HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-14 City Council Agenda PacketBIG CREEK ELEMENTARY
REVISED
Call to Order 6:00 P.M.
1. Guided Tour of Cubberley Community Center
Oral Communications 7:00 P.M.
Agenda Items
2. Joint Study Session of the Palo Alto City Council and the Palo Alto Unified
School District Board of Education: Presentation and Discussion of Final
Report of the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee, Including
Recommendations Regarding: (a) the Cubberley Community Center
Property; (b) Related Management, Finance, Contract and Property
Matters; and (c) Strategies for Next Steps.
Adjournment
Special Joint Study Session
Thursday, March 14, 2013 @ 6:00 P.M.
Cubberley Community Center Theatre
4000 Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94303
Palo Alto City Council
and
Palo Alto Unified School District
Board of Education
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
Volume 1
Executive Summary
An opportunity CCAC Recommendations
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
VOLUME I
Contents
Executive Summary
An Opportunity &
CCAC Recommendations
CCAC REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cubberley. One of the most critical and important issues facing the Palo Alto
community ... and at the same time one of the greatest opportunities.
Originally opened as a high school in the 1950’s, Cubberley was closed due to decreasing
enrollment in 1979. Thanks to visionary collaboration between the City and the School
District, the vacant high school was replaced by a community center that has grown in
use and importance over the years, filling a key and central role in community life. Now
Cubberley is again at a critical crossroads. The School District believes that Cubberley will
be needed again as a high school, and this is a community where education has a very high
priority. At the same time, however, our growing and changing population cannot afford
to give up valued and essential community center services, and there are no available
comparable locations. Without Cubberley, many of these services could be lost to the
community. Based on extensive research and deliberation, this Committee believes that
a modern, more efficient site design is feasible, and with such design the site can support
both uses — as it must. We strongly recommend taking steps now to prepare for eventual
joint use of the site to provide both the school and community programming that are key
to our quality of life in Palo Alto.
Although the Cubberley Community Center currently occupies the entire 35-acre site,
the City only owns 8 acres; the remaining 27 acres are owned by School District, and
leased to the City. Together, this 35-acre site is the last major plot of publicly owned land
in the City proper, and its long term future use is critical to both community services and
education. With the lease between the City and the School District expiring at the end of
2014, a near-term decision must be made about renewal — this decision will set the stage
for choices about the long-term future and use of the site.
VOLUME 1 ... page i
‘
’
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry
I could not travel both ...... Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I — I took the one less
traveled by, And that has made all the difference.
— Robert Frost
This report of the CCAC — the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee — is the
culmination of nine months of intense and dedicated effort by a diverse and representative
committee of Palo Alto citizens seeking a win/win solution for the City and the School
District. Our report is presented to both bodies with the strongest of recommendations
that the City and School District work cooperatively to the end of achieving that win/
win outcome by planning for phased development to support co-location at Cubberley
for the common good. A true synergy between both bodies working together could lead
to opportunites not otherwise available to either. We recognize that this will not be easy,
and that much work remains to be done, but the CCAC believes that this is a special
opportunity for the community to come together and seize the opportunity to create a
positive outcome that will create a better future for Palo Alto.
The recommendations for the future of the Cubberley site that resulted from the CCAC
process and effort are provided with a summary discussion in the Recommendations
section of Volume 1 of this report. These recommendations reflect our basic belief
that the community center function of Cubberley must be preserved. Given the School
District’s expected need for a high school on the site at some future time, the CCAC
recommends that that future be a shared City / School District use. A necessary first
step toward achieving this end is for the City and School District to renew the Cubberley
lease. But the CCAC unanimously agrees that such a renewal should be tied to a mutual
commitment to use the renewal period to make concrete plans for long term sharing of
the site. The CCAC believes that this shared use goal can be achieved to the betterment of
the entire community — if the City and the School District work cooperatively together
with the common goal of a shared use that will serve both the educational and community
services of future generations of Palo Altans.
This CCAC report is presented in four volumes. Volume 1 is a summary of the
opportunity that Cubberley presents and of our recommendations for how to take
advantage of that opportunity to create a positive reality for the future that will serve
both community and educational needs. Volume 2 presents the reports of our four hard-
working subcommittees: School Needs, Community Needs, Facilities, and Finance. The
School and Community Needs reports underscore the great importance of both areas to
community expectations and to the quality of life in Palo Alto, and include consideration
of demographics. The Facilities report presents some exciting concepts about how the
site might be used in a far more efficient and productive way to meet the needs of the
community. The Finance report considers a number of financial issues associated with
Cubberley’s long-term future, ranging from elements associated with the lease to funding
options looking to the future. In considering the idea of a shared use of the site, the
VOLUME 1 ... page ii
VOLUME 1 ... page iii
subcommittee work looked into what some other communities have done or are doing
to achieve a similar goal. Volume 3 provides a wealth of background information, including
the formation of the CCAC and a record of our meetings. Volume 4 is comprised of
appendices including: CCAC minutes, master planning documents, City and School District
financial outlook and budgetary information, joint use concepts, a CCAC briefing book,
and tenant-related information.
A very considerable community effort has been the basis for this report. The CCAC
hopes that this provides a solid basis for the near-term decisions that must be made by the
City and the School District ... and a strong beginning for a longer-term community effort
with the City and the School District working closely and cooperatively together with
the common goal of making the best and most complete future use possible for the very
special community treasure that Cubberley has become.
CCAC REPORT — VOLUME 1
Cubberley. An opportunity so important, so significant, and so far-reaching that it will
profoundly impact future generations of the greater Palo Alto community. An opportunity
so complex that its resolution will require leadership from both elected officials and
involved members of the community. Achieving a positive resolution to an issue of this
magnitude and import truly is a great opportunity. And, Palo Alto is a community with
a history marked by problems that were faced and opportunities seized and solutions
achieved that we benefit greatly from today.
The last time Cubberley’s future was at risk, the City and School District forged a visionary
partnership to serve the Palo Alto community by protecting the site and putting it to valued
use that has endured for over 20 years. Today’s circumstances are putting that partnership
to the test. This first volume of the CCAC report to the community presents a statement
of the opportunity that Cubberley presents together with our recommendations for
actions that we believe could lead to constructive solutions that will be our generation’s
contribution to Palo Alto’s future greatness.
An opportunity
CCAC is the acronym for Cubberley Community Advisory Committee, but it could as
easily be Community Conundrum About Cubberley. Because the decisions that must be made
by the Palo Alto City Council and the Palo Alto Unified School District about Cubberley
and which will determine its future present a complex and very difficult conundrum.
The fundamental problem faced by the community can be summarized as this: Cubberley is a
former high school which the School District thinks will be needed again as a high school at some
undetermined time in the future — at the same time, since its closure as a high school, Cubberley
has been transformed into a vibrant and irreplaceable community center, but in structures that
were not designed to meet the facilities needs of today and which will require substantial additional
investment to preserve. With the future of this last community asset of its kind under the cloud of
these potential conflicting needs, a decision is pending about whether or not the City and School
District should renew the lease, which has raised the question: can both of these community needs
VOLUME 1 ... page 1
‘’Before you attempt a solution, you
must first define the problem.
—Prof. Gene Webb, Stanford Business School
be successfully served or will one advance at the expense of the other? Is a win / win outcome
possible? Clearly, the City and the School District need to work together to achieve a win / win.
This is the challenge which the community faces and which this CCAC report will attempt to
address.
The declared position of the School District is that they would like to keep the option
open to use all 35 acres of the site for a high school at some yet to be determined future
date. (It should be noted that this position was taken early on, without the context of site
design options.) This requirement is not absolute, nor is the date that it could be absolute
(estimates range from 15 to 25 years in the future), but current projections show increasing
enrollment that will exceed the built-out capacities of the two existing high schools.
A unique community property.
Can we transform a problem into an opportunity?
Cubberley comprises 35 acres ... 27 owned by the School District and 8 owned by the
City. The owners are, of course, the citizens of our community. This 35 acres is the last
large block of publicly owned land in the city proper. Cubberley’s unique, last-of-its-kind
quality is that its location is in the core of the city with all the advantages of convenience,
accessibility, and ease of meeting service and community needs that its location provides.
The City and the School District are faced with a critical decision that must be made by
the end of 2013 ... a decision that will significantly impact the future of this property and
how it serves the citizens who own it. And that decision is the lease arrangement between
the City and the School District that is up for renewal. Should this lease be renewed and
if so under what arrangements for the amount of payment and conditions of use? And,
what must be done during a renewal period to prepare for the best use of the site into
the future?
Many complex and daunting issues impact this decision and will be impacted by it. It is
the equivalent of attempting to solve a mathematical equation with conflicting boundary
conditions. But solve it we must!
The dimensions of the problem that the City and School District must resolve include
these critical elements:
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
VOLUME 1 ... page 2
l Potential use of the entire site for a future high school. The position of
the School District is that they will eventually need all 35 acres. This require-
ment is not absolute, nor is the date that it could be absolute (estimates roughly
range from 15 to 25 years in the future).
l Community services at Cubberley would be displaced and lost if all
35 acres were to be returned to use as a high school. The community
services at Cubberley have grown to become an essential and vital component
of, and major contributor to, Palo Alto’s highly regarded quality of life, and if
the Cubberley facilities were not to be available many of these services would
be lost forever to the community. Even if the City retains its claim on 8 acres,
services would have to be consolidated into a much smaller footprint and
facilities would have to be redesigned.
l ABAG pressures for expanding housing in Palo Alto exacerbate the
need for additional school and community services. To the extent that
the ABAG housing recommendations for Palo Alto are accommodated, the
resultant significant population increase will: (a) make the need for a full high
school at Cubberley much more likely, while (b) also creating a greater
demand for scarce public services which will be even more scarce if the
community center is displaced by the high school use and thus, as noted
above, lost to the community.
l The financial environment today is very different from when the
applicable leases were written. Both the City and School District financial
environments today are very different from when the applicable leases were
written and the funds for the leases were provided by the Utility Users Tax
passed by the voters and incorporated in the City budget. The Cubberley
lease income continues to be an important revenue stream for the School
District, while the City has a structural deficit and sizable infrastructure and
other needs — all with the Utility Tax income flattening.
l Extant structures are 57 years old and deteriorating. Whichever the
future use or uses, there is already a need for investment in the physical plant
at Cubberley ... a need that will continue to grow the longer decisions regarding
its future are delayed.
l The layout of the current structures is a very inefficient use of the
property. With land for public uses far more expensive and much less
available than when Cubberley was built, any future use will require much
more efficient facility design and land use.
VOLUME 1 ... page 3
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
l The City and the School District have different planning horizons.
Whichever the future use or uses, there is already a strong need for investment
in the physical plant at Cubberley ... a need that will continue to grow the longer
decisions regarding its future are delayed. Accordingly, planning by both the
City and School District needs to start now — and be long term. Decisions
must be made about whether to continue investing in aging and costly facilities
or instead to invest in a new, more efficient design that can serve the whole
community well into the future. If the School District cannot commit to a future
community center presence on the site, alternate locations will have to be
purchased. Moreover, the School District would have to pay to reclaim the
8 acres owned by the City.
l ‘Kicking the can down the road’ will have severe consequences.
The issues associated with Cubberley are such that decisions delayed will
inevitably lead to even more difficult problems in the future. In the absence
of a solution to the Cubberley question, the property will inevitably continue
to deteriorate, its use will become increasingly inefficient, and options for
addressing the issue of its long-term use will be further constrained.
l Availability of alternative parcels will diminish over time. Development
pressures from growth-driven demand will generate other uses for the few
parcels that might now be available for community services or education.
And, because the rapid pace of development could leave the community with
few if any options in the relatively near future, the time line for decisions is
sooner rather than later.
l Which services should be retained, expanded, or eliminated? Currently
available data on the supply and demand for Palo Alto community services and
programs are insufficient to inform a building program or to determine which
should have a future at Cubberley and with what space requirements.
l A cooperative, community-wide effort is essential to achieving
a successful outcome. The future of Cubberley is a community issue, and
its successful resolution will require the City and the School District to
recognize that they both serve essentially the same community, which is an
implicit mandate to work together to achieve a positive solution for all.
Planning for Cubberley’s future is significantly complicated by the fact that the School
District cannot know for certain now what its plans are for a high school use of the
VOLUME 1 ... page 4
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
Cubberley site. It could be for a full high school comparable to Paly and Gunn ... or for
some kind of specialized high school ... or, if the population levels off instead of growing as
currently projected, not used for a high school at all. Moreover, the time line for the School
District knowing this ultimate need can only be characterized as some future time. This
uncertainty is surely the basis for the School District’s desire to preserve their potential
access to the entire 35 acres.
The Community Needs Subcommittee Report (Volume 2) reviews the community
services now at Cubberley, and for each includes a brief statement under the heading “If
Cubberley were not available.” Taken together, these statements inform us that, due to the
lack of alternative and / or affordable locations in Palo Alto, many of these services would
be lost to the community or even, literally, be forced to completely shut down. Moreover,
the longer we wait to determine their future at Cubberley, the fewer alternatives there will
be for relocation.
The ABAG mandate, to the degree that it becomes a reality, is the most significant factor
that will influence the future of Cubberley. In a city that many feel is already at capacity,
thousands of new housing units would significantly increase the pressure for expanded
school facilities ... and at the same time the demand for services of the kinds offered at
Cubberley. And, today, we do not know either the extent to which this mandate will be
followed or the time line if it is. All of which make the decisions that must be made even
more difficult.
With parts of Cubberley dating back almost 60 years, it is not surprising that many of the
structures are deteriorating and in real need of maintenance and upgrading. An uncertain
future complicates the decisions to make needed investments in the physical plant, and the
longer these decisions are delayed the more expensive and difficult they will become. The
fact that the layout of the structures on the property is not efficient further complicates
these decisions in the sense that it might make far more functional and financial sense to
scrape and rebuild in a way that is a more efficient and effective use of the site.
Planning for a future high school, community center, or shared use should begin now.
Because completing any of those facilities has a planning horizon of 15 or 20 years or more,
some construction can start sooner. Phased development would allow some of the site to
be utilized during construction.
“Kicking the can down the road” is clearly not a solution. In fact, it could have the
VOLUME 1 ... page 5
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
consequence of eliminating possible solutions and exacerbating the existing problems. For
example, if a future high school use were to result in community services being displaced,
the options for relocating those service in the Palo Alto community will be fewer ... or even
non existent ... the longer it takes the community to come to grips with how Cubberley
will be used in the future. In truth, even today there are very few such options, and state
requirements presented via ABAG significantly impact those that are available. Another
possible consequence would be to provide support for those who believe that the answer
for Cubberley would be for the City to keep its 8 acres and develop that part of the site
for community use, leaving the future of the other 27 acres to the School District to
determine. This could, of course, proscribe many productive joint use outcomes together
with efficiencies that could be gained through planning around compatible uses.
And so, to find a solution that is to the benefit of all of the owners of the site, which is to
say the entire community, the first problem that must be solved is to find a way for the City
and School District to work cooperatively, in unison and partnership, on the same time line,
and with a common goal.
These and related issues have been reviewed and discussed in great deal by the four CCAC
subcommittees:
l School needs subcommittee ... Chaired by former Mayor Bern Beecham
l Community needs subcommittee ... Chaired by former School District
President Diane Reklis
l Facilities subcommittee ... Chaired by Parks and Recreation Commission
Vice Chair Jennifer Hetterly
l Finance subcommittee ... Chaired by former Mayor Lanie Wheeler
Each of these subcommittees did a prodigious amount of work and each did an excellent
job of studying and understanding the issues and bringing recommendations forward for
the full CCAC to discuss and act upon. Their reports are collected in Volume 2 of this CCAC
Report, and each is an absolute must read.
It was unanimously agreed that the CCAC lacked the time, resources, and expertise to
perform the comprehensive needs assessment required to make detailed recommendations
about programming for school or community use. Instead, this report, informed by the
thoughtful deliberations of a diverse group of community and school representatives,
analyzes the challenges and opportunities Cubberley represents and makes specific
recommendations about the time line and policy priorities that should drive the development
of a plan for Cubberley’s future.
VOLUME 1 ... page 6
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
——————
Clearly, the question “what to do about the future of Cubberley” is one that needs to be
answered sooner rather than later, and equally clearly that answer needs to come from a
united community working together in common purpose to the benefit of all.
CCAC Recommendations
The CCAC recommendations are of two kinds: (1) specific near term
decisions that are required as essential components of the long term solution which will
serve the best interests of the entire community, and (2) a number of decisions which we
have identified as critical steps down a path which will enable the community to ultimately
achieve a solution. As noted above, the need is great, the problem is complex, and an
ultimate win / win solution will require the best efforts of a united community working
together in common purpose.
The CCAC researched and discussed the issues associated with Cubberley’s future at
great length and in considerable depth. The extensive work of the four subcommittees is
reported in great detail in Volume 2 of this report. These subcommittee reports contain
and provide a great deal of information essential to understanding the issues and how those
issue might be resolved:
l School needs subcommittee ... working closely with the School District, the
subcommittee’s report provides quantitative data and educational needs infor-
mation that are the basis for the School District’s projections of their future
requirements that Cubberley will be be needed to meet.
l Community needs subcommittee ... the wide range of community
services for which Cubberley is home are outlined, together with the possible
fate of these services if Cubberley were not available. Their report demon-
strates the needs that Cubberley fills for the community. The Community
Needs Subcommittee is optimistic that the Cubberley site is large enough that a
more efficient layout of buildings could create both the square footage currently
VOLUME 1 ... page 7
CCAC Report — An Opportunity
‘’... if it can be thought, it can be done,
a problem can be overcome.
