Davis Langdon (Cost Estimator) Position Hourly Rate Principals $250-$300 Associate Principals $200 Senior Associates $175 Associates $155 Cost Planners $85-$145 Clerical $65 Gates + Associates (Landscape) Position Hourly Rate President $165 Principal $110-$140 Senior Associates $95-$115 Irrigation Designer $100 Associates $80-$95 Draftspersons/Landscape Designer $65-$80 Clerical Staff $60-$70 Smith Fause McDonald (Technology/Acoustic) Position Hourly Rate Principals $165 Associates/Senior Engineers $135 Project Consultants/Engineers $120 Consultants/Engineers $95 Technicians/Drafting $75 Administrative $60 The above listed rates are adjusted annually. The next adjustment will be 1 January 2012 Agenda Library Bond Oversight Committee meeting Quarterly Meeting January 24, 2012 7th floor conference room 4:00 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. Committee Members: James Schmidt (Chair), Sandra Hirsh (Vice-Chair), John Melton, Dena Mossar, Alice Smith Staff: (Public Works) Phil Bobel, Karen Bengard, Debra Jacobs, (Library) Monique leConge; (Administrative Services) Joe Saccio, Tarun Narayan, (Auditor) Jim Pelletier, Ian Hagerman, (Attorney) Melissa Tronquet Others: (Turner Construction Management) Greg Smith ROLL CALL ORAL COMMUNICATIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES – October 25, 2011 AGENDA REVIEW & REVISIONS UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. DISCUSSION – Construction Progress (Greg Smith) a. Mitchell Park Library & Community Center b. Temporary Main Library 2. DISCUSSION – Design Progress (Karen Bengard) a. Main Library NEW BUSINESS 3. DISCUSSION – Outside Auditor’s Report (Ian Hagerman) 4. DISCUSSION – Timing of Main Library bond issuance 5. DISCUSSION -- Draft Financial Report Summary from Administrative Services (Tarun Narayan) a. Expenditures to date – summary spreadsheet 6. ACTION – Approval of Quarterly Report to Finance Committee 7. DISCUSSION– Mitchell Park Library & Community Center contingency issue (Phil Bobel) 8. Next Steps a. Next meeting: April 24, 2012 Meeting minutes Library Bond Oversight Committee meeting Quarterly Meeting October 25, 2011 Community Room, Downtown Library (*Note change in location) 4:00 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. Committee Members: Dena Mossar (Chair), James Schmidt (Vice-Chair), Alice Smith, Sandra Hirsh, John Melton Staff: (Public Works) Phil Bobel, Karen Bengard, Debra Jacobs, (Library) Monique leConge; (Administrative Services) Joe Saccio, Tarun Narayan, (Auditor) Michael Edmonds, Ian Hagerman, (Attorney) Melissa Tronquet Others: (Turner Construction Management) Greg Smith ROLL CALL 4:02 pm. Quorum. Absent: Smith ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES – July 26, 2011 Motion to delete 2e. Unanimous AGENDA REVIEW & REVISIONS No changes UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. DISCUSSION – Construction Progress (Greg Smith) a. Downtown Library -- Kudos on job well done. b. Mitchell Park Library & Community Center -- Trying to close in building, get site paved, mitigate (e) moisture due to early rains. Partnering will continue. Third party review is underway to analyze project challenges & consequences. Project will still come in less than bond measure cost estimate. Reserves will be likely approx $7 million for MPL & CC. Change orders are being driven by low bid environment. 2. DISCUSSION – Design Progress (Karen Bengard) a. Temporary Main Library -- Finding usual hidden conditions. b. Main Library – i. Community meeting last evening. Part of study effort to explore connectivity. Gardeners less resistive to idea ii. Parks & Rec Commission and LAC this week 1. HRB, ARB in November 2. Council in December iii. Main Library added 1.7 million for added scope of 10 items that went to Council on July 25. iv. Artist was at Community meeting and showed demonstration of art project. NEW BUSINESS 3. DISCUSSION -- Draft Financial Report Summary from Administrative Services (Tarun Narayan) a. Expenditures to date – summary spreadsheet i. Auditor will recommend that Staff costs be reimbursed by Bond Measure. ii. To Finance committee on Dec 6. at 600K in staff costs to date will be increasing iii. Report is positive in tone. Minor items were immediately corrected by staff. iv. Take up in January at LBOC v. Precedence for including staff costs? Have been included in Enterprise Fund capital bonds. 