— E. A. Bucchianeri
being used by community services and also high school buildings of similar square
footage as Gunn or Paly. However, future shared use might not be able to
accommodate all the services that are now served by Cubberley, particularly
field sports including softball and soccer. The difficult problem of prioritization
is one issue that we believe should and could be addressed by the planning
process with professional help. Their report makes it very clear that currently
available information about community services supply and demand is
insufficient to enable long term prioritization of services and programs or to
inform a future building plan.
l Facilities subcommittee ... the comprehensive and creative report of this
subcommittee analyzes the inefficiencies of the existing facility’s land use,
building plan, energy use, and maintenance costs. The report shows how
more efficient, modern building design could substantially improve efficiencies
in all of these categories—making room for a 21st century facility to meet
21st century educational and community needs at Cubberley. Further, it
shows that providing a co-located or shared facility eliminates the burdensome
costs of purchasing land to build replacement community service facilities.
l Finance subcommittee ... the financial and governance issues surrounding
the potential future uses of Cubberley were studied by this subcommittee.
With so many open questions about the future of Cubberley, no financing
recommendations were made, The studies of this issue, which includes
information from other Jurisdictions in somewhat similar situations provide a
beginning for the recommended joint planning efforts to follow.
The work of the subcommittees was reviewed and discussed by the full CCAC, and from
those discussions the following broad major conclusions and recommendations emerged.
Recognize that the Community Center
function of Cubberley must be preserved
As clearly demonstrated by the work of the Community Needs Subcommittee, and
presented in Volume 2, the Cubberley Community has developed over the years as a vital
and essentially irreplaceable home for a wide range of community services. The community
clearly needs — and wants — most of these services. As reported by the Subcommittee,
if displaced from Cubberley, many would be lost to the community.
VOLUME 1 ... page 8
CCAC Report — Recommendations
At the same time, the community also strongly supports education, which led the CCAC
to the inescapable conclusion that we must ....
Develop a shared community / school use
The District’s current formal position on Cubberley is to preserve the possibility of
reestablishing a high school on the site, potentially using all 35 acres, at some point in the
future if needed to accommodate growth in the student population. Recognizing the inherent
conflict between this School District need and the City’s need to maintain to the greatest
degree possible the community service functions of Cubberley, and with the understanding
that options for relocating these services are few and shrinking, the subcommittees looked
into shared use models in other communities (see Finance Subcommittee Report) and into
ways to make more efficient use of the Cubberley site (see Facilities Subcommittee Report).
As described in Volume 2 and attachments to this report, shared use models do exist,
and we came to the conclusion that this was a realistic goal. The Facilities Subcommittee
analysis demonstrates that with a more efficient design of the site, over nine acres of usable
space could be recaptured for structures and/or playing fields without using multi-story
buildings. The promise of realizing such space efficiencies through redesign, even with
only single story structures, underscores the shared use potential of the site (See Facilities
Subcommittee Report, pages 10-13, and Appendix B). The first step toward developing a
shared use future for Cubberley is to ...
Renew the lease
The strongly held view of the CCAC is that the School District and the City should renew
the lease. We recognize that the terms and conditions for the new lease will be the
product of negotiation, but the fact of its renewal will accomplish two critical immediate
needs: (1) allow Cubberley to continue to provide the many community services for which
it is now home in the short term, and (2) provide a defined period of time for the City
and School District to do the planning needed to achieve a positive, long-term solution.
As noted below, there was considerable discussion about whether the term of the lease
should be five years or ten years, and what specific conditions the new lease would have
to include to ensure that the City and School District ...
Use the period of the lease renewal
to develop a long range shared use plan, including
professional support and expertise.
The CCAC believes that time is truly of the essence relative to the need to develop a
VOLUME 1 ... page 9
CCAC Report — Recommendations
long term plan for the future of Cubberley, and accordingly that the first years of the
renegotiated lease be used to develop a meaningful, substantive, and achievable long range
plan for the shared use of the Cubberley facilities. Development of such a plan, sooner
rather than later, will give the community the opportunity to address and resolve a myriad
of complex and interconnected issues, including: upgrading existing facilities vs. renovation,
the extent and location of any redevelopment, determining the most efficient arrangement
and location of the City and School District 8 acre and 27 acre components of the site,
development of concepts for maximizing the useful acreage by considering elements like
multi-story buildings and underground parking, a detailed determination and projection of
community needs for both services and education, determination of neighborhood traffic
and other impacts of various use and development alternatives, and more — all with the
assistance of professional experts who can bring wide experience with and understanding
of these and related issues. It is clear that none of this can be achieved unless we ...
Establish a cooperative working relationship
between the City and School District to determine
the future of Cubberley
There has rarely been a local issue where it was more important for the City and the
School District to work cooperatively together toward a common solution. A shared
future use of the Cubberley facility presents significant challenges — and opportunities
— and a successful outcome really will require a joint effort toward and commitment to
achieving that success. There are many issues that are unlikely to be resolved if addressed
by either the City or School District acting alone, including: financing of on-going operations,
maintenance, planning studies, any redevelopment, and long-term operations; development
of a functional layout and determination of uses that could effectively and efficiently serve a
shared use future; creation of a management structure for joint use operation; and a wide
range of decisions both near and longer term.
——————
CCAC Recommendations
Over the course of our work and deliberations, the CCAC took a number of specific votes
on various propositions raised by the subcommittees and individual members. These votes
are noted below in, with one exception, approximate chronological order. The exception
was the question about the term of the lease, which was raised at more than one meeting,
and which always resulted in a split vote.
VOLUME 1 ... page 10
CCAC Report — Recommendations
Term of the lease renewal
While most CCAC votes on the issues considered were unanimous or close to unanimous,
the question of what term to recommend for the new lease always resulted in a roughly
evenly divided vote. The arguments for a shorter (5 year) lease typically revolved around
the need to create pressure to get the long term planning done in a timely manner ... it
was felt that a shorter lease would have the effect of “putting the collective feet of the City
and School District in the fire” with some advocating completion and approval of such a
long term plan as a condition for automatic extension of the lease beyond 5 years. Those
who supported a longer term (10 year) lease suggested that this approach would provide
needed stability for tenants, including making rental of available space (for example, when
Foothill College moves out) more easily accomplished and incentivize tenants to pay for
improvements to their space or to a maintenance fund; another argument for a 10 year
lease was the suggestion that it would likely be 10 years or more before major renovations
of the site would be undertaken. The pros and cons of these different lease periods should
be carefully considered as the City and School District negotiate the lease extension which,
regardless of period, we strongly believe should be accomplished. For example, a longer
lease term between the City and School District allows the City to enter into longer term
leases with their tenants, possibly producing higher rental rates.
The following questions and issues were put to a vote of the full CCAC, and are presented
as they were drafted during CCAC discussions and need to be considered in the context of
the discussions at the time (as presented in fuller detail later). The formal recommendations
are:
VOLUME 1 ... page 11
CCAC Report — Recommendations
A
B
It is the strong recommendation of the CCAC that the entire
Cubberley site become a joint / shared City / School District use facility.
Passed 17-0-0
The CCAC’s preferred option is, not just a shared parcel, but rather a truly
integrated use of the site
The City and School District should renegotiate a lease extension
option with additional conditions.
Passed 17-0-0
The conditions of the lease extension should reflect the changed circumstances
and economics since the original leases were signed.
VOLUME 1 ... page 12
CCAC Report — Recommendations
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
The current Covenant Not To Develop should be
removed from a Cubberley lease extension.
Passed 18-0-0
This recommendation should not be understood to imply deleting the dollars
associated with the covenant.
Child care should continue to be provided at school sites
and is important to the community.
Passed 18-0-0
This recommendation pertains to the overall existing Lease, not development of
the Cubberley site. The CCAC wanted to emphasize the importance of continuing
the arrangements for child care at school sites that currently exists.
Operating costs should not be shared in a five year window.
Passed 19-0-0
During the first five year lease period, all operations on site will be the City’s.
Facility upgrades beyond routine maintenance
should be negotiated.
Passed 19-0-0
Currently the City pays for routine maintenance as determined necessary by the
City. If the School District or City wants more extensive maintenance done, they
should discuss sharing the costs.
Capital expenses in the first five years of the lease
extension should be shared.
Passed 15-2-1
A site master plan needs to be developed in the first
five years of any lease extension.
Passed 18-0-0
In the first five years of any lease extension, there should be a
Community Needs Assessment developed with professional support.
Passed 17-0-1
J
K
L
CCAC Report — Recommendations
M
N
O
As a condition of any lease extension or renewal, an
MOU shall be developed within one year of its execution that
determines how a Community Needs Assessment and Master Plan
will be developed in the next five years.
Passed 19-0-0
The City and the School District shall explore the possibility of
expanding City / School District joint-use agreement models including
the expansion of joint-use at City and School District facilities.
Passed 20-0-0
Discussed in detail, it was agreed that it would be important for the City and
School District to explore this issue for the benefit of our community, but was not
suggested to be a part of the lease extension.
As a condition of any lease extension or renewal, within one
year of its execution near-term improvements to Cubberley shall be
identified that can serve most, if not all, current and potential
site uses (example: restrooms for playing fields).
Passed 20-0-0
Any new leasing of the space should be done in the context of
the MOU, Community Needs Assessment, and revised Master Plan
Passed 20-0-0
The City and School District should further investigate alternative
forms of governance and determine a governance structure
for the joint use of Cubberley.
Passed 14-0-0
A long-term master plan for Cubberley should not be a
part of a 2014 ballot measure.
Passed 20-0-0
It was generally agreed that the funding of site improvements at Cubberley is not
compatible with a 2014 bond measure for reasons of time constraints and general
uncertainties surrounding the project.
VOLUME 1 ... page 13
P
CCAC Report — Recommendations
VOLUME 1 ... page 14
Q
Phased construction should occur consistent with the
MOU and Master Plan to minimize disruption to existing users.
Passed 11-0-1
The City should not relinquish ownership of its 8 acres.
Passed 13-4-0
While the School District would like flexibility to use the full 35 acre site, the
CCAC’s work has demonstrated: (1) valued current use and likely increasing
need for community center space; (2) that the purchase of alternate space is cost
prohibitive and unlikely to enjoy the benefits of prime location and easy access
by walking, bicycling, or transit; (3) successful examples of shared use in other
communities and a variety of options for funding and governing a shared site; and
(4) the feasibility of accommodating community center needs while still providing
more, and more highly functional, space for school use than the entire current 35-
acre facility offers.Planning for co-location and joint use of the whole site offers
great potential for a win-win solution. Certainty about a long term City presence
on the site facilitates that planning.
——————
Please see Volume 3 for further insight to, and understanding of, these CCAC
recommendations as provided by the minutes of our discussions, which understanding will,
we believe, contribute to flexibility in the design and development of future phases.
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
Volume 2
CCAC Subcommittee Reports
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
VOLUME 2
Subcommittee Reports
Contents
School Needs Subcommittee Report
Subcommittee Report
Community Needs Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary ... Subcommittee Report
Facilities Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary ... Subcommittee Report
Finance Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary ... Subcommittee Report
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Volume 2
School Needs Subcommittee Report
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
School Needs Subcommittee Report
March 2013
Bern Beecham, Claire Kirner, John Markevitch, Pam Radin, Greg Tanaka, Tracy Stevens
with help from Ann Dunkin, Robert Golton
2
School Needs Report
Background
In September, 2012, PAUSD adopted the following as its policy for the Cubberley site:
Preservation of the option to reopen Cubberley sometime in the future for maximal usage
for educational purposes. Enrollment has grown in PAUSD at somewhat more than two
percent per year since 1990 and there is no end of this growth in sight. Using an
extrapolation of this growth out to 2030, there will be 700 more high school students than
the 4600 currently planned as build out capacity. A further extrapolation yields more
growth.
In the immediate term, PAUSD projects to modestly exceed middle school capacity for several years
starting in 2016 and is in negotiations for expansion at Terman Middle School. The timing for the
outcome of these negotiations is unknown. If negotiations should be unsuccessful, PAUSD may be in
the position of having to consider Cubberley for some middle school requirements although other
district options include use of modulars.
Aside from this possibility, PAUSD's intent is to reserve Cubberley for its third high school site. The
primary questions surrounding this need are not if but when and how much.
By policy, PAUSD's Paly and Gunn high school campuses each will have a capacity of 2300 students.
Their sites are roughly equal at 44.2 and 49.7 acres respectively.
PAUSD has indicated they desire the ability to build a standard high school at Cubberley using the entire
35 acre site.
Demographics for High School
PAUSD retained Decision Insite to analyze future student populations. The following information is
from their November 20, 2012 report and represents their moderate projections. The analysis projects
high school student demand will peak in 2020 at 4553 students, just shy of the 4600 capacity for
PAUSD's two existing high schools and drops slightly in the final two years of their planning horizon.
Note that middle school demand shown below rises again in 2022, implying future high school growth.
3
The greatest influence and uncertainty on Palo Alto demographic projections is growth in housing stock.
Below are the housing projects used in the student growth projections. Per Decision Insite, these
housing projects form the comprehensive list of projects that have received some form of planning
approval by the City.
The absence of housing projects in the outer years is highly uncertain and reflects the limited planning
horizon for developers. Decision Insite did not make independent estimates beyond what has been
included in City's planning process. It nonetheless may be reasonable to assume a baseline growth of at
least 50 units per year rather than zero even though locations zoned for additional multifamily housing
in Palo Alto are quite limited at this time.
ABAG Requirements
The Association of Bay Area Governments, working to implement State housing requirements, may
dramatically change Palo Alto's housing growth potential. For 2013-2017 in the above Decision Insite
projections, growth averages 128 units/year. Over the past 14 years, Palo Alto has averaged about 200
units per year, arguably in boom times.
ABAG is proposing that Palo Alto provide zoning for a housing increase of 2,149 units during the eight
year period 2014-2022, an average of 272 units per year. Note that ABAG does not require actual
housing to be built, only that the City provide appropriate zoning.
Decision Insite uses comparable existing Palo Alto housing developments to formulate their estimates of
student demand generated by the above projected housing. Based on developer and zoning design
goals, multifamily housing may have lower initial per unit student yield than single family housing.
4
It should be noted that while ABAG proposes a large increase in housing for the City, PAUSD's
boundaries are not entirely conterminous with the City. Most significantly, PAUSD includes Stanford
University lands (as well as small portions of Los Altos Hills and Portola Valley). While ABAG does not
require housing growth on the non-Palo Alto lands of the University, the University nonetheless has
significant housing plans under its Santa Clara County General Use Permit. To the degree that
University housing is designed for students, including graduate and post-doc, PAUSD high school yield
should be lower than from City housing units. Decision Insite's projections include Stanford's student
and resident housing.
Palo Alto Premium
Aside from ABAG requirements, there is a slow, moderate wave of single family housing built after
WW2, primarily in South Palo Alto, that continues to turn over for the first time. As these "empty
nests" turn over, new owners willing to pay a Palo Alto premium (earlier estimated at $400,000 per
unit) are likely to do so specifically because they have children they wish to send to PAUSD schools,
resulting in a somewhat higher student yield from otherwise normal single family housing turnover.
The self selection of residents moving in because of PAUSD schools' reputation may have an additional
impact on long term yield in multifamily housing. Families, especially those that rent, may move out of
Palo Alto sooner than otherwise to reduce their housing expense after their children finish school,
thereby allowing new families to move in.
Whatever the ABAG outcome, an ongoing increase in enrollment is all but a certainty assuming a stable
economy and continued success at PAUSD schools. In spite of the specificity of Decision Insite's
projections, PAUSD's experience is that projections more than a few years out are highly uncertain.
For planning purposes, PAUSD's working assumption is 1.8% long term growth at the high school level.
As shown below, a growth rate of between 1.5% and 2.5% beyond the projected 2018 high school
enrollment easily leads to meeting/exceeding capacity in the early to mid '20's.
PAUSD options and timeframe
What options, other than Cubberley, are available for PAUSD when capacity is reached for Gunn and
Paly? One possibility is additional multistory facilities on their campuses or significant implementation of
online classes and activities. A much less likely possibility is to increase the capacity of the two schools
by extended hours or extended school year. None of these options expand athletic field capacity nor
capacity for the larger single use facilities such as the theater. Although other cities and excellent
5
schools have denser high school sites, this issue is a policy matter for the district and community rather
than a technical issue. There are anecdotal reports of parents and community members calling for a
student limit of less than the current 4600.
That said, PAUSD will still have a timing issue to resolve. The intersection of lines on a chart does not
drive the creation of a new high school. It will be a policy matter for PAUSD to determine whether the
trigger for a new school is 4601 students (capacity plus one), 10% overage or some other point. In the
mid-20's, high school enrollment is likely to be increasing by roughly 100 students per year.
PAUSD and the community will need substantial time to discuss and resolve major aspects of a new
school, develop a preliminary design, and go to the voters for a bond measure to build it. Without
being cynical, bond measures are more easily passed when the need and certainty has become clear,
even in a city as liberal and supportive of past school bond measures as Palo Alto.
Finally, the City's lease payment to PAUSD is a substantial part of their operating budget and there is a
strong financial incentive for PAUSD to continue the lease as long as possible. Losing this lease income
simultaneously with incurring operating costs of a new high school will be difficult for the district and
will require a major additional source of annual income before PAUSD can commit to Cubberley High.
Regarding lease term, PAUSD has continuously said they desire a 5 year extension for the present
Cubberley lease. Unless a financial benefit develops, there is little inherent benefit to PAUSD of a lease
longer than 5 years as long as such lease can continue as may fit PAUSD's development schedule. More
recently, district officials have indicated they may be willing to consider a 10 year lease.
This subcommittee believes 10 years is a reasonable term for the district based on projected timing for
needing the site for active school development.
Options other than Cubberley
PAUSD owns or controls 275 acres as shown below. No other PAUSD site provides any prospect of
enough space for a high school and there are virtually no other sufficiently large, non-parkland sites
within the urban growth boundaries of Palo Alto.
6
Size and Design of Cubberley High
PAUSD has indicated their intent that the future Cubberley High have the capacity to be a "standard"
high school and has stated they desire the entire 35 acres, inclusive of the 8 acres owned by the City.
However, no site design has been initiated by PAUSD nor is any realistic design possible until the school
community at large is ready to engage.
PAUSD Maintenance/Facility Preservation Needs
Existing Cubberley buildings are comparable to many current PAUSD facilities and PAUSD has suggested
they would consider renovating rather than demolishing them. The existing buildings retain their legal
compliance with state school building requirements.
Nonetheless, this subcommittee believes it is unlikely a future Cubberley High will incorporate existing
buildings. As presented by the Facilities Subcommittee, the existing Cubberley layout is very land-
inefficient. Retention of existing facilities and layout almost certainly would require PAUSD to purchase
the City's eight acres and eliminate the possibility of continued provision of community services at the
site.
Consequently, the School Needs Subcommittee believes there is little value to PAUSD of extending (via
higher levels of maintenance) economic life of Cubberley facilities beyond a likely 10 (or 15) year life.
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Volume 2
Community Needs Subcommittee Report
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
CCAC
Community Needs Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary
“Failure to plan is planning to fail.”
ancient proverb cited by Ben Franklin, Winston Churchill, Hillary Clinton, and others
Imagine a multi-cultural learning environment that supports social, emotional and physical
health for all ages and abilities, and is flexible for the ever changing needs of the School District
and Palo Alto.
Cubberley is a unique community center serving all of Palo Alto. A varied collection of
community organizations provide numerous services and opportunities at Cubberley today.
They are described in the body of this report. The community center spaces at Cubberley can
only become more valuable to our citizens as time goes on.
With innovative planning and a new and more efficient layout of the site we can meet both City
and School District needs. Care would have to be taken to provide physical separation as
desired for the safety of students during school hours.
Demographic Trends
The population of Palo Alto is growing. Both the number of children and the
number of seniors is on the rise, putting increasing pressure on all city services including our
schools. All age groups in the city are growing more diverse every year. This diversity drives
our innovative community and requires increasing services and opportunities offered through
our city and schools.
We must develop programs that are relevant to all of these segments of our population.
Cubberley provides an ideal location for the city and school district to work together to provide
for the integration of the various social, ethnic, and economic variations within our borders.
We are at a crossroads
Failure to act now could mean the end of many of the services and opportunities at Cubberley
today. Cubberley is the last 35 acres of public space that exists in Palo Alto. The conventional
assumption is that Cubberley can be used for either increased school capacity or a community
center, but we can work together to create a much more exciting and innovative joint use of
this valued 35 acres.
2
Planning must start today
“The whole is more than the sum of its parts.”
Aristotle, Metaphysica
In 1991 Palo Alto chose to protect these 35 acres from disappearing into private housing
developments, and in doing so developed the community of services that is Cubberley today. It
is again time to use this wisdom, creativity, and cooperation to continue to develop school and
community facilities to share these 35 acres.
Major benefits to working together to plan and share this site:
• Synergy between community center providers and the district would enhance
programs
• Shared facilities save costly resources
• A joint City/PAUSD vision will attract future funding more effectively than
separate projects
Major consequences if we fail to plan now for efficient creative joint use of site:
• Potential tenants will be hesitant to sign long-term leases without a clear direction
for the site’s future, making it more difficult for Cubberley to generate a steady revenue
stream
• Business and residential growth prohibit relocation of a cohesive community center
• Buildings will consume scarce resources to maintain the status quo rather than to
serve our current and future needs and inefficient layout of the buildings will continue to
prevent the development of needed services and activities
Community Needs Subcommittee Recommendations
Short term -- the City of Palo Alto and the PAUSD should renegotiate a 5-year
lease that includes planning shared community center/school buildings and site parking,
including an MOU addressing how they will plan together to develop the new site. To
evaluate actual community needs, the City should contract for a professional
Community Needs Assessment.
Medium term -- the City could begin to build community center building(s)
while allowing the remainder of the site to continue to be used. If the district has made
a decision to open a new school, this is the time to plan how to build and remodel the
remainder of the site for school purposes and shared spaces.
Long term -- the City should continue to evaluate the best mix of tenants and a
fee schedule for community space, as well as how to share space and energy with
PAUSD as needed and desired.
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
Community Needs Subcommittee Report
Cubberley: A Multigenerational,
Cultural, Wellness, Arts & Education
Community Center
March 2013
Diane Reklis, Jean Wilcox, Rachel Samoff, Sheri Furman, Tom Crystal, Tom Vician
with help from Stacey Ashlund, Rob de Geus, and John Northway
2
3
CCAC
Community Needs Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary
“Failure to plan is planning to fail.”
ancient proverb cited by Ben Franklin, Winston Churchill, Hillary Clinton, and others
Imagine a multi-cultural learning environment that supports social, emotional and physical
health for all ages and abilities, and is flexible for the ever changing needs of the School District
and Palo Alto.
Cubberley is a unique community center serving all of Palo Alto. A varied collection of
community organizations provide numerous services and opportunities at Cubberley today.
They are described in the body of this report. The community center spaces at Cubberley can
only become more valuable to our citizens as time goes on.
With innovative planning and a new and more efficient layout of the site we can meet both City
and School District needs. Care would have to be taken to provide physical separation as
desired for the safety of students during school hours.
Demographic Trends
The population of Palo Alto is growing. Both the number of children and the
number of seniors is on the rise, putting increasing pressure on all city services including our
schools. All age groups in the city are growing more diverse every year. This diversity drives
our innovative community and requires increasing services and opportunities offered through
our city and schools.
We must develop programs that are relevant to all of these segments of our population.
Cubberley provides an ideal location for the city and school district to work together to provide
for the integration of the various social, ethnic, and economic variations within our borders.
We are at a crossroads
Failure to act now could mean the end of many of the services and opportunities at Cubberley
today. Cubberley is the last 35 acres of public space that exists in Palo Alto. The conventional
assumption is that Cubberley can be used for either increased school capacity or a community
center, but we can work together to create a much more exciting and innovative joint use of
this valued 35 acres.
4
Planning must start today
“The whole is more than the sum of its parts.”
Aristotle, Metaphysica
In 1991 Palo Alto chose to protect these 35 acres from disappearing into private housing
developments, and in doing so developed the community of services that is Cubberley today. It
is again time to use this wisdom, creativity, and cooperation to continue to develop school and
community facilities to share these 35 acres.
Major benefits to working together to plan and share this site:
• Synergy between community center providers and the district would enhance
programs
• Shared facilities save costly resources
• A joint City/PAUSD vision will attract future funding more effectively than
separate projects
Major consequences if we fail to plan now for efficient creative joint use of site:
• Potential tenants will be hesitant to sign long-term leases without a clear direction
for the site’s future, making it more difficult for Cubberley to generate a steady revenue
stream
• Business and residential growth prohibit relocation of a cohesive community center
• Buildings will consume scarce resources to maintain the status quo rather than to
serve our current and future needs and inefficient layout of the buildings will continue to
prevent the development of needed services and activities
Community Needs Subcommittee Recommendations
Short term -- the City of Palo Alto and the PAUSD should renegotiate a 5-year
lease that includes planning shared community center/school buildings and site parking,
including an MOU addressing how they will plan together to develop the new site. To
evaluate actual community needs, the City should contract for a professional
Community Needs Assessment.
Medium term -- the City could begin to build community center building(s)
while allowing the remainder of the site to continue to be used. If the district has made
a decision to open a new school, this is the time to plan how to build and remodel the
remainder of the site for school purposes and shared spaces.
Long term -- the City should continue to evaluate the best mix of tenants and a
fee schedule for community space, as well as how to share space and energy with
PAUSD as needed and desired.
5
Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 6
Cubberley Today ...................................................................................................................... 7
Current Cubberley Tenants and Renters Summaries ............................................................ 8
Education Programs – Pre-school through Adults ............................................................. 9
Early Childhood Education and Child Care .............................................................. 9
Kindergarten through adult education; private schools and tutoring ........................11
Health Programs: Outdoor & Indoor Sports, plus Wellness ..............................................13
Outdoor Sports .......................................................................................................13
Indoor Sports and Wellness Programs ...................................................................16
Performing Arts Programs: Music, Theater, and Dance ...................................................18
Music and Theater ..................................................................................................18
Dance .....................................................................................................................20
Artists in Residence Program ...........................................................................................22
Hourly Rental Spaces ......................................................................................................24
Other Non-Profits and City Services ................................................................................26
Palo Alto Now and Later - Demographic Trends ..................................................................28
Cubberley Tomorrow ..............................................................................................................30
A Vision of Synergy .........................................................................................................30
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................31
City and School District Planning Efforts ..........................................................................32
Recommendations ...........................................................................................................33
Appendices .............................................................................................................................34
A. Recommended Criteria for Future Renting and Leasing of Cubberley Space ..........34
B. What’s Special About the Cubberley Community Center? .......................................36
C. Summary of the “Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on Palo Alto’s Social
and Community Services” ........................................................................................37
Future Services Needed ..................................................................................................37
Community Survey Results ..............................................................................................38
D. Neighboring Community Centers .............................................................................39
E. Websites ..................................................................................................................44
6
Introduction
Imagine a multi-cultural learning environment that supports social, emotional and physical
health for all ages and abilities, and is flexible for the ever-changing needs of both the School
District and the City of Palo Alto. That vision is alive and well at the Cubberley Community
Center. Much more than a collection of classes and activities located in an old high school, it is
home to a wonderful collection of community agencies and organizations that provide a variety
of services to Palo Alto.
In 1991, a visionary collaboration between our city and school district leaders created the Lease
and Covenant that allowed Cubberley Community Center to form. The lease provides funds
that help Palo Alto Unified School District provide some of the most highly regarded schools in
the country. Great schools improve our community. The City of Palo Alto created an invaluable
and successful resource at Cubberley that helps make this community an extraordinarily
desirable place to live and work and retire. A great community sustains great schools.
Twenty years ago few people dreamed that PAUSD would ever need a third high school or that
the City’s population would grow significantly. Yet now our increasingly diverse population is
growing for all ages, particularly for children and older adults. The need for a third high school
is being discussed and the community center spaces at Cubberley can only become more
valuable to our citizens as time goes on. There are no ready alternatives for locating a new
school or for relocating community services besides Cubberley. The present lease with its
associated agreements is due to expire in 2014 and the partnership between the city and the
school district is being put to the test.
Twenty years from now, will we look back at this time and admire the wisdom of today’s City
and District leaders and the creative solutions they negotiated to resolve today’s thorny issues
or will we look back in sorrow for what we lost? The City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Unified
School District have a critical opportunity in the next five years to extend their partnership to:
address population and demographic changes
build on the successes of Cubberley as well as the District
create a practical plan for the Cubberley site that includes phased development, flexible
design, and cooperative funding over time
With innovative planning, we can meet both City and School District needs – possibly on an
integrated joint-use basis, but requiring a new and more efficient layout of the site. Care needs
to be taken to provide physical separation as desired for the safety of students during school
hours. The future of the greater Palo Alto community will be profoundly affected by decisions
made in the next few years.
The issues that surround Cubberley must be addressed, and soon.
7
Cubberley Today
Cubberley is special. Since the 1991 negotiated lease (and associated agreements) between
the City and the School District, and following the related Master Plan, Cubberley has provided
an uncommon community center for residents and other stakeholders. The programs at
Cubberley engage people of all ages, day and night, seven days a week and serve up to
600,000 people a year.
Cubberley Is Part of Tapestry of Community Services throughout Palo Alto
In accordance with the City’s comprehensive plan, City's services-providing resources are not
centralized at a single location, as is regularly done in nearby cities, but are instead distributed
around Palo Alto. Thus services in the north at Lucie Stern and its surroundings (including the
Art Center, Junior Museum, theaters, Rinconada Pool club room, and Avenidas) are
complemented – not repeated – in the south by offerings mostly at Cubberley.
In addition, the several City library branches provide meeting rooms as well as library services
across town. There also are (or soon will be) teen centers at Mitchell Park and Ventura. (Note
that while the soon-to-be reopened Mitchell Park Community Center will be functionally the
same size as before, it will provide a new teen center and only a few additional meeting rooms –
it is not intended to be a full community center.) Finally, our schools and parks complete a rich
tapestry of opportunities in Palo Alto.
Neighborhood Clusters on the Cubberley Site
A key concept in the 1991 Master Plan is the idea of grouping providers and users into clusters
on the campus, according to their similarity of use and required facilities, in which each group
has its own synergy and life, while the collection serves the entire community of Palo Alto. The
concept has largely been implemented, and clusters of like-activities are now spread across the
entire campus. Dance groups work together to provide a broad spectrum of dance experiences
for many. Artists learn from each other while providing support and ideas for the future. The
various childhood education centers work with dance, music, exercise, and City classes to allow
the children access to a broad range of experiences.
These clusters have helped define the programs as Cubberley Community Center has
developed, but they could be concentrated in a much smaller part of the site. When new
construction is planned, a stronger feeling of community would be created by redesigning the
site to form interconnected spaces, for the current tenants or new ones, plus adding informal
meeting areas and display spaces for artists (of all ages) and for cultural displays.
Research by Subcommittee
The following sections summarize the results of twenty years of following Cubberley's Master
Plan. Our research efforts to characterize Cubberley's current usage included:
An extensive written survey of most of Cubberley's current tenants and renters.
Interviews with tenants and renters and Community Services Department staff input.
Visits made to other (non-Palo Alto) community centers, asking their experiences and
discussing their “visions.”
Looking at several other cities' implementations of joint/integrated use possibilities for
co-located schools and community services on a single site.
8
Various studies and reports that helped provide additional context, such as the Impact of
the Aging Baby Boom Population on Palo Alto’s Social and Community Services, the
recent update to the Community Services Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan
and the Human Services Commission needs assessment.
The breadth of present services and resources offered at Cubberley today – the number, variety
and quality of programs – may surprise some, and we hope this report will help provide a basis
for discussions in the upcoming lease renegotiations plus long term planning for this site.
Current Cubberley Tenants and Renters Summaries
Summaries are provided in the next section for the following larger clusters of programs:
Education Programs – Pre-School through Adult
Health – Outdoor & Indoor Sports, plus Wellness Programs
Performing Arts Programs – Music, Theater and Dance
Artists in Residence Program
Hourly Rentals
Other Non-Profits and City Services
These summaries cover:
1) Community needs and benefits
2) Current tenants/providers
3) Services relocation feasibility
4) Opportunities arising from School-City integrated uses
9
Education Programs – Pre-school through Adults
Early Childhood Education and Child Care
Community Needs and Benefits
Cubberley Community Center is home to several high quality centers providing both childcare
and early education, supporting both the children and their parents.
Good early care and education are part of the infrastructure of any vibrant city and are
especially valued in our city. Palo Alto has recognized this since the 1970s with innovative
support for such programs. We need to continue this support as the city grows and develops.
We know that children who are successful early-learners and who succeed in school have a
much greater chance to be successful in later life, to contribute positively to their communities,
and to be able to support themselves and their families, than those who are not successful in
school. Good quality early care and education can do a lot to make sure that children arrive at
the Kindergarten classroom door ready to take advantage of all that PAUSD has to offer.
In a community where many parents of young children work long hours, much of the young
child’s development goes on outside of the family. Child care is part of the infrastructure that
enables a community like Palo Alto to thrive. Our community provides excellent schools for its
children, but such a community also needs to provide environments for its youngest to thrive so
that they arrive at these schools ready to take full advantage of them.
But as vital as excellent child care services are to our thriving city, it is today very challenging to
find enough affordable facilities in which to locate such programs to meet the need. Palo Alto
has for many years paid attention to assisting early care and education agencies secure and
develop such facilities. For the city to continue to prosper as it grows; it must continue to
support quality child care.
Current Tenants and Renters
Some 200 children are served at the two main child care facilities at Cubberley: the Good
Neighbor Montessori and the Children's Pre-School Center. Approximately 50% of families
served are residents and an additional 33% work in Palo Alto. Their spaces are currently used
Monday through Friday from 7:15am to 6:15pm. Highlighted areas on the map below are those
dedicated to Childcare and Early Childhood Education.
10
If Cubberley were not available
Finding affordable space for childcare facilities is next to impossible in Palo Alto. These child-
care and early-education providers would most likely be forced to relocate outside of Palo Alto.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided Community Services
There are many positive outcomes achieved by co-locating schools, Community Centers and
Early Childhood Care and Education. Both the child care centers and the school would benefit
by their proximity.
The co-location of PAUSD schools and child care services has many advantages. It provides
the opportunity for teachers to have access to high quality care for their own very young
children. It provides a place for older children to gain an appreciation for the youngest members
of their community, as well as providing volunteer opportunities.
Co-locating early care and education services with other community services could also provide
occasional care for children while community members participate in community center or
volunteer at the newly opened school. These opportunities to integrate early care and
education services into various community activities can provide significant advantages to the
Palo Alto community.
11
Kindergarten through adult education; private schools and tutoring
Community Needs and Benefits
Cubberley Community Center has long provided educational programs for infants through
seniors. The numerous offerings programs are diverse, and some fall into multiple categories
(and may well be noted twice here).
These education programs (including Foothill), bring about 4,200 people to Cubberley annually;
the surveys estimated 70% residency, excluding Foothill College.
The entire community benefits from these programs in that they support lifelong learning,
language instruction and cultural exchange. They complement public schools programs (with
dance, music, theater, performing and visual arts).
Current Tenants and Renters
Language/Cultural programs
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading Room
Bay Area Arabic School
Dutch School
Grossman Academy Japanese Language School
Museo Italo Americano (Italian language classes)
Academic programs
Kumon Math and Reading tutoring
Adult educational
PAUSD Adult School (gardening classes at this site)
PAUSD Post-Graduate program
Foothill College (Cubberley's largest tenant – leaving in the near-future)
Other childcare programs
Acme Education Center (after-school & summer programs; Chinese, English)
Related education uses (mostly hourly renters)
Schools & parent/adult education
Waldorf School of the Peninsula (theater)
Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School (gym)
Palo Alto Menlo Park Mothers Club (meetings)
Commonwealth Club
Education related to animals & the environment
Bay Area Amphibian & Reptile Society
Audubon Society
Earth Day Film Festival
Community and civic services
SCC Registrar of Voters
Friends of Palo Alto Library (FOPAL)
12
Most programs are offered during after-school, evening, and weekend hours. The Reading
Room is open weekdays from 10am to 3pm. Childcare programs are open weekdays from 7-
8am to 5-6pm. Foothill is most active Monday through Thursday nights, but also on some
weekdays and weekends.