1. Not originally part of $76 M cost estimate 2. Other entities have charged staff costs vi. Previous Council direction was that staff costs shouldn’t be included. vii. New vendors. Creative Machines and Big D. 4. ACTION – Approval of Quarterly Report to Finance Committee a. Math error possible in columns 5 & 6. Needs to be corrected before committee can vote to approve it. 5. ACTION– Mitchell Park Library & Community Center contingency issue a. Discussion of MPL & CC contingency issue. b. Received report from staff on Council actions relative to MPL & CC contingency issue. 6. ACTION – Officer elections a. Chair - Jim Schmidt b. Vice Chair - Sandra Hirsh c. Elected unanimously. Effective after this meeting. 7. Next Steps a. Next meeting: January 24, 2012 b. Next Council memo in November. Adjourn 4:50 pm. Mitchell Park Library Approved Change Orders (CO's) and Outstanding Potential Change Orders (PCO's) $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,0000%67%100%Percent Completion Co s t Approved CO's Outstanding PCO's Flintco COR's 10% Contingency 20% Contingency Mitchell Park Construction Contract Summary of Cost Amounts (Council Authorized 20% Contingency shown in Red) $24.365M Base Contract $32M $1.622M Contingency Used $3.251M Remaining Contingency 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Engineer's Estimate Construction Contract $ i n M i l l i o n s $29.238M $25.987M $24.365M Contingency Funds Library Bond Fund Utilization Projections (January 2012) (Dollars in Millions) 4 (DT) 5.212 (DT) 4.418 (DT) $50M (Mitchell) $49.043M (Mitchell) $41.594M (Mitchell) $18M (Main) $18M (Main) $19.749M * (Main) 4 (Other) 3.745 (Other) 2.37 (Other) Cu r r e n t P r o j e c t i o n En g i n e e r ' s Es t i m a t e Bo n d E l e c t i o n Es t i m a t e Dollars (Millions) Downtown Library Mitchell Park Library Main Library Temporary Libraries & Bond Costs $68.13M $76M *The Main Library Projection was increased following Council approval on July 25, 2011 (Staff Report #1438) of approximately $1.7M of design amendments and future building improvements related to deferred maintenance, code upgrades and service enhancements. Palo Alto Library Projects Monthly Progress Report November / December 2011 Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Main Library Mitchell Park Main Entry Table of Contents Mitchell Park Library  Status Report  Management Summary  Action Items  Schedule Milestones Main Library  Status Report  Management Summary Library Closure Plan Financial Summary Data Date: 12/21/11 Mitchell Park Library & Community Center 3700 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto The new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center is a highly sustainable joint-use facility that will be a vibrant destination for civic, cultural, social, educational, and recreational activities. The new center, which will replace undersized and aged facilities, is made possible through Measure N and the strong partnership between the city and the community. During construction, temporary library and teen center facilities are available at the Cubberley Community Center. WEB CAM LINK: http://173.164.239.206/view/viewer_index.shtml November/December 2011 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION BEGAN: September 2010 SCHEDULED OPENING: Fall 2012 PROJECT TEAM OWNER: City of Palo Alto Public Works (650) 329-2295 ARCHITECT: Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc. South San Francisco, CA (650) 871-0709 GENERAL CONTRACTOR: Flintco Pacific, Inc. Folsom, CA (916) 351-5400 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Turner Construction Company San Jose, CA (408) 277-6370 FOR MORE INFORMATION www.cityofpaloalto.org/libraryprojects KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS Metal Roof Complete Traffic Signals Near Completion UPCOMING ACTIVITIES Exterior Sheathing/Waterproofing in Progress Library HVAC Units Lifted on Roof Library Roofing Started November 2011 Progress Photos Library Roofing Continues Library Waterproof Flashing Started New Bike Canopy Welding Library Intensive Green Room Continues Recycling December 2011 Porous Concrete Parking Stalls Curing Library Entrance and Children’s Area Library Sky Lights and HVAC Units Fall Protection Installation on Green Roofs Library Children’s Patio Area Library Standing Seam Roofing Library Exterior Waterproofing Progress Photos Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Management Summary November/December 2011 Noteworthy Accomplishments Wall Sheathing Building A = 60%, B = 75%, C = 75% Accel-E wall panels will be covered by the end of the year Waterproofing Exterior Walls in progress Silva cell installation complete Glazing permit issued and material deliveries started Major air conditioning equipment installed Current Project Challenges: Exterior wall dry-in is two months away Mock up for curtain wall still not complete Waterproofing expanded details need subcontractor coordination Occupancy separation plan check not complete Processing the high volume of change documentation and providing direction Settle tube steel and exterior wall framing changes Settle waterproofing and sheet metal changes Submittals impacting material delivery and inspection Key submittals (Photovoltaic, Solar, and Vehicle Chargers) need to be revised and approved No sheet metal shop drawings Safety Contractor has no lost time incidents in 92,750 hours of work to date with 3 incidents reported Public Safety is a priority outside the fence. No incidents reported to date Quality Control City & Special Inspectors had to reject exterior wall work several times Quality Control Observation Reports : 42 have been issued and 5 remain open Schedule: Design, detailing and fabrication of exterior wall components are affecting schedule Updates are not tied to baseline schedule. Maintain baseline as built for contract purposes City & TCCO are reviewing schedule extension requests from contractor Next Key Milestones: Exterior Wall fluid applied waterproofing is incomplete. Work resumes in January Building Dry In: Library 2/27/12 Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Action Items November/December 2011 Action Items Impact Responsible Due Complete design on remaining exterior wall framing components Tube Steel (G4) (at main entry) Curtain wall (Flintco) Cost impact and schedule impact. Materials ordered. G4 Flintco LATE ! ! URGENT Issue Expanded waterproofing details. Details done, coordinate & issue ASI. ASI 091.1 issued 10/25/11 Needed to insure watertight structure. G4 Flintco Goal8/31 Project 9/17 Deferred submittals to bldg dept Metal stud walls (@ CPA/WC3), Glazing, Accel-E wall (A & C Returned/Approved B @ CPA/WC3) No inspection or cover up until these are submitted. Still outstanding at end of September. Glazing due by Flintco Flintco CPA WC3 LATE ! ! URGENT Gas service installation by CPA Utilities to be installed 11/11/11. Authorized Flintco new location Need utility connections to start up MEP systems Costs may not be reflected in current budget report CPA Utilities PWE Turner 10/15 Negotiate settlement of productivity loss claims Claim will grow if not resolved. CPA PWE Flintco Turner 9/30 Expect 12/30 Revised occupancy separation plan approved. Complete drawings, issue ASI and process through plan check. ASI 104 issued 10/25/11, submitted to CPA/WC3 on 10/28/11 May result in rework and affect inspection. Authorized Flintco to proceed G4 CPA Bldg. WC3 9/30 agreed 10/21 ASI 104 Resolve extension of construction schedule currently showing October 5, 2012 completion. Contract completion is still April 29. Cannot accept schedule updates, settle further delays or agree on recovery plans. PWE Flintco Complete Purchasing Plan FF&E Purchasing schedule Monthly meetings Affects coordination of building construction work— particularly electrical and mechanical Turner G4 PWE 1/31 Update non-bondable budget. Coordinate new estimates with fund raising effort. Affects fund raising effort for non bond expenses G4 CPA Dan