If Cubberley were not available
Most would try to relocate, but it would be difficult to impossible to stay in Palo Alto or nearby;
therefore many services would be lost to our community.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
The programs at Cubberley would complement and add diversity to PAUSD offerings. Onsite
childcare (for staff or parents) could be available for children younger than 5 years. Programs
would support working parents, as students could stay onsite for the after-school enrichment
offerings, providing educational value that is related to PAUSD’s mission. Particularly obvious
programs enhancing schools' missions include:
Performing Arts – Music, theater, dance, cultural festivals
Visual Arts
Outdoor/Indoor sports – including martial arts, rehab, Special Olympics
Library support (FOPAL)
Youth Services (YCS rents hourly)
13
Health Programs: Outdoor & Indoor Sports, plus Wellness
Outdoor Sports
Community Needs and Benefits
The outdoor facilities at Cubberley were considered a special resource to be preserved for their
undisputed community value even before the 1989 lease and the 1991 Master Plan. In general,
Cubberley’s provision of regular, significant and accessible sports programs has obvious fitness
and social benefits for all residents. An especial benefit is the younger-girls softball programs,
compensating for some recent losses of field space at elementary schools, where portable-
classrooms proliferation has significantly reduced available fields. (Also note that recently
proposed new fields out by the Baylands would be less protected and much less accessible
than what we have now at Cubberley.) For background context, see the Palo Alto Fields 5 Dec
2002 Final Report at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/cubberley_community_advisory_committee.asp.
Current Tenants and Renters
The largest outdoor sports programs here use the several fields for softball (P.A. Girls Softball)
and soccer (P.A. Soccer Club and P.A. AYSO). Cubberley's fields are used intensively most of
the year, prioritizing softball in the spring, and soccer in the fall. Youth teams (18 months to 18
years old) occupy nearly every available field weekdays after school and all day on Saturdays.
Youth and adult leagues share the fields on Sundays. Rugby and cricket events also occur
irregularly. The other outdoor sports facilities (tennis courts and the track) are heavily used by
some smaller programs, both by teams (public and private schools), and on a drop-in basis for
individuals of all ages.
The recent survey replies for these several programs estimate roughly 7,000 participants yearly,
of which from 60% to 95% are City residents. The AYSO soccer program alone includes some
2,000 players, while P.A. Soccer has 650, and P.A. Girls Softball has roughly 400. Some
programs having wait-lists say these are currently 10-20 players long, which is much better than
City-wide future needs estimates (which foresee a severe playing fields shortage, per the “Got
Space” study).
The softball program is particularly in need of equipment and items such as batting cages that
cannot easily be moved around. Cubberley provides the opportunity for older and younger girls
to share space, and for older girls to provide leadership and role models.
Fields:
• Palo Alto AYSO
• Palo Alto Soccer Club
• Stanford Soccer Club
• Silicon Valley Adult Sports
• Palo Alto Adult Soccer Club
• Palo Alto Girls Softball
• Various league tournaments
• Drop-in public use
Tennis :
• Gunn High School
• Castilleja School
• Girls Middle School
• USTA Leagues
• Palo Alto Tennis Club
• Drop-in public use
14
If Cubberley were not available
A complete take-over of these fields by any new school would pressure the City to prioritize
dedication of other fields for youths (greatly reducing adult opportunities) especially at Greer
Park – there really is not much alternative fields opportunity available from neighboring
communities.
Tennis courts – the City has 32 public courts of which 13 are lighted (Mitchell Park and
Rinconada Park). Cubberley is home to 6 of the 32 public tennis courts representing
19% of the public courts in Palo Alto.
Fields – The demand for fields is growing faster than the population, yet there are few
locations for additional fields in Palo Alto. The proposed new fields near the golf course
will help a bit, but these fields are likely to be windy and will not be easily accessible,
e.g., by children on bikes, so this is not a complete solution. More efficient use of the
Cubberley site could probably create at least one additional field.
15
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
A co-located school at Cubberley would certainly reduce its fields' general availability, but some
compensation would come from the new students’ usage. If a full high school reopens on this
site, it will not be possible to continue the same recreation programs unless additional fields
become available somewhere else.
Younger kids need smaller fields which are incompatible with fields for older kids. Most softball
programs that use other school fields do not have a spring season since there is no place to
play. Location of fields would have to be carefully done.
16
Indoor Sports and Wellness Programs
Community Needs and Benefits
The Cubberley Community Center provides a number of indoor sports and health-related
services for the community. The spaces used for this type of activity are the gymnasiums, the
Pavilion, gym activity room, auditorium and building P (which is occupied by the Foothill College
Community Education REACH Program).
The health programs have related goals: creating essential links between outpatient
rehabilitation and full community reintegration for adults recovering from stroke and acquired
brain injury, as well as cardiac therapy for adults who have cardiovascular and other health
problems. Sports services include after-school and summer youth basketball and volleyball.
The center also provides space for martial arts and multi-cultural health and fitness activities, as
well as recreation activities, health and well-being and social outlets.
Current Tenants and Renters
Indoor gym space and health related services have an annual participation of approximately
1,800. The ratio of residents to non-residents served is not known for all the groups that use
Cubberley indoor sports and health activities; however for the youth after-school and summer
camps programs, 75% are residents. The indoor space sports and health spaces are used
seven days a week, at various times, with the heaviest use during morning hours and after 5pm.
Two examples of health related tenants at Cubberley are:
The Cardiac Therapy Foundation (CTF) provides medically supervised rehabilitation and
information programs for physician-referred persons having cardiac, diabetes,
pulmonary, and other problems. CTF provides such services for more than 200
members, of whom more than half are Palo Alto residents. It has an office at Cubberley,
and also rents hourly space (about 1550 hours annually, mostly between 7 am and
12pm). Its members are mostly between ages 55 and 90. CTF uses gymnasium A and
the weight room for its rehabilitation activities, and various rooms and the auditorium for
classes, board meetings, and free public lectures on cardiac issues, technology, and
research. CTF has a medical advisory board of medical professionals, primarily cardiac
physicians and nurses.
REACH is a post-stroke program of Foothill College. It provides a link between
outpatient rehabilitation and full community integration. REACH instructors include
specialists in physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology training, speech
and language skills, independent living skills, and life-adjustment counseling for both the
outpatients and their caregivers. Most of the outpatients are age 55 and above; a few
are in their 30s or 40s. REACH, as a college program, mostly serves the broad mid-
peninsula community, not just Palo Alto residents.
Foothill has indicated that it prefers that this program stay at the Cubberley campus,
even after Foothill completes its new site. They are also not building a gym at their
campus, so presumably they hope to continue to offer some of their fitness classes for
all adults as well.
17
If Cubberley were not available
Some of the non-profit health groups would go out of business due to the inability to afford or
find alternative space. Many would try to relocate; however indoor gym space is very limited
and Palo Alto has no other community gymnasiums. Cubberley has two individual gymnasiums
and a larger pavilion gym housing two full size basketball courts.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
At least one additional gymnasium would be needed to service both city and district needs. The
city’s use of gyms is lowest during the school day so there would be opportunities to share
spaces without having to completely duplicate them. Both students and staff would benefit from
having fitness and health programs available on-site and it might be possible for some students
to enhance or replace PE courses.
When services for the aging part of our community are co-located with schools, early care and
education services, the potential exists for children of all ages to form relationships with elders,
enriching their lives with information and caring experiences they do not normally have access
to on a day-to-day basis.
18
Performing Arts Programs: Music, Theater, and Dance
Music and Theater
Community Needs and Benefits
Cubberley Community Center’s Theater hosts a variety of performance events, including
concerts, lectures, dance, drama, and public meetings put on by different organizations
including non-profit groups, businesses, and City departments.
The facility has been continuously upgraded over the years and currently has 317 seats, plus
two ADA-accessible locations in its standard configuration. It is equipped with a professional
live sound system, a theatrical lighting system, and a high quality video projector. The various
music groups benefit by sharing the theater itself, common spaces and equipment. The
community benefits from the interactions of these several types of groups who provide
numerous affordable performances to enjoy.
Cubberley currently provides a place for over 500 musicians of all ages to learn, practice,
rehearse, and perform in both large groups and small. The primary focus of most of these
groups is on providing our youth an affordable opportunity to develop and enjoy their musical
skills. Nearly one half of the participants are residents of Palo Alto. On average, the Theater is
rented out for approximately two performances per week; it also frequently serves as a large
meeting hall.
Cubberley provides a unique chance for students to develop and interact across school and
grade boundaries. The programs do not attempt to compete with those offered in schools, but
rather to enhance them. Likewise, they do not attempt to compete with the theater programs
offered at Lucie Stern, but instead provide alternative programs for different students and
audiences. While there are many places around town for students to take lessons, there are
few where they can regularly perform and develop together.
Current Tenants and Renters
Over 500 students/participants are enrolled at any given time (about 45% are City residents).
Those comprising the audience account for 150-300 visitors for 100 rentals annually – an
average of about 12 hours of time in the building per rental. The Theater sees its highest levels
of usage during the months of March through July. Music events make up the largest portion of
bookings, and range from orchestras, choral competition, traditional cultural music, and rock.
There are also a large number of dance events, including ballet, modern dance, traditional and
cultural dance. The remainder of events includes dramas, lectures, film screenings, religious
services, training seminars, and municipal public meetings.
Events are put on by a broad array of organizations. Approximately 70% of the groups are non-
profit organizations, 10% are businesses, 15% are departments in the city, and the remainder
are individuals.
El Camino Youth Symphony
Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra
Palo Alto Philharmonic
Peninsula Piano School
Peninsula Women’s Chorus
Bats Improv
Peninsula Youth Theater
Jayendra Kalakendra
Shiva Murugan Temple
Nuber Folk Dance
Shri Krupa
Sankalpa Dance Foundation
Vaidica Vidhya Ganapathi Center
Heritage Music Festivals
19
A majority of these programs are targeted at youth; in general, these programs complement
music and theater opportunities available within the school settings. With the exception of the
Peninsula Piano School, who uses their space 6 days a week from 10am to 7pm, most
providers schedule programming during after-school, evening and weekend hours.
If Cubberley were not available
Providers would have to find alternate rehearsal and performance space that would probably
entail raising rates for participants and/or moving their program out of Palo Alto.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
If a school or schools opened at Cubberley, these organizations could provide enrichment for
the students while sharing significant amounts of space and materials. Careful scheduling
would be essential, but students would benefit from performing opportunities beyond those
offered by their school. Performances involving both older and younger performers would open
new doors to their musical and theatrical development.
20
Dance
Community Needs and Benefits
Having the concentration of dance opportunities at Cubberley is of tremendous benefit to
literally thousands in our community, providing high-level dance training and performance
opportunities at all age levels, at a convenient location. Dance Connection has established
after-school programs at local elementary schools.
Several dance instruction, performance and social dancing opportunities operate at Cubberley.
Programs exist for pre-school, elementary through high school, young adults and seniors.
Dance styles range from ballet to social ballroom, including modern, jazz, tap, and hip-hop.
Cultural traditions are also offered including Scottish, Irish, flamenco, Mexican, Congolese,
South American and East Indian. The recent survey indicates that 70% of the children and 50%
of the adults who participate in these dance programs are Palo Alto residents.
Current Tenants and Renters
The current “resident tenants” (those with studios) are Dance Connection, Zohar and Dance
Visions. Both Zohar and Dance Connection are fully utilized, morning through evening; Dance
Vision also sublets to other artists and theater groups during holidays and down times.
Because the dance studios were originally high-school wood-working and metal shops, all three
of the resident tenants have invested a lot of their own money in refurbishing and now
maintaining their studios. Unique to Cubberley, the multiple dance groups interact and work
communally on performance projects, enhancing the quality of the dance experience for all
students. Nine other dance opportunities also rent on an hourly basis. The Pavilion is regularly
used for Ballroom Dancing as it has a large dance floor.
Dance programs include:
Dance Connection
Dance Visions
Zohar Dance Company & Studio
Dance Kaiso/Wilfred Mark
Friday Night Dancers
Guru Shadha
Raices de Mexico Ballet Folklorico
Saturday Night Ballroom Dancing
The Red Thistle Dancers
21
If Cubberley were not available
If the dance studios had to move out of Cubberley, they would probably each have to be
relocated in isolated industrial sites – rents in residential areas would be prohibitive. There are
few alternative dance studios – much less dance communities – similar to and accessible by
Palo Alto residents and their families. This is particularly true for the youth and teen programs
offered by the three resident studios. The dance services for youth provided at Cubberley are a
core support in the City's network for youth opportunities, complementing school athletics,
AYSO, and children’s theater among other programs, providing our youth multiple ways of
finding their differing passions and creative sparks.
Dance Connection in particular serves approximately 2,000 students, most of whom are Palo
Alto residents. Although other youth dance classes are offered through the City’s Community
Services Department, they are minimal compared to those at Cubberley.
The adult dance offerings provide high quality instruction, attracting both residents and non-
residents. Ballroom dancing on Friday and Saturday evenings is both dance instruction and a
social recreation for adults and seniors. Other adult dance activities provide a wide range of
opportunities.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
Several types of dance instruction would provide increased opportunities for students, both for
developing their musical talents and for providing an artistic and fitness opportunity for both
students and staff. The multi-age opportunities would also be enriching.
22
Artists in Residence Program
Community Needs and Benefits
The Cubberley Artists in Residence Program represents the City’s commitment to the arts by
enhancing and promoting the artistic culture in Palo Alto, showing various art forms through
open-studio events, exhibitions, workshops, lectures, and classes taught by the artists in
residence. Many Cubberley artists also provide instruction and art-making opportunities to
children and lifelong learners in an accessible and friendly environment.
The program’s purpose is to establish a community of visual artists who support, collaborate,
and exchange ideas with one another and the community. Especially valuable features include:
The opportunity to engage and interact with participating artists.
The services rendered and the teaching provided by participating artists.
The donation of art work contributed by participating local artists to the City’s Art in
Public Places collection for the education and enjoyment of all citizens.
The program was initiated in 1989 in response to a lack of affordable studio space for artists,
which was providing challenges for local arts organizations. Today 22 artists (about 50% are
residents) occupy 17 studio spaces. The program is a community center for visual artists who
support, collaborate, and exchange ideas with one another.
Artists who teach classes in their studios average 20-30 students per quarter (65% are
residents). Visitors to the annual open-studio events vary, averaging 500 visitors per studio per
year. The majority of respondents indicated 60-80% of visitors are residents.
Individual survey responses varied greatly: some artists utilize their space 7 days a week, up to
12 hours a day, while others may use their space 25 hours per week. Most respondents are
using their space 4-7 days a week for approximately 5-8 hours a day.
Every two years, local artists are invited to apply to a juried process, along with approximately
1/3 of the current studio tenants. This process ensures Artist Studio tenants are re-juried
approximately every five years. From six to eight artists from the juried pool are awarded the
opportunity for residency (or possible continuance) by a panel of three City-appointed visual arts
experts based on specific criteria.
Current Tenants and Renters
L. Anderson B. Gunther I. Infante
L. Bouchard P.Hannaway S. Ingle
U. Delarios M. Gavish S. Kiser
K. Edwards C. Sullivan M. Lettieri
M. Fletcher N. White A. Mcmillan
P. Foley C. Valasquez J. Nelson-Gal
L. Gass M. Gavish M. Pauker
23
If Cubberley were not available
Most artists indicated that they would disperse and relocate out of the Palo Alto area due to lack
of affordable spaces in this area. Available studios in Palo Alto are few and decreasing.
Alternative/replacement studio spaces are severely limited. On the mid-peninsula there is just
one other set of studios – Palo Alto Studios – that currently provides space for 34 artists who
share 15 studios. There is, however, a waiting list to get into any of these, and the rates are
well above rates at Cubberley.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
Many of the artists indicated that they would enjoy serving as mentors for students as well as
role models of artists using various mediums to express themselves. In addition there would be
opportunities for joint shows furthering the artistic development of our students.
24
Hourly Rental Spaces
Community Needs and Benefits
Cubberley provides much needed rental meeting spaces for dozens of regular user groups, as
well as spaces for occasional activities and meetings by all members of the community.
Current Tenants and Renters
Neighbors Abroad
Youth Community Services
Palo Alto Housing Corporation
Pre-school Family
Grossman Academy Training
Vineyard - Faith
Christ Temple Church - Faith
Earth Day Film Festival – theater
Waldorf School of the Peninsula – theater
rental
Palantir Technologies – gym use
International School of the Peninsula – gym
use
Gideon Hausner – Jewish Day School –
gym use
Palo Alto Soccer Club – meetings
Common Wealth Club - meetings
Palo Alto Girls Softball - meetings
Whole Foods Market - meetings
Bay Area Amphibian and Reptile Society
- meetings
SCV Audubon Society - meetings
National MS Society - meetings
Palo Alto Menlo Park Mothers Club –
meetings
Liga Hispano Americano De Futbol –
meetings
SCC Registrar Voters
Home Owner Associations
If Cubberley were not available
Cubberley today meets at least a third of the community demand for meeting space (particularly
useful to small groups) provided in the following city-run facilities:
Cubberley Community Center
9 Meeting Rooms
2 Dance Studios
1 Gym Activity Room
3 Gyms
1 Theater
1 Music Rehearsal Room
Lucie Stern Community Center
1 Ballroom
2 Community Rooms
Art Center
Auditorium
Green Room
Meeting Room
Mitchell Park Community Center
1 Office Classroom
1 CBO Classroom
1 Art/ECR Classroom
1 Multipurpose room
Mitchell Park Library Portion
1 Program room
1 Computer room
4 small group study rooms
25
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
There would likely be minimal interaction, although meeting rooms could be located wherever
spare space existed on the site and could move from the city area to the district area as the
needs of both entities change.
26
Other Non-Profits and City Services
Community Needs and Benefits
Cubberley provides office and class spaces for both the City of Palo Alto and other non-profits.
This allows these services to continue despite the scarcity of public space elsewhere.
Current Tenants and Renters
Normal business hours are Monday through Friday from 8:30am to 5:30pm.
California Law Revision Commission
P.A. Adult School: gardening classes & Senior Friendship Day
Friends of Palo Alto Library (155 volunteers contributing over 23,000 hours, raising in
excess of $1M annually)
Temporary Mitchell Park Teen Center (currently closed)
Temporary Mitchell Park Library
Office of Emergency Services of PAFD/PAPD (weekly EMS training)
Palo Alto Mediation Services
Wildlife Rescue
Cardiac Therapy Assoc. Administration
Facilities for the un-housed – gym showers available daily, between 6am and 8am.
27
If Cubberley were not available
A significant number of these groups would need to find other office space; however options are
very limited, and must be considered on a case by case basis. No specific solutions for this
category can be given at this point.
If PAUSD opens a school on site in addition to City-provided community services
There would likely be minimal interaction, although meeting rooms could be located wherever
spare space existed on the site and could move from the city area to the district area as needs
of both change.
28
Palo Alto Now and Later - Demographic Trends
Palo Alto strives to be a community that provides all its inhabitants a place to live a rich life, full
of opportunities to experience, learn, and grow from infancy to the end of life. The notion of
community involves not only personal interrelationships, but also the place within which these
personal interrelationships take place. There are many communities in which people participate
throughout their lives including the family, the neighborhood, the schools, the city, and beyond.
Cubberley Community Center provides a unifying part of the fabric of our city. It is an ideal
location for expanded and enhanced community services. If and when the school district is
ready to open a school at this site, co-location of a school and community center would create
new opportunities that would enrich all of our lives and serve the social and emotional needs of
Palo Altans of all ages and abilities.
Youth Population
The youth population in Palo Alto is growing. Over the last 10 years, the number of children
between the ages of 5 and 17 has increased by 2.3% a year. The school district conservatively
estimates this growth will continue at the rate of 2% each year for at least the next 5 years. The
number of youth under 18 has grown to over 14,000 or approximately 1/4 of the total city
population. In addition to the need for more schools, the school district and the city need to
provide opportunities for its youth for various community focused activities. These opportunities
will provide for the integration of the various social, ethnic, and economic variations within their
population and build more appreciation and enlightenment among them. Cubberley provides an
ideal location for the city and school district to work together to make this happen.
Senior Population
There is also a growing senior population. Over the last 10 years, the number of adults aged 55
or older has increased by 2.5% a year to nearly 30% of the city’s total population of nearly
65,000. The city’s 2006 study, “Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on Palo Alto’s
Social and Community Service,” states that 80% of our Boomers are planning to “retire in place”
as they age. This aging population creates the scenario that by 2026 upwards of 40% of the
city’s population will be 55 years of age and older. The present perception of the city’s seniors
is that they want “a sense of community.” Palo Alto needs to work toward providing that sense
of community with a rich variety of offerings in multiple locations around the City that seniors
can reach through public transportation. Cubberley is an obvious location for such services.
Other Adult Populations
Between the senior and youth demographics there exists a 31,000 adult population comprising
nearly 1/2 of Palo Alto’s population including single adults, married/living together adults without
children, and married/living together adults with children. The city needs to develop programs
that are relevant and attractive to single adults who comprise 25% of its adult population, as well
as provide programs relevant to married adults to reach the community needs of these
segments of its population.
29
Diversity
All age groups in the city are growing more diverse every year. Palo Alto now enjoys an
extraordinary mix of people who come from all over the world. We have people from many
backgrounds and cultures, each with languages, ideas, approaches, and ways of living that can
enrich our community immensely. This diversity also brings with it a need for a wide range of
services offered in a variety of ways. Our diversity is an incredible asset and we need to make
the most of responding to it and incorporating it into the services and opportunities offered to our
city and school community.
Festivals, music, art, and recreation all provide opportunities for community members of all ages
to thrive while gaining understanding of others. A vibrant community center at Cubberley
provides the perfect place for increased communication among our various sub-populations and
this will lead to an even richer community ready for the realities of the 21st century.
Impact of this Growth and Change in Palo Alto
More children plus more older adults equals more people in Palo Alto. More people create
more needs and more interrelationships. More people with differing backgrounds add to the
vibrant and innovative place we call Palo Alto, but also increase the need for services. All of
this growth and change creates an even greater need for community.
30
Cubberley Tomorrow
What we have at Cubberley is uniquely Palo Altan and tremendously valuable. Well rounded,
active and engaged individuals enrich the entire community. The services at Cubberley do not
simply benefit the users, but also benefit all those who interact with them. The city administers
the site and offers some classes as in most neighboring community centers, but nearly all of the
Cubberley programs are provided and administered by community organizations; this enables
an uncommonly rich assortment of opportunities using minimal City resources.
Good communities need good schools. Palo Alto is known for the dynamism, creativity and
intense involvement of its citizens. We demand the very best schools to nurture the bright
young people who drive progress in our area.
Good schools need strong communities. The students in these schools need more than just
good schools; they need opportunities to explore the visual arts, dance, sports, music, and
various service opportunities to find the passion that will drive them forward into productive,
happy, satisfying full lives.
Our more mature population needs outlets for service, learning, creativity, and connection, as
well, to keep their lives satisfying through middle age and into their senior years.
Excellent schools and a rich variety of community services and activities provide the basis for
Palo Alto’s vibrant community.
Making Choices
There will always be a need to make choices between competing users of the community space
at Cubberley. When Foothill vacates most of its current space, this need will be particularly
great. The proposed community needs assessment will drive these choices once it is complete,
but city staff will need to select tenants every time space opens up both before and after a
community needs assessment is completed. The recommended criteria for future renting and
leasing of Cubberley space outlined in Appendix A would create an open, defensible matrix to
guide future decisions.
A Spirit of Collaboration Will Benefit Everyone
What follows is a vision for combining the strengths of our school district and our city to create
an integrated space at Cubberley to serve the needs of all ages and abilities as the twenty-first
century continues to unfold.
A Vision of Synergy
The information on how our city is evolving has been explained above. Cubberley is the last 35
acres of public space that exists in Palo Alto. As our population grows, so does the value and
importance of this public land. We can use the last 35 acres in Palo Alto to provide the new
school capacity needed for the future and also further development of the cluster of services
concept that makes Cubberley today so vibrant and vital and so important to so many.
Maintaining what we have at Cubberley and continuing the dynamic process of responding to
community and school needs by bringing Palo Altans together to work with one another, share
ideas, and create new ideas and institutions will be part of what will assure Palo Alto’s future as
a dynamic, exciting, desirable place to live, work, and play.
We are at a crossroads. We can make the conventional assumption that Cubberley needs to be
used for increased school capacity or a community center. Or we can do both! We can carry
31
on the community spirit that created the Cubberley we know today by working together to create
a much more exciting and innovative use of this valued 35 acres. We can provide both new
school capacity and a multicultural, multidisciplinary, multigenerational, flexible community
center that knits our residents together in new and exciting ways and provides services that
meet the needs of Palo Altans from the youngest to the oldest of our citizens. Constructing
buildings that use the 35 acres efficiently allows us to do both. (See the Facility Committee
Report.)
Expanded Wellness Programs
There are currently many ideas for how to enhance the services now offered at Cubberley. One
example involves the expanding the wellness activities currently offered. A number of non-profit
organizations currently provide health and wellness services at Cubberley. More would like to
do so in the future, if suitable facilities and financial support were available. At the 11/14/2012
CCAC meeting, several cooperating community groups requested a wellness center that would
house and integrate their separate programs. Pacific Stroke Association (PSA), Cardiac
Therapy Foundation (CTF), Abilities United, Avenidas and the City of Palo Alto outlined their
vision of an integrated health and wellness program with a focus on seniors.
Cubberley and School Communities
There are also ideas about how the visual, dance, and musical artists communities currently at
Cubberley could interact with school students to provide instruction, mentoring, and space for
student talents to grow. There are ideas about how high school students could learn about how
young children develop in the early child care and education centers where their teachers’
young children spend their days engaged in educational play. Other exciting program additions
would become possible for a new high school by sharing the 35 acres at Cubberley with a
community center.
Conclusions
Exactly what is needed for the growing school population and what is needed for the evolving
city of Palo Alto requires more work and expertise than was available to the Cubberley
Community Advisory Committee. PAUSD has the capacity to identify its needs as population
growth unfolds and to identify the best way to meet those needs.
Deciding which buildings to build or remodel as well as deciding on renting and leasing priorities
for a community center requires a very thorough community needs assessment to identify what
services and opportunities are needed by the community, where such services exist now, and
what services are best offered at Cubberley to meet community needs. We need professional
expertise to do this work well. Only by investing in such a systematic study with the school
district as a willing partner can we be sure we are planning well for a facility that will serve Palo
Alto for years to come. Such a study will require that PAUSD and the Palo Alto Planning
Department work together to determine how to meet this broad range of community needs.
Securing the land at Cubberley and committing ourselves to the project of creating a
plan to develop the site for the co-location of a school and community services needs to
start today!
In 1991 Palo Alto chose to protect these 35 acres from disappearing into private housing
developments, and in doing so developed the community of services that is Cubberley today. It
32
is again time to use this wisdom, creativity, and cooperation to continue to develop school and
community facilities to share these 35 acres. We can start by taking the following steps:
1) The city and the school district should work together to design a flexible shared space to
meet the changing needs of both organizations over time, including an MOU detailing
how such joint planning work will be accomplished.
2) The city and school district should design a new lease including how to maintain the site
for the next 5 – 10 years.
3) Over the longer term the city should maintain or expand community uses at Cubberley
as Palo Alto’s population increases including building or remodeling on a portion of the
site to house most community center needs into the future.
4) The school district would thus maintain the potential to build and remodel the remaining
acres to create a high school for the future that would be comparable to Gunn and Paly,
even though those sites are larger.
City and School District Planning Efforts
Conflicts that must be recognized
The City needs to plan for an upgraded community center now, but the District’s need for a new
high school is likely 15-30 years into the future. The apparent difference in their planning
horizons can be turned into an opportunity: New construction as it becomes necessary can be
intelligently phased, adapting to changing goals of the two parties, City and District, while
allowing ongoing use of most of the site with construction disrupting only a portion. We cannot
expect the City to wait for 20 years while some buildings require major maintenance or
replacement, but we also cannot expect the District to plan the details now for a school that may
not be needed for 30 years.
City and District boundaries are not contiguous; the biggest difference is that all of Stanford and
half of Los Altos Hills are part of PAUSD, but not part of the City of Palo Alto. This requires
attention, but precedent exists in the current lease where child care space is provided at Nixon,
even though most students live outside City boundaries.
Talking points which the City and the District must resolve to plan future use of site
Both entities must agree to work together and avoid the “we” vs. “they” thinking that breeds
mistrust and prevents finding the best solution for our common community.
A shared site with both community center activities and a school can address the 41
developmental assets that are recognized as essential for the well-being of students and would
improve the social and emotional health of people of all ages.
Several site decisions need to be made before any construction can begin, including:
Parking and access (car, bus, foot and bike) to the site, including to the fields
Utilities on site
How could / should construction be phased in?
What safety precautions are essential given that building will occur while part of the site
is being used?
Which buildings need to be leveled in the long term and which ones could be
rehabilitated if they fit into overall site plan?
33
Which parts of the site should become largely community center, which parts should
eventually become largely school use and which parts should serve both purposes for all
or part of the day?
How separate do community center and district spaces need to be?
Is it necessary to make all buildings DSA compliant?
What should the basic architecture of the site look like?
What if the City and the District choose not to plan the future of this site together?
The fallback position remains that the city could build a very good community center on 8 acres
of the current site. This is decidedly an inferior choice compared to the joint or integrated use
we have been talking about. We would all lose in terms of flexibility and ability to offer the best
possible program for the least cost, but the City risks losing the Cubberley Community Center
entirely if we don’t plan now and build improved spaces soon. Marking time for 10-20 years is
not an option.
Recommendations
Short term -- the City of Palo Alto and the PAUSD should renegotiate a 5-year lease
that includes planning shared community center/school buildings and site parking,
including an MOU addressing how they will plan together to develop the new site.
To evaluate actual community needs, the City should contract for a professional
Community Needs Assessment.
Medium term -- the City could begin to build community center building(s) while allowing
the remainder of the site to continue to be used. If the district has made a decision
to open a new school, this is the time to plan how to build and remodel the
remainder of the site for school purposes and shared spaces.
Long term -- the City should continue to evaluate the best mix of tenants and a fee
schedule for community space, as well as how to share space and energy with
PAUSD as needed and desired.
34
Appendices
A. Recommended Criteria for Future Renting and Leasing of
Cubberley Space
The Cubberley Community Center space is leased or rented to a diverse array of program and
service providers. The selection process for who gets space at Cubberley is guided by the 1991
Cubberley Master Plan, which designates areas of the Center in the following categories:
Education – Preschool through Adults
Indoor Sports and Health
Outdoor Sports
Artists in Residence
Music & Theater
Dance
Hourly Rental Space, Other Non-profits, and City Services
While the time and scope of work of this report did not permit the CCAC to develop a detailed
renting and leasing priority system, the Community Needs Subcommittee did develop a
recommended process to help prioritize renter and tenant proposals. It should be noted that the
diversity and range of programs and services provided at Cubberley is extremely broad, and all
of the services in the categories (above) are considered a “need” for one constituent group or
another.
Community Needs Assessment
The next and more complex question is to understand the relative need for each category and
how these needs might be met through creative, innovative design of a new facility. To answer
this question we recommend a comprehensive City Community Needs Assessment done by a
professional assessor to determine the long-term needs for the community, possibly resulting in
a revised/new Cubberley Master Plan. Having a PAUSD representative on the committee will
help ensure that the City and the District understand each others’ needs and provide
complementary offerings. The recommendation below will ensure that space allocation
between competing potential users is an open, defensible process based on the master plan.
The CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee suggests a jury system for selecting future renters
and tenants similar to the system used for the artists’ studio space currently in use at Cubberley.
A selection committee would be ultimately responsible to the City management and comprised
of relevant City staff, commissioners and stakeholders such as:
City Staff – Director of Community Services
City Staff - Cubberley Manager
City Staff - Real Estate Manager
Parks and Recreation Commission representative
Human Relations Commission Representative
Cubberley Advisory Committee Chair
Community members-at-large for tenants and residents
PAUSD representative
35
Selection Criteria
The committee would use the selection criteria listed below to serve as a tool in guiding a
discussion on prioritizing proposals for use of space at Cubberley. There are three core filters
the selection committee would use to evaluate suitability of proposals.
1. The first filter is a scoring of proposals based on the following criteria:
Alignment with the Cubberley Master Plan
Appropriateness of space
Percentage of Palo Alto residents served
Demonstrated community need
Complements existing services
Adds to the diversity of Cubberley (e.g., Age, Culture, Interest)
Serves a large number of people
Is a Safety Net Service
Directly supports the City’s Comprehensive Plan
Provides a high community benefit
2. The second filter is an evaluation of alternative coverage of the service or program in Palo
Alto. The intent is for the committee to consider whether the community has access to
similar services elsewhere in Palo Alto. When the alternative coverage is low, a proposal
will rank higher for getting space at Cubberley, and when alternative coverage is high a
proposal will score relatively lower for getting space.
3. The third filter is the capacity to pay for the space requested. Recognizing the City of Palo
Alto is obligated to pay PAUSD millions of dollars for the lease of Cubberley, the offsetting
rental and lease revenue is a critical factor in the selection process – not the primary
criterion, but nevertheless one that must be thoughtfully considered.
Proposals ranking relatively higher on these three filters will be accommodated first while those
scoring relatively lower will be accommodated later or not at all.
36
B. What’s Special About the Cubberley Community Center?
Cubberley provides an irreplaceable public, comprehensive community facility that
reflects our community values.
1. Cubberley is our last large (35 acres), undeveloped (non-parkland), and publicly owned
space.
2. Palo Alto has wisely chosen to disperse our public buildings to make offerings walkable,
bikeable, and transit-oriented, a City of Palo Alto Land Use & Community Services policy as
laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. Cubberley in the south and Lucie Stern in the north
offer many classes and programs meeting this goal; youth and teen programs at Ventura
and Mitchell Park add even more balance for many non-drivers. (Note that the new Mitchell
Park community center simply replaces its original community spaces).
3. The Cubberley site provides a unique opportunity for PAUSD and the City to plan a creative
co-location of community services and school(s) that could work together to make this
valuable public property a treasured part of our community for all ages.
4. It is essential to appreciate what is provided now at Cubberley in order to judge what can
best be offered going forward. Staff has recently surveyed current tenants, and the
Community Needs Subcommittee has interviewed many of the following significant
Cubberley groups.
The Arts: 22 Artists in Residence currently have studios. Co-location yields benefits to
community and to artists; this model is being copied in locations around the world. Three
Resident Dance Programs have studios plus several small companies share spaces,
providing a complementary community and a variety of classes for all ages and abilities.
Music groups include Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra, Peninsula Women’s Chorus,
Peninsula Piano School, Palo Alto Philharmonic, and El Camino Youth Symphony.
Theater programs and camps round out the Cubberley arts programs.
Sports & Recreation: Outdoor Sports – Four softball fields and four soccer fields allow
spring, summer, and fall youth leagues to practice and play Monday - Saturday. Adults
use the fields heavily on Sundays. Tennis courts are used heavily at all hours. The
football field and track are used regularly for soccer, football and jogging. Indoor Sports
and Fitness – Foothill and the City offer a wide array of sports and fitness classes for all
ages and abilities. Foothill is not building a new gymnasium at its new location and
would like to maintain a presence at Cubberley after moving to its new site.
Senior Programs: Avenidas is interested in increasing opportunities for seniors and
combining Senior Wellness programs with the existing Stroke and Cardiovascular
programs as well as Senior Friendship Day and other senior social activities.
Education: Preschools and after-school care – Such care provides for early learning
and enables parents to work, confident that their children are thriving. Private schools,
tutoring and continuing education -- Foothill College, the City, and the School District all
offer classes, many of which are adult education classes.