Noce Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Schedule Milestones November/December 2011 * Dates are from Flintco’s MP-16 November Update Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Schedule Milestones November/December 2011 Activity ID Bldg-A Bldg-B Bldg-C Pad Certification 10/27/10 10/27/10 10/27/10 Foundation Complete 12/28/11 1/16/11 1/7/11 Frame & Place Slab on Grade 2/11/11 5/6/11 5/3/11 Top out Structural Steel Frame 5/31/11 4/15/11 5/12/11 2nd Floor Poured 4/16/11 X X Roof Poured 5/31/11 6/24/11 6/21/11 Frame Ext Walls AEXT 4000 9/2/11 9/26/11 9/2/11 Building Dried In AEXT 5555 2/24/12 2/7/12 2/21/12 Frame Interior Walls AINT 1130 5/24/11 6/1/11 7/1/11 Insp - OK to hang drywall AINT 2090 3/12/12 3/7/12 3/7/12 Insp - MEP overhead AINT 1220 9/20/11 9/20/11 9/20/11 Casework Start Date AFIN 1090 5/21/12 3/9/12 5/11/12 Ceiling Complete AFIN 1120 6/8/12 5/3/12 5/15/12 Flooring Complete AFIN 1180 7/26/12 5/17/12 6/14/12 Permanent Power AINT 2120 4/12/12 5/10/12 5/24/12 Main Mechanical Online AEQU 1100 5/14/12 6/7/12 6/14/12 Elevator Complete AINT 2030 6/8/12 x x Parking Paving Complete STE 1200 10/14/12 10/14/12 10/14/12 Substantial Completion PCO 5555 10/14/12 10/14/12 10/14/12 Certificate of Occupancy PCO 5050 11/21/12 11/21/12 11/21/12 Building Air out and Commissioning complete AEQU 1080 10/31/12 7/6/12 8/12/12 Completed Completion Date Main Library 1213 Newell Road, Palo Alto The Palo Alto Main Library renovation and addition is in the final phase of design “Better Libraries for Palo Alto” projects, funded by the passage of Measure N by voters in 2008. The project incor- porates upgrades to the historic building’s structural, electrical and mechanical systems while preserving the integrity of architect Edwards Durell Stone’s iconic design. The new addition includes a program room and additional restrooms to extend the services of this heavily-used branch. The project targets LEED certification. Exterior View November/December 2011 2011 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION BEGAN: Winter 2012 SCHEDULED OPENING: Winter 2013 PROJECT TEAM OWNER: City of Palo Alto Public Works (650) 329-2295 ARCHITECT: Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc. South San Francisco, CA (650) 871-0709 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: TBD FOR MORE INFORMATION www.cityofpaloalto.org/libraryprojects KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS Design Development Complete Council Approved Scope Expansion UPCOMING ACTIVITIES Parking & Circulation Study Main Library Management Summary November/December 2011 Noteworthy Accomplishments Design development complete Council approved scope expansion Competed haz mat report Current Project Challenges: Final construction documents Bidding project Safety No activities Quality Control No activities Schedule: Construction begins Winter 2012 Next Key Milestones: Publish 100% design development estimate Constructability review of 60% construction documents Parking & circulation study Closure Plan November/December 2011 FA L L WI N T E R Main Library - Opening to the Public in Winter 2013 20 1 3 20 1 4 Mitchell Park Library & Community Center - Opening to the Public in the Fall 2012 Main Library Closes for construction Mitchell Park Library and Community Center construction started, College Terrace Library re-opened Downtown Library re-opened 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 FA L L FA L L WI N T E R SP R I N G SP R I N G SU M M E R SU M M E R FA L L WI N T E R SP R I N G SU M M E R WI N T E R Financial Summary November/December 2011 BUDGET COSTS MEASURE N 2008 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE PROJECTED RESERVES 09010 Cubberley Temporary Library 645,000 619,687 25,313 09005 Downtown Library 4,000,000 5,212,000 4,418,111 793,889 09006 Mitchell Park Library & C.C. 50,000,000 49,043,000 41,593,618 7,449,382 11000 Main Library 18,000,000 18,000,000 19,748,500 -1,748,500 11010 Art Center Temporary Library 500,000 500,000 0 Bonding and Financing Costs 4,000,000 2,600,000 1,250,000 1,350,000 BONDED AMOUNT 76,000,000 76,000,000 68,129,916 7,870,084 - - -