Community Organizations: Friends of Palo Alto Library, Wildlife Rescue, spiritual
groups and others. Rooms can be rented for meetings, retreats, and special occasions.
37
C. Summary of the “Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on
Palo Alto’s Social and Community Services”
This analysis was initiated by the Community Services Department of the City of Palo Alto and
was undertaken by a task force of community leaders and service provider agencies. The
resulting white paper was published in November 2006 and focused on lifestyle issues including
education, recreation, health, fitness, leisure and social services
The study aimed to assist Palo Alto’s city government, local nonprofit agencies, and the
community at large in understanding some of the impending impacts of a demographic
environment driven by the aging of the Baby Boom Generation, noting that such changes will
have an impact on policies, programs, services and practices within the community.
Study Summary. The thoughts and concerns of some 400 Palo Alto Boomers can be
summarized as follows:
Boomers want to live independently as they age and the concept of a “senior friendly”
environment, especially with regards to mobility, is especially important.
There is a deep desire to be engaged in community and social activities and have a variety
of learning opportunities.
Palo Alto Boomers want to stay involved, for either lifestyle or financial reasons, through
volunteerism or continued part or full-time employment.
Boomers want to remain physically and mentally active and healthy, well into their elder
years.
80% of the Boomers say they are planning to stay in Palo Alto as they age.
Future Services Needed
When asked to identify the services and programs that Boomers are presently using that they
will need more in the future, a variety of services and programs were identified. The five major
themes, in order of priority, that dominated the discussion were:
1) Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Examples cited most frequently were travel; activities at night for adults/seniors; activities for
widows/widowers; creative arts classes; book clubs; Stanford Lively Arts; inter-generational
interaction; dance groups; poetry nights; art and theater events; open microphone; and
increased social gathering points.
2) Parks and Recreational Services and Facilities
Within this theme the most mentioned uses were activities that draw people to parks; lawn
bowling; Tai Chi; playgrounds for seniors; senior and community centers; a golf club for
Boomers; and sports leagues for seniors.
38
3) Senior Designed Community/Social Services
Examples cited included buddy systems for walking, hiking and exercise; quality Police, Fire
and EMT services; food closets; outreach for shut-ins; social services targeted at aging;
walk-able neighborhood shops and services; universal housing concepts; and vibrant
downtown neighborhoods.
4) Education and Library Services
Some of the specific services and programs identified as important were readings clubs;
technical classes; quality library facilities and programs; Palo Alto Adult School; City-
sponsored special interest classes; Stanford continuing studies; and Foothill College.
5) Information and Referral Services
Examples for information and referral programs included continued communication about
programs for adults; easy, single point access to information on caregivers; technology
services; Medicare advice; tax preparation
Other themes included health care/in home services, and health and fitness programs.
Community Survey Results
323 surveys were received over a six-week period from Palo Alto resident “Boomers.”
What Services Do You Currently Depend On? Top 3
Education and Libraries
Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities (including references to intergenerational activities,
connectivity, social support groups, interest-based activities vs. age-based activities,
more daytime activities, senior related activities, and social integration)
Health and Fitness Opportunities
What New Services Are Needed? Top 3
Transportation
Health and Fitness Opportunities
Education and Libraries
Of All Services, Which Are the Most Valuable to You, Personally? Top 3
Education and Libraries
Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Health and Fitness Opportunities
39
D. Neighboring Community Centers
Sunnyvale Community Centers
Community Center, located at 550 East Remington Drive
The Sunnyvale Community Center is a unique recreation complex which includes a Creative Arts Center,
Performing Arts Center, Indoor Sports Center, general Recreation Center and an Arboretum Complex.
Use of the Sunnyvale Community Center is for City-sponsored community recreation activities in which
anyone may participate. However, there are also accommodations to fit almost every need by private
groups from small meeting rooms that can be used by as few as 15 people, to state-of-the-art, Internet-
ready conference rooms that can seat 300 guests or clients.
The Sunnyvale Community Center boasts a 200-seat theater, which has a fully rigged and lighted stage
that can accommodate plays, recitals and concerts. The theatre hosts two resident theatre companies:
California Theatre Center (adult professional theatre company), and Sunnyvale Community Players
(volunteer community theater organization).
Programs and Activities
Senior Center
The Community Center campus also includes the Sunnyvale Senior Center, which hosts educational,
recreational and cultural activities for adults 50 years and older. The Senior Center also includes several
rooms, including a large ballroom and a professional kitchen that can be rented for large events.
After School Recreation Programs
The majority of after-school programs are conducted at elementary and middle school sites in Sunnyvale
or at the Sunnyvale Community Center.
Summer Recreation Programs
The City of Sunnyvale also offers a wide variety of recreation, sports, arts and enrichment activities and
camps for children and teens during the summer months. For middle school and high school-age teens,
there is a summer recreation volunteer program designed to provide young people with the opportunity to
develop leadership and job skills. Swim classes and drop-in swim at local pools are available for children
and adults.
Activities for Adults
Year-round programs for adults range from adult sports leagues and drop-in gym programs to pottery and
other visual and performing arts classes.
Therapeutic Recreation Program
The Therapeutic Recreation Program promotes the development of new leisure skills, increases self-
esteem and social skills. The program provides information and referral services and participates in
cooperative recreational programs with other cities for special events. We provide social recreation
programs for individuals with all types of disabilities and all levels of functioning.
Greenbelt Stroll
Hike, swim, play tennis, picnic in the park -- enjoy 2.7 mile-long stretch of the John W. Christian
Greenbelt.
Columbia Neighborhood Center, 785 Morse Avenue 3.5 miles from the main Community Center
The Columbia Neighborhood Center (CNC) was developed to provide social, recreational and educational
services for north Sunnyvale residents. This collaborative project between the City of Sunnyvale,
Sunnyvale Elementary School District, Advanced Micro Devices, Sunnyvale residents, and numerous
community agencies includes the AMD Sports and Service Center building, Columbia Middle School, and
the Sunnyvale Preschool Center. The CNC is open to all community residents and provides a variety of
services and activities year round, seven days a week, including evenings.
40
Cupertino
Quinlan Community Center, 10185 Stelling Road, .3 miles from the Sports Center
Built in 1989 and opened to the public in 1990, this 27,000 square foot facility has won numerous awards
for its innovative design. It is centrally located on Stelling Road near Stevens Creek Boulevard and enjoys
views of the Cupertino foothills and beautiful Memorial Park right out its back door.
The Quinlan Community Center is home to the City of Cupertino's Parks & Recreation Department,
the Cupertino Historical Museum, as well as serving as a sub-station for the Sheriff's Department. The art
of the Cupertino Fine Arts League lines the walls throughout the building.
The Quinlan Community Center is a multi-use building, offering classrooms for Parks & Recreation
classes, as well as a variety of other rooms available to rent for your business or personal needs. The
Cupertino Room features a full caterer's kitchen and can accommodate up to 275 people in a banquet
format, or up to 300 people for an event with theater-style seating, making it an ideal spot for weddings,
receptions, corporate seminars or meetings. The Social Room can accommodate up to 80 people, ideal
for smaller gatherings like birthday parties, baby showers or even an employee retreat. The attached
patio provides a quiet spot to relax and enjoy a bit of fresh air or to slip out for a stroll around the park.
Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue 1.2 miles from the Sports Center
The facility offers state of the art audio/visual equipment for all your technological needs. Two six-foot by
eight-foot mounted screens present the opportunity for dynamic presentations, certain to make an
impression. Laptop connections are available throughout. A plasma flat screen in the elegant reception
lobby adds ambiance to your event while keeping patrons informed. Worried about technology set-up and
operation? Our staff assistants are present throughout your event to help.
Community Hall can also be transformed into an elegant banquet facility for wedding receptions or
parties.
Cupertino Sports Center, 21111 Stevens Creek Blvd
The Cupertino Sports Center features 17 tennis courts, a fitness center with LifeFitness and Star Trac
strength training equipment, LifeFitness and Hoist free weights, LifeFitness and Star Trac bikes and
treadmills, LifeFitness ellipticals, Techno Gym Waves, Precor AMT's, 2 racquetball courts, complete
locker room and child watch facilities. The resident tennis professional offers private and group lessons,
pro shop and Friday Night social drop-in tennis programs.
Cupertino Senior Center, 21251 Stevens Creek Blvd 1 block from Sports Center
The Cupertino Senior Center is Cupertino’s hub for activities, information and services that are specifically
geared toward active adults 50 years and older.
Cupertino Teen Center, 21111 Stevens Creek Blvd
The Teen Center is a new facility with all of the latest gaming equipment and cool features that teens
enjoy. Take your pick from a game of pool, foosball, air hockey, pin ball, Xbox 360, Wii, PSII, five
computers, board games, two big screen TV’s, movies, and more! The Teen Center also has a
kitchenette which includes: refrigerator/freezer, microwave, toaster oven, two (2) large tables, and fifteen
(15) chairs. It can be rented for parties or special occasions for $200 / 3 hours.
41
Saratoga
Joan Pisani Community Center, 19655 Allendale Ave
Can accommodate 15 to 300 guests for a wedding, reception, party or meeting. Garden patio, large
multipurpose rooms and kitchen facilities are available one year in advance. Non profit groups receive
50% discount, Residents of Saratoga receive a 10% discount.
Preschool, Youth Art & Enrichment
Saratoga Community Preschool, My First Art Class
Youth Oil Painting; Public Speaking, Pre-public Speaking
Music Together, Vocal Performance, Magic, Clay, Piano Games, Beginning Guitar
Youth & Teen Health & Fitness
Archery, Jr. Rock Climbing, Fencing, Squash, Shotokan Karate, Gymnastics, Just 4 Kicks Soccer, Lil’
Sluggers, Deep Cliff Golf, Atherton Lacrosse, Ice Skating, Hockey, Tennis
Dance Force, April Paye
Karate, Fun Fun Fundamentals
Saratoga School of Dance: Ballet, Tiny Tots Dance, Ballet/Tap, Boys Tap Dance, Tap
Teen & Community Programs
Driver’s Ed, CPR, Youth Oil Painting, Beg. Guitar
Adult Health & Fitness
Jacki Sorensen Aerobics, Hula Hoop, Jazzercise, Baby Boomers Fitness, Ergo Fitness Workshop
Deep Cliff Golf classes, Adult Tennis
Cook Your Buns, Eating for Vibrant Health
Saratoga School of Dance: Tap, Latinizmo, Folk Dancing, Zumba
Lunchtime Yoga, Vinyasa Yoga, Beg. & Adv. Yoga, Rosen Method Movement, Beg. Tai Chi
Ballroom, African Dance, Belly Dancing, Ladies Latin
Adult Arts & Enrichment
Ikebana, Adult Oil Painting, Beading
Landscaping Design, Chocolate Truffles, Free Your Voice, Take a Tour of Italy, Chinese Painting
Saratoga Senior Center, adjacent to the Saratoga Community Center
The Senior Center serves as a vital resource for seniors and older adults in the Saratoga community,
offering over 35 activities and classes, as well as other services, trips, and special events, programs and
activities, wellness screenings, speakers, the opportunity to build friendships, as well as a caregivers'
support group
Warner Hutton House, located at 13777-A Fruitvale Ave, around the corner from Community Center
This charming & romantic 1896 Queen Anne house includes a garden patio with an inviting gazebo. It is
the ultimate setting for your small, intimate garden wedding, and is perfect for small parties, elegant
socials or business retreats. The house and garden have a 30 to 80 person capacity and includes a full
service kitchen.
Saratoga Prospect Center, located at 19848 Prospect Road, 3.1 miles from Community Center
The Saratoga Prospect Center (formerly the North Campus) offers an attractive site for business
meetings, wedding receptions, parties, and seminars. Facility Rental Discounts (one discount allowed per
rental): Non profit groups receive 50% discount.
42
Mountain View
Community Center, 201 S Rengstorff Ave in Rengstorff Park
When the Community Center is not being used for recreation classes and City events, it is available for
private rental. Located in Rengstorff Park, the Center provides a relaxing setting along with professional,
friendly service. Trees, turf and beautiful plants abound in the park and facilities. There is a skate park,
pool, BBQ areas, tennis courts, playgrounds, and a natural grass play area in this beautiful park.
Rooms for rent include the Auditorium (capacity 200), Lower Social Hall (capacity 100), Rooms 2
and 3 (capacities 40and 60)
Preschool programs
Classes are for Tot & Preschool, Youth & Teen, Adults & Seniors
Gym Rentals – shared facilities with open middle schools
The City of Mountain View has two great gymnasium facilities that are available for rent Monday-Friday,
5:30 pm to 10:00 pm and 8:30 am to 4:00 pm on weekends. Both gymnasiums are divided into two
sides/courts (half gym) or one full gym and are ideal for activities such as basketball or volleyball. The
auxiliary rooms are great for many activities including dance and exercise classes.
Mountain View Sports Pavilion at 1185 Castro St, 1.9 miles from Community Center
Whisman Sports Center at1500 Middlefield Rd, 1.4 miles from Community Center
Senior Center, 266 Escuela Avenue, .7 miles from Community Center
Game Room -- Billiards tables, table tennis, puzzles and more!
Classes & Workshops -- Classes include exercise, arts & crafts, dance, music and enrichment! Also, sign
up for free workshops on various topics.
Special Events -- Special events year-round for all to enjoy including a Summer Picnic and Holiday Gala!
Exercise Room -- Equipped with treadmills, elliptical trainers, free weights, stationary bikes and more!
Social Services -- Blood pressure and Alzheimer's screenings, legal assistance and health insurance
counseling are offered.
Travel Program -- Expand horizons with trips both locally and further afield.
Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, 500 Castro Street 1.9 miles from the Community
Center. http://www.ci.mtnview.ca.us/mvcpa/mvcpa.html
Intelligently designed with state-of-the-art technology, the Center is perfectly suited for its stated goal--to
host a comprehensive performing arts program for a culturally diverse community.
Historic Adobe Building, 157 Moffett Boulevard 1.5 miles from Community Center
The restored Adobe Building maintains its rustic charm while offering modern conveniences and is
available for a variety of events ranging from weddings to corporate.
The Rengstorff House and gardens in Shoreline Park are available for rental daily except during our
public hours, (Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday, 11 am to 5 pm). Included in the rental fee is the use of
the entire first floor of this historic Victorian home. The maximum capacity of the house using only the
indoor areas is 49 people. Using both the indoor and outdoor areas, the house and grounds can
accommodate up to 150 guests and is wheelchair-accessible. The gracious dining room and three lovely
parlors, all decorated with classic period décor, open up to brick patios surrounded by manicured lawns,
blooming flowers and natural areas.
43
Menlo Park
Burgess Park, 700 Alma St
Originally a part of the Dibble Hospital Facilities and purchased in 1948, Burgess Park is one of the first
City-owned recreation areas in Menlo Park.
Arrillaga Family Recreation Center, adjacent to Burgess Park
The picturesque Arrillaga Recreation Center offers room rentals for both residents and non-residents.
This center, complete with full kitchen and ample parking, presents a relaxing setting and is surrounded
by a park. Arrillaga Family Recreation Center offers seven rooms for rent of various sizes (680 square
feet to 2,378 square feet) including 2 dance studios to accommodate a variety of activities from weddings
to birthdays and even corporate events.
Arrillaga Family Gymnasium, adjacent to Burgess Park
Facilities include basketball, volleyball, and badminton courts for drop-in, youth, and adult leagues. The
gym is rented 6 mornings per week for health and fitness classes.
Arrillaga Family Gymnastics Center, adjacent to Burgess Park
10,000 sq ft gymnastics room, multipurpose room and exercise room. Menlo Park Gymnastics currently
has a girl’s competitive team, which has been very successful in competition. The new facility has the
space and equipment to develop a boy’s competitive program and gives the City the ability to host
competitions and demonstrations. Future program plans include classes in Rhythmic Gymnastics, Circus
skills and cheerleading. In addition to the developmental gymnastics equipment, the new gym has an
1800 sq ft pre-school area with an adjacent toddler restroom.
Onetta Harris Community Center, 100 Terminal Ave by the Belle Haven Pool, 3.6 miles from
Burgess Park
The OHCC offers rentals for Menlo Park residents and non-residents. The center features a multi-purpose
room, kitchen, gymnasium, computer lab, fitness center, conference room, pre-school room, and two
classrooms. Additionally, the OHCC is home to various City of Menlo Park programs and special events
which have included, Multi-Cultural Days, Teen Dances, Camp OHCC, Game Nights, Career Fairs,
Holiday Celebrations, Community Classes, and Meetings.
Senior Center
The Menlo Park Senior Center is located at 100 Terminal Ave, next to the Belle Haven Pool, Onetta
Harris Community Center, Beechwood School, and the newly renovated Kelly Park. The Senior Center
offers rentals for Menlo Park residents and non-residents. The center features a Lobby, Ballroom,
Community Room, Imagination Room, Computer Lab, and Poolside Patio. Additionally, the Senior Center
is home to various programs and special events which have included Luncheons, Receptions, BBQs,
Picnics, and Fiestas.
Teen Services
Menlo Park Community Services Department has programs geared for teens. All programs are set up so
teens will be with others of the same age and same grade. We offer a series of programs focusing on
everything from sports and adventure, to education and career development.
44
E. Websites
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/cubberley_community_advisory_committee.asp
Cubberley Community Center Background Information
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/29755
Cubberley Master Plan
http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/civicax/filebank/documents/30937
Palo Alto Fields Advisory Committee Final Report - December 5, 2002
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/31552
Sunnyvale Community Centers
http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityServices/CommunityCenters.aspx
Cupertino Community Center
http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=178
Saratoga Community Center
http://www.saratoga.ca.us/cityhall/rec/facility_and_park_reservations/facilities/cscenter.asp
Mountain View Community Center
http://www.ci.mtnview.ca.us/city_hall/comm_services/recreation_programs_and_services/fa
cilities_and_reservations/reservations.asp
Menlo Park Community Center
http://www.menlopark.org/departments/dep_comservices.html
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Volume 2
Facilities Subcommittee Report
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE
REPORT
March 2013
Jerry August, Brian Carilli, Penny Ellson, Jennifer Hetterly, Jim Schmidt
i
CCAC
Facilities Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary
Local demands of a growing population for both public school and community services,
coupled with a shrinking supply of available large parcels for public facilities development
and Cubberley’s prime, easily accessible location in the core of Palo Alto, make
competing local interests in Cubberley particularly acute. Facing enrollment projections
that exceed currently planned high school capacity as early as 2020, PAUSD would like
flexibility to use the full 35-acre site for school use. The City currently uses the whole
facility for a valued, vibrant and irreplaceable community center. Like the PAUSD, the
City anticipates increasing demand for its programming. Identifying a cost effective
solution that enables both agencies to serve their overlapping constituencies using this
prime site with greater efficiency is a key objective of this report.
All of those demands for Cubberley cannot be met in its “as-is” condition. Given the
location of each agency’s currently owned parcel, neither could meet its service needs
on its designated acreage without substantial redesign and construction. Furthermore,
the 57 year-old facility is run down and energy inefficient, and its current layout wastes
valuable space and is neither designed for, nor well suited to, modern school or
community programming.
The ideal timelines for action on Cubberley differ for the District and the City. Given
uncertainty about school enrollment projections and what school programming might
look like in 10, 20, or 30 years, PAUSD’s independent interests would be served by
preserving Cubberley “as-is” at the City’s expense, until whenever they are ready to use
it. However, huge unmet infrastructure needs create pressure for the City to decide
now about investments in Cubberley services. Without certainty about how long such
services can remain on the full site, or on the site at all, and with mounting maintenance
and operating costs, it is hard to justify continued investment in the aged Cubberley
facility. The heavily used community center services will be increasingly difficult and
expensive to relocate over time and the benefits of Cubberley’s prime location cannot
be duplicated. (See Facilities Subcommittee Report, pp. 5-7, 12). All of these factors
contribute to an urgent need for certainty and near-term planning on the City’s part.
High quality school and community programs/services are both critical to the vitality and
prosperity of the Palo Alto community. So the Facilities Subcommittee sought to
answer two questions:
Can a more efficient site design create adequate space for a community center
and a high school with comparable building space to Gunn and Palo Alto High?
2. Can phased development address the demands of divergent timelines to the
benefit of the Palo Alto Community?
ii
The answer to both is “yes.”
Redesign Can Accommodate Both School And Community Needs
If each agency keeps its current parcel in the “as-is” configuration, the District will have
to build new classrooms and tennis courts and invest in other renovations (including
seismic upgrades, removal of hazardous material, etc.) to put Cubberley on equal footing
with Gunn and Palo Alto High Schools. The City will have to address the loss of field,
gym, theater and auditorium space as well as parking. So rather than considering
existing facilities through the lens of current ownership, the Facilities Subcommittee
focused on site usage strictly from the perspective of space and type of facility – not
getting into detail about who gets what and where. That analysis revealed significant
inefficiencies in the design of buildings, circulation, site areas (landscaping and outdoor
courtyards and utilities), and parking.
Cubberley currently provides about 175,000 net square feet of 1950’s-era buildings on 4
acres – only 11% of the site, but spread out in such a way that the footprint
monopolizes a much larger area (over 9 acres) and precludes more functional use of the
spaces between and around the buildings. The necessary circulation areas to support
that building configuration consist of covered walkways that require significant and
ongoing roofing costs, reduce natural light into the buildings and create a foreboding
tunnel effect. Site areas are largely comprised of narrow strips, isolated between
buildings, an amphitheater and single function perimeter landscaping. On-grade parking
consumes 5.5 acres of land for about 735 spaces and fails to maximize opportunities to
put buildings where they will have the least visual impact on surrounding neighborhoods.
(See Facilities Subcommittee Report pp. 7-9 and Appendix B).
iii
Taking the process a step further, the Subcommittee determined that moving parking
below grade, improving circulation, and reconfiguring site areas to provide more useful
gathering spaces could yield 9.4 acres (400,000 square feet) of recaptured space at
Cubberley without sacrificing building square footage or playing field capacity and
without adding multi-story buildings. 9.4 acres is comparable in size to six football fields
or more than 300,000 net square feet of single story buildings.
With redesign of the Cubberley site, over 475,000 square feet could be available for
single story buildings: 300,000+ square feet (from the 9.4 recaptured acres) + 175,000
square feet (set aside to offset the “as-is” building square footage) = 475,000 square
feet. By comparison, the estimated building footprints at Gunn and Palo Alto High
Schools are 231,000 and 269,000 square feet, respectively. If not needed for buildings,
extra square footage could be assigned to additional sports facilities, site or circulation
areas, or parking. If the community supports multi-story buildings, even more
opportunities could be created. (See Facilities Subcommittee Report pp. 9-12).
Cubberley presents a unique opportunity to employ modern building practices to
maximize use of space and potential for capturing synergies of shared use. The
Cubberley site may be smaller than the other two high school sites, but its potential to
carry an equal or better school facility along with a community center could deliver
unparalleled community benefits.
Planning for Phased Development Will Benefit PAUSD, the City and
the Palo Alto Community
Facilities development naturally follows a phased process. Programming decisions must
be made to drive design, and design, bidding, and permitting must precede construction.
Before demolition begins, facilities must be vacated. Whenever the School District
decides to move back in, (the CCAC School Needs Subcommittee thinks this is an
inevitability), community programs/services will have to be consolidated into a much
smaller footprint. Planning for redevelopment of City facilities now could avoid a
sizeable and lengthy gap in services, allowing tenants to transition in and out of different
Cubberley facilities as construction progresses. If no planning is done until PAUSD is
able to decide to move forward with design of a new high school, time will be short.
The benefits of transitioning will be lost. And the pressure to get students into seats
may preclude concerted efforts to identify and exploit potential efficiencies and
compatibilities of use. Both agencies will have to scrape and build as quickly as possible.
Both PAUSD and the City have a strong interest in what the other does with its
respective acreage. The CCAC strongly recommends that they start planning together
now for the entire site. Ideally that planning process would identify opportunities for
joint use of programmed facilities on a time-separated basis (see Facilities Subcommittee
Report pp. 14-15). But even if timelines for programming decisions cannot be aligned,
cooperative planning efforts can result in a phased development plan that would serve
shared interests in non-programmed facilities in the near term and maximize flexibility
for future joint use in the long term.
iv
If they start planning together now, PAUSD and the City could jointly create a phased
development plan that would:
Identify a location on the site for a community center that will preserve the most
flexibility for future school design;
Engender commitments to design flexible programming spaces that can be
devoted strategically and alternately for future school use and community use as
needed;
Provide for distinct construction phases that can roll out over time: Phase I –
community center, Phase II – potential joint use facilities (once compatible uses
are agreed upon), Phase III – high school; and
Provide taxpayers with a clearly defined long-term vision to explain and support
sequential fund raising initiatives.
In addition, such a plan could realize significant ongoing efficiencies for both agencies by:
Incorporating plans for traffic and safety operations that will ultimately support
all uses; and
Including mechanical, operational and parking facilities that will ultimately support
all uses.
Conclusion
Joint planning for the co-location of school and community uses on the Cubberley site
offers an unparalleled opportunity to meet the shared needs of the future to the great
benefit of the Palo Alto community. Redesign can create ample space for both school
and community use. Phased planning can serve the City’s immediate need for certainty
of a future home for community services while maintaining maximum flexibility for
future school design and potential joint use. Without co-location, the need to purchase
new land (if it is available at all) for community center services adds exorbitant costs to
the equation. Without cooperative planning, the opportunity is lost to meet school and
community programming needs in a flexible way and to realize efficiencies in design,
construction, use and operations. Likewise, without cooperative planning, excessive
maintenance and operations costs may needlessly continue until the aged facilities are
replaced. Both agencies, and the taxpayers of Palo Alto stand to benefit from
cooperative planning now for future shared use of the Cubberley site. If the City, the
PAUSD, and the community can rise to the challenge of engaging in concerted planning
now, Palo Alto can have the best of both worlds.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary i
Introduction 1
Background – The Cubberley Property 2
Defining the Problem Set 3
Growing and Changing Community and School Needs 3
Budgets: Money Matters 5
Budgets: Opportunity Costs 6
Considering Our Options: Analysis of Cubberley Land Use 7
Existing Use 7
Potential Use 9
Redevelopment Challenges/Opportunities 12
Conclusion 12
General and Specific Recommendations 13
Appendices
A. How We Studied the Issues 17
B. Methodology for Site Analysis 18
C. Problem Statement 20
D. Working Paper – Needs for Facilities 22
1
Our Last 35 Acres:
Planning to Maximize Cubberley’s Potential
"I was seldom able to see an opportunity until it had ceased to be one." ~Mark Twain
INTRODUCTION
The 35-acre Cubberley site is Palo Alto’s last large, publicly owned parcel with potential
for facilities redevelopment. This ideally located site is easily accessible from schools
and neighborhoods by walking, bicycling, and transit. Its valued current use offers a rich
array of programs and services to residents of all ages as a community center and
playing fields used by up to 600,000 visitors per year. The heavily used community
facilities will be difficult and expensive to replace when the Palo Alto Unified School
District (PAUSD or the District) reclaims Cubberley for school use as planned. This
problem grows more acute as each year new development fills limited Palo Alto parcels
that might be used for community facility and playing field replacement.
The Facilities Subcommittee recognizes PAUSD’s uncertainty about the “enrollment
rollercoaster” and high school facility/programming needs fifteen or twenty years from
now. These uncertainties present challenges that must be addressed by any facilities
plan. Likewise, with anticipated population growth and demographic shifts, City of Palo
Alto (CPA or the City) community service needs are also projected to increase and
change. The City is already grappling with a shortage of playing field space in addition to
uncertainty about future needs of an aging populace.
In addition, significant expenditures related to deferred maintenance on the aging facility
that must be addressed in the next five to ten years add complexity to the Cubberley
problem set.
Both agencies are faced with population growth and budget challenges. The City and
PAUSD urgently need to collaborate now to identify the best use of this last 35 acres
and its aging facilities -- to create a plan to cost efficiently meet the future needs of Palo
Alto residents served by both agencies with the quality and scope of services the
community expects.
This report describes the current site, defines the problem set posed by competing and
complementary District and CPA needs and analyzes current and potential facilities
usage on the site. Our analysis, along with that of the other CCAC Subcommittees,
leads us to the firm and clear conclusion that co-location of a school and a community
center on the 35-acre site is both feasible and desirable. The next five years present a
singular opportunity to develop a flexible plan for phased development to meet the vital
needs of the Palo Alto community.
2
BACKGROUND – THE CUBBERLEY PROPERTY
The City of Palo Alto currently owns 8 acres of the 35-acre Cubberley facility, located
in the northeast corner of the site. The city’s acreage contains most of the campus’
classroom space, art and dance studios, some parking, a portable building used by
Friends of the Palo Alto Library (FOPAL), and the tennis courts. PAUSD owns the
remaining 27 acres, including the playing fields, a dance studio, weight room, gymnasiums
and pavilion, multi-purpose auditorium and theater with music rooms, three wings of
classrooms, a portable building used by FOPAL, and most of the parking areas.
PAUSD’s 27 acres is currently leased to the City for approximately $7 million per year
(including Covenant Not to Develop) plus all maintenance costs, expenses which are
supported by the City’s General Fund.
Quality of Facility and Maintenance Expense
Most of the buildings and other facilities at the Cubberley site were completed by 1955.
Some additional buildings (Pavilion, Theater, and others) were added in the early 1960’s
3
along with a new artificial turf field in 2009. The site was built to then-existing school
standards. While the structures have stood up well given their age, they have become
increasingly run-down and expensive to maintain and were not designed to support
current and future needs.
The Cubberley site is inefficiently used by modern standards. Existing buildings are
single story, per the 1950’s model of Palo Alto school architecture. The building layout
results in long distances between buildings through low, covered walkways that give a
foreboding tunnel effect, block natural light and require costly repair and replacement.
Single pane windows, poor insulation and louvers contribute to high energy costs. Air
conditioning is not provided throughout most of the site, heating is ineffective and aged
wiring does not adequately support today’s technological needs. The small, largely
uniform, individual classroom design also limits the types of groups and activities that
can be accommodated and fails to provide appropriate gathering spaces for modern
school or community use.
In addition to being inefficiently designed and poorly suited to the structural needs of
modern school and community programming, the aged site is costly to maintain.
According to the recent Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission (IBRC) report, current,
ongoing maintenance requires a minimum annual expenditure of $330,000 (optimal
maintenance should be closer to $800,000 per year). On top of that, the IBRC
concluded that an additional $10.2 million in major deferred maintenance would be
required between now and 2016, followed by $4.9 million before 2026 and another $3.7
million by 2036.
DEFINING THE PROBLEM SET
Growing & Changing Community and School Needs
City Services & Programs Needs
Population growth translates into more users of all ages. Demographic shifts toward an
aging and more ethnically diverse population will require suitable programming for the
specialized needs of those growing cohorts. The combination of growth and
demographic changes demand both quantitative and qualitative adjustments to the
community services offered in Palo Alto. Such a large undertaking requires concerted
study, advance planning and significant investment.
Currently, CPA uses the entire Cubberley site for community services, both its own 8-
acre portion and the 27 acres it leases from PAUSD. The Community Needs
Subcommittee, together with staff’s recent survey of current tenants, has provided an
overview of existing programs and services at Cubberley. Present programming has
been shaped by the existing Cubberley Master Plan (as amended 1996) — which appears
to have been successful in achieving a key aim, creating clusters of related arts and
service groups that subsequently formed communities who share resources and
information, creating synergies that benefit the whole community. Recently, CPA staff
4
points out, these micro communities have been identified as a “developmental asset,”
resources where users connect to find supportive and strengthening community.
In addition, a November 2006 white paper (outcomes of work of a community task
force, written by Richard James, CPA Community Services and Lisa Hendrickson,
Avenidas) on “The Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on Palo Alto’s Social and
Community Services” projects that between 2000 and 2030, Palo Alto’s older adult
population (age 55 and up) could more than double to over 36,000 (p.7.) Further, a
survey of local Boomers indicated that 80% intend to stay in Palo Alto when they retire.
These are indicators of important changes that require rethinking the city’s community
service offerings.
The white paper provides a “surface exploration” of lifestyle issues and broad
recommendations for service needs related to the city’s aging population, including:
education, recreation, health, fitness, leisure, volunteer opportunities, and social
services. The report recommended expansion of opportunities and facilities for
recreation related activities for “all levels of fitness, age and disabilities.”
What is not clear from any existing resources is specifically how Cubberley fits into a
larger picture of citywide available services -- accommodating service needs now and in
the future. This is important because a key problem for facilities planning is that it must be
driven by programming — and programming needs have not been well defined.
Facilities are places where programs and services occur. Program/service needs should
drive the requirement for facilities. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and its amendments
provide a broad vision and policy framework to guide both current and future services.
(See Appendix D, pp. 22-24). The capability to provide those services at Cubberley is
necessarily somewhat limited by its existing and available facilities. A Community
Services Background Report (7/21/09) was prepared with intention to amend a portion
of the Comprehensive Plan. The Report covers all of Palo Alto, not just the Cubberley
Community Center. Needs prominently identified were: playing fields, gym space,
childcare capacity, response to the unique needs of the aging Baby Boomer generation,
and improved cost-recovery strategies to reduce the draw on CPA’s General Fund.
However, this vision and policy framework is not specific enough to inform a facility
design program. Whether the city builds at Cubberley or some other location, a
comprehensive assessment and forecast of community service supply and demand is
needed so programs can be well-designed and prioritized to meet specific community
needs in a flexible way.
Such a study was done to inform the building program for the new senior center in
Sunnyvale (10/2/12 interview with Manuel Gerard, Recreation Supervisor, City of
Sunnyvale). The study provided the data necessary to develop a facility program that
precisely fit into the Sunnyvale citywide fabric of community services — and resulted in
a building design that is uniquely suited to that city’s senior users and their changing
needs. This type of comprehensive needs and existing facilities assessment would
similarly provide the information the City of Palo Alto needs to inform community
service facility program decisions at Cubberley and elsewhere.
5
School Needs
The PAUSD Board of Education (BOE) has expressed uncertainty about whether the
District would scrape the current Cubberley buildings and completely rebuild in the
future (9/12/2012 BOE meeting). They would like all buildings to have maximum
flexibility for the future; most newly built school buildings must comply with the then
current requirements of the Division of the State Architect (DSA), the Field Act, and
other California laws. Superintendent Kevin Skelly has stated that he believes the
existing Cubberley facilities “have some life left in them” for school use. In the near
term, the PAUSD is not using Cubberley except for its lease revenue stream and would
like to renew the lease for an additional five-year period when it expires on December
31, 2014. In the long term, the District wishes to preserve its option to reopen
Cubberley for a future school or schools.
In a BOE Study Session Report on February 28, 2012, PAUSD staff reported that the
Strong Schools Bond program will build capacity for 2,300 students at each existing high
school. The straight-line high school enrollment projection shows this capacity adequate
through 2020. This expectation is based on projected student enrollment average
annual growth of 2%.
The School Needs Committee correctly points out that Palo Alto demographic
projections are highly uncertain, as they are affected by economic expansion/recession,
ABAG housing recommendations, and other significant factors that cannot be projected
beyond 3-5 years. It is highly likely a new high school may be needed much later then
2020. The district, in some discussions, has suggested that may be as far out as 2030 or
2040. In any case, their dependence on Cubberley lease revenues and the significant
costs of opening a third high school are strong incentives to postpone reclaiming the
site.
Gunn and Palo Alto High Schools have 49.7 and 44.2-acre sites, respectively, primarily
built with single-story buildings, while PAUSD owns only 27 acres at the Cubberley site.
The quantity, quality, and type of future educational and ancillary services needs are
undefined at present. Likewise the space needs and design are undefined. Hence, at
this time, the future needs, and future facilities required to support those needs, are
here guessed at by using experience at existing PAUSD high schools -- i.e., similar to
those at Palo Alto and Gunn High Schools.
Finally, it is important to remember that building to DSA requirements will be necessary
for any shared use facilities and this may impact building costs.
Budgets: Money Matters
Both PAUSD and the City have significant budget constraints. PAUSD has stated its
present need for a continued revenue stream from the City for the Cubberley lease and
Covenant (currently $7 million per year, 4.4% of the district’s $159 million operating
budget). PAUSD passed a parcel tax in 2010 that supports its strained operating budget.
Secondary school construction funds under the current PAUSD Strong Schools bond
measure have been spent or encumbered, so they cannot be used for Cubberley.
6
The City struggles to close budget gaps year after year and to control a looming
projected structural deficit. With limited opportunities for raising new revenues and a
flattening Utilities Users Tax, funding for Cubberley is a concern. The City’s budget
does not yet include funding for a “Cubberley solution.” The planned departure of the
Foothill College, the center’s longest term and largest tenant has further pressed the
City toward more careful study of its options at Cubberley.
The IBRC identified a citywide backlog of deferred maintenance projects on the order
of $40 million (“catch-up”), including $18.8 million in deferred maintenance that must be
made at Cubberley. Of the Cubberley expenditures, according to the CCAC Finance
Subcommittee, “$8.43 million is on City Buildings and $10.4 is on School District buildings.
This would cover infrastructure improvements which would extend the life of the buildings for
25 years but most of this would need to be accomplished within 10 years.”
Investing in these infrastructure improvements might be justifiable if the city were
certain it could retain use of the facility and amortize the costs over 25 years, but it is
quite possible PAUSD will need to reclaim the site earlier. If they rebuild on the site,
then those CPA investments would be lost.
Budgets: Opportunity Costs
As previously explained, PAUSD has said they would like the entire 35 Cubberley acres
preserved for PAUSD’s future exclusive use. This option would provide maximum
flexibility to the school district and on its face might appear to be the least costly
solution for the District. A closer look reveals significant costs to the community of
that strategy that have not fully been studied.
Whenever the District reclaims its 27 acres, the City will still have to rebuild or
relocate to accommodate community service needs. Without a plan for relocation, a
gap in service could result that might cause dissolution of existing sports leagues and
other programs currently housed at Cubberley.
Purchasing new real estate for community services in alternate locations is already cost
prohibitive. Finding another large parcel with similar bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
connectivity is unlikely. Moreover, alternate site options for community facility and
fields development diminish over time as community needs compete with the housing
pressures of population growth and ABAG requirements. Purchasing and developing
land for replacement fields and facilities is an extremely large unknown future cost. The
longer we wait, the more options we lose.
Preserving the entire site for PAUSD via the lease agreement forces the city to keep
services and programs there and ties up CPA money, preventing the city from exploring
and exploiting potentially better and more cost effective site and facility options.
Further, funds expended to maintain the status quo at Cubberley will no longer be
available for future community center development.
Equally important are the additional unknown costs to the community of renovating
Cubberley (already a 57 year-old facility) for PAUSD use. As a point of reference, $76
7
million is budgeted at Gunn and $101.5 million at Palo Alto High for Strong Schools
Bond projects that are underway (per Bob Golton 1/24/13).
To summarize, preserving Cubberley “as is” for PAUSD would allow continued city
community center use for a possible 10-15 years. It would provide short-term revenues
for PAUSD and would allow for the opening of a future comprehensive high school at
Cubberley in a 70-year old facility. However, it also would cost the community $2.21
million in annual operating expenses, $330,000 - $800,000 in annual maintenance, as
much as $18.8 million in deferred maintenance, and unknown amounts for renovating
the existing structures for eventual school use. Once renovations begin, playing fields
will be closed for most public use and Cubberley services and programs will be
displaced.
In Palo Alto, both the City and the School District serve, and are funded by, largely the
same community. Therefore, decisions about the use of public land should be guided by
the needs of our whole community for sufficient high quality schools and high quality
community services.
Saving Cubberley’s 35 acres for PAUSD’s future exclusive use is a very expensive
proposition for the community both in terms of financing and opportunity costs. This
raised the questions, “Does PAUSD really need the entire site? Is there room on the
35-acres for community services, playing fields, and a comprehensive high school?”
CONSIDERING OUR OPTIONS: ANALYSIS OF CUBBERLEY
LAND USE
Existing Use
The Facilities Subcommittee did an analysis of existing Cubberley land use to help
answer this question. The Subcommittee started with the assumption that it would not
be possible for either the CPA or the PAUSD to meet its service needs on its currently
owned parcels without substantial redesign and construction. Furthermore,
independent development of each current parcel would result in unnecessary and
inefficient duplication of functions such as parking, access roads and maintenance
facilities. There is not adequate acreage for duplication of playing fields.
As such, rather than considering existing facilities through the lens of current
ownership, the Facilities Subcommittee focused on current site usage strictly from the
perspective of space and type of facility – not getting into detail about what lies on
whose property.
8
Figure 2
The Facilities Subcommittee’s study led to the startling realization that the current
1950s design dedicated more than half of the land to site facilities (landscaping,
courtyards, and outdoor utilities), access roads and driveways, surface parking lots, and
circulation.
Figure 2 shows the overall space utilization for the 35 acres. Existing buildings take up
175,500 sq. ft. (4.0 acres) of space, representing only about 11% of the full 35-acre site,
but laid out in such a way that they monopolize a much larger area (over 9 acres) and
preclude more functional use of the spaces in and around the buildings. Circulation
areas between buildings consist primarily of covered walkways, using another 116,148
sq. ft., (2.7 acres). This represents a use ratio of 60% net building to 40% circulation –
almost half of the built out space on the 35 acres is dedicated to covered walkways that
require significant and ongoing roofing costs and reduce natural light into the buildings.
Site areas (landscaping, outdoor courtyards, and outdoor utilities) are largely comprised
of narrow strips of grass isolated between buildings, an amphitheater and single use
perimeter landscaping. The “Site” areas take up 426,897 sq. ft. (7.8 acres).
Remaining outdoor space consists of outdoor athletic facilities and on-grade parking
lots. 566,280 sq. ft. (13 acres) of the site is dedicated to a football field and track, large
9
playing fields for softball, soccer, etc. and 6 tennis courts. Approximately 735 on-grade
parking spaces, consume 239,755 sq. ft. (5.5 acres) -- the equivalent of 48, 5000 square
foot parcels and more than all the buildings combined.
Potential Use
Taking the process a step further, the Subcommittee considered how a redesigned
facility might preserve space for a high school with the same or larger building square
footage as the existing Cubberley facility and accommodate a community center. The
land could be used more efficiently—moving parking below grade, improving circulation
and reconfiguring site areas to provide more useful outdoor gathering spaces.
Figure 3
Even under conservative estimates, those changes alone would yield 9.4 acres of land for
repurposing without sacrificing building square footage or playing field capacity, and
without using multi-story classrooms. The recaptured 9.4 acres could be used any
number of ways. In order to give a sense of how big 9.4 acres is, some size
comparisons are listed in Figure 4 below.
10
Figure 4
If the community supports it, a stepped-back second story could be added to new
buildings, easily providing an additional 100,000 square feet of indoor space, not counting
potential use of that recaptured 9.4 acres (Figure 5).
The District does not have precise estimates of the net building square footage at either
Gunn or Palo Alto High Schools, but using the same methodology applied in the
“existing use” analysis above, the Facilities Subcommittee estimated approximate
building footprints of 231,000 square feet and 269,000 square feet, respectively. PAUSD
reviewed these numbers and confirmed that this estimate of the high schools’ square
footage was consistent with the District’s 2007 Master Plan (per email exchange
between Brian Carilli, CCAC, and Ron Smith, Facilities Manager, PAUSD, 12/18/12).
With redesign of the Cubberley site, over 475,000 square feet could be available for
single story buildings: 300,000+ square feet (from the 9.4 recaptured acres) + 175,000
square feet (set aside to offset the “as-is” building square footage) = 475,000+ square
feet. Modern, more efficient use of building space could provide more than enough
square footage to support high school buildings comparable in size to either Gunn or
Paly in addition to community center buildings with square footage comparable to the
existing Cubberley structures.
11
Figure 5
The subcommittee is not suggesting that all of the available recaptured space should be
used for buildings. Extra square footage could be assigned to other needed uses, for
example: site or circulation areas, playing fields or parking. Further, if the redesign
includes any second story buildings, that square footage would provide additional
building space or more on-grade acreage for alternative use.
To summarize, none of the three existing sites with potential for future high school use
has been fully built to modern standards. Cubberley presents a unique opportunity to
employ modern building practices to maximize use of space and potential for capturing
synergies of shared use. The site may be smaller than the other two high school sites,
but its potential to carry an equal or better school facility with a community center and
playing fields could deliver unparalleled community benefits.
Conclusion: Through redesign and construction, PAUSD and CPA could coexist on the
site, each enjoying significantly more functional capacity, and possibly benefit from
synergies of sharing some facilities if other logistical and budget problems could be
sorted out.
12
Redevelopment Challenges/Opportunities
CPA’s budget constraints create an urgent need for certainty about the future use of the
site in order to justify investment in either deferred maintenance or redevelopment of
the aging facility. That near-term need seemed incompatible with PAUSD’s timeline
until we considered that it also presents a singular opportunity for both agencies.
The likely reclamation of the District’s 27 acres, currently used for community services,
creates an urgency for the City to begin planning for consolidation of services into a
much smaller footprint – a goal that cannot be accommodated within the “as-is”
structure of the facility. Moreover, the population growth that drives the District’s
“enrollment rollercoaster” also weighs heavily on the City’s ability to meet future
community service needs.
A course that fails to plan for and provide adequate facilities for both schools and
service needs is both short sighted and inappropriate. While it may be tempting to
postpone decisions and maintain the status quo until the District is ready to break
ground for a new high school, such a policy choice sacrifices community needs for short-term
financial gain of one agency.
Instead of investing indefinitely in preserving Cubberley’s outdated, inefficient, costly and
run down facilities, the School Board and City Council could invest in reconfiguring the
site to accommodate both a high school and a community center, creating a facility
designed to complement district programs and reflect the goals of an “asset-building”
community.
The forward-thinking design of this facility could also provide flexibility to weather future
bumps and dips in population and enrollment cycles, with space devoted strategically
and alternately for school use and community use as needed.
The Facilities Subcommittee has concluded that there is ample space to optimize this
prime public land for use by the whole community. Our analysis demonstrates that the
35-acre site can accommodate 9-12 education and community services needs, with or
without multi-story classrooms.
CONCLUSION
Co-location of school and community services on the Cubberley site offers an
unparalleled opportunity to meet the shared needs of the future. Obviously, new design
and construction will require a significant investment by both the City and the PAUSD,
but that will be true no matter where or when it is built. Without co-location, the need
to purchase new land (if it is available at all) for community center services and programs
adds exorbitant additional costs to the equation. Concerted planning in the near term
can reduce the additional, significant opportunity costs associated with delay.
With cooperative planning and mutual commitment, the City and School District can
meet school and community service needs, improve PAUSD and CPA flexibility to
13
respond to future variations in the “enrollment roller coaster” and maximize potential
synergies with greater capacity and potential for more flexible and possible shared use.
Both agencies, and the taxpayers of Palo Alto, stand to benefit from financial,
programmatic and operational efficiencies by planning now for future shared use of the
Cubberley site.
Based on the work of the CCAC, we strongly believe that co-location of school and
community services on the 35 acre site is not only possible, but also critical to the
future vitality of the Palo Alto community. Concerted, cooperative planning must begin
now. The opportunity costs of failure to act soon are unacceptable.
General & Specific Recommendations:
1). Co-location and/or Shared Use
The Facilities Subcommittee strongly supports the unanimous recommendation of the
CCAC that the entire Cubberley site should become a joint/shared City/PAUSD use
facility. Some detailed suggestions for shared use are outlined below.
This is preferable to the next best alternative for the City – to develop a new
community center on its existing 8 acres, by itself.
2). Lease Extension
The Facilities Subcommittee recommends that CPA and PAUSD extend a renegotiated
lease (whether it should be 5- or 10-years is still being discussed) with the following
changes:
o The current Covenant Not to Develop should be removed from the lease
extension.
o A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) should be completed in the first year
(with a provision built in for creation of a Building Program Planning Committee
(BPPC) comprised of:
Program specialists
Facility consultants
End users
Financial advisors
Maintenance personnel
Community representatives
Management representatives
The MOU should provide the BPPC’s tasks and timelines for community needs
assessment and facility planning and a preliminary traffic study, both of which should be
completed in the first five years.
14
3). Needs Assessment
The Subcommittee strongly recommends a comprehensive needs assessment because a
key problem for facilities planning is that it must be driven by programming—and
programming needs have not been well defined.
4). Opportunities for Possible Shared Use
Possible Shared Use
Each entity will need facilities dedicated to its own use. There is good potential for
shared facilities as well, that could result in reduced operating costs and need for
construction funds for both CPA and PAUSD. The sharing may be done by time
separation (TS--e.g. after school hours, or scheduled public use during school hours), or
may be simultaneous (depending on PAUSD security needs for students).
In response to a request of the BOE in their 9/12/2012 meeting, the Facilities
Subcommittee suggests the following list of facilities where shared use opportunities
might be explored. These are based on existing services/programs in PAUSD high
schools and at Cubberley Community Center, along with some possible additional
future services/programs directed primarily toward aging Baby Boomers.
Parking (preferably underground)
Maintenance yard (joint and adjacent sections)
Equipment storage and Repair (joint and adjacent sections)
Supplies delivery area/dock/storage area (joint and adjacent sections)
Electric power, natural gas, water, fuel, sewage common entry/exit area
Emergency electric power equipment
Offices for maintenance and repair staff
Kitchen
Dining area (indoor and outdoor)
Outdoor stadium and track (TS)
Outdoor playing fields (TS)
Tennis courts (TS)
Restrooms for track, fields, courts (TS)
Gymnasiums (TS)
Pool and aquatic facility (TS)
Auditorium (TS)
Theater (TS)
Theater rehearsal/makeup/costume rooms (TS)
Theater set storage, construction rooms (TS)
Music Recital Room (TS)
Music Practice Room (for band, orchestra) (TS)
Dance Studio, if implemented (TS)
Fine arts and craft spaces, if implemented (TS)
Radio and television broadcast studios, if implemented (TS)
Lecture rooms (TS)
Language learning laboratories (TS)
15
Some classrooms (TS)
Some audio-visual rooms (TS)
In addition to facilities, some staff might be shared as well, reducing overall operational
costs for PAUSD and CPA. Staff that might be shared include:
Custodial
Administrative
Grounds and Maintenance
Information Technology
5). Traffic Safety and Operations
Intensified use of a site with established bicycle, pedestrian, and transit connections to
schools and neighborhoods will deliver certain transportation efficiency advantages and
will likely also generate impacts of higher volumes. Impacts on the safety and efficient
operation of nearby streets that serve the Cubberley site should be carefully studied and
mitigated – giving particular attention to designated school commute routes. On- and
off-site safety and operations should be key considerations in the planning process.
CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE
REPORT
APPENDICES
Appendix A - How We Studied the Issues 17
How We Studied The Issues
Key elements of the Facilities Subcommittee’s review process included the following:
Tour of the existing Cubberley site (8/28/12 - led by City staff Rob de Geus,
Adam Howard and Gonzalo Rozo).
Tour of comprehensive Sunnyvale Senior Center, located on a shared-use site
(10/2/12 - led by Manuel Gerard, Recreation Supervisor, City of Sunnyvale).
Tour of Stanford’s new Y2E2 Engineering Building, featuring over 600,000 square
feet of buildings on 8.5 acres (12/12/12 - led by Brian Carilli, Associate Director
of Facilities and Planning, Stanford School of Engineering).
Informally surveyed existing school and community facilities citywide to put
Cubberley in context.
Contributed to development of questions for the Cubberley Community Center
Tenant and Long-term Renters Survey.
A visual “flyover” demonstration providing an overview of the distribution of
school and community service inventory across Palo Alto
(cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/cubberley_community_advisory_committee.asp).
Materials reviewed by the Subcommittee:
Cubberley Lease and Covenant Not to Develop.
Cubberley Master Plan, As Amended 1996.
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, including Community Services and
Facilities Element and Transportation Element.
Community Services Background Report, 7/21/09 (intended to amend
Community Services and Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan).
Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission Report, including Appendix H, Working
Paper on Cubberley Site, Municipal Services Center/Embarcadero East Corridor
Report, and spreadsheet identifying catch-up and keep-up costs at Cubberley
FY2012 through FY2036.
November 2006 White Paper on The Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on
Palo Alto’s Social and Community Services” (outcomes of a community task force,
written by Richard James, CPA Community Services, and Lisa Hendrickson,
Avenidas).
City of Palo Alto Capital Budget Outlook (presented to CCAC on 8/22/12).
PAUSD Capital Budget Outlook (presented to CCAC on 8/22/12).
Board of Education position statements.
Reports and deliverables of the Community Needs, School Needs, and Finance
Subcommittees of the CCAC.
Field Use Agreement between CPA and PAUSD.
Thomas H. Sawyer, Facility Design for Health, Fitness, Physical Activity,
Recreation and Sports Facility Development (12th ed. 2009),
http://www.sagamorepub.com/files/lookinside/6/pages-facility-pd12th.pdf.
Supporting documents prepared and gathered during planning process for
Sunnyvale Senior Center.
Appendix B – Methodology for Site Analysis 18
Methodology for Site Analysis
Existing facilities use was estimated based on extrapolations from an aerial view of the
site and currently available data regarding acreage and square footage. The color-coded
overlays on the aerial view of Cubberley, above, provide a visual representation of the
current site layout by type of use. Note that these are only ballpark estimates. Future
planning will require more precise calculations in cooperation with the City and PAUSD
facilities departments.
Analysis of the potential efficiencies offered by redesign considered the following:
Estimated parking allowed 350 square feet per space (800 spaces = 280,000 sf).
While we did not present a cost analysis for parking, it should be noted that below
grade parking requires substantially less ongoing maintenance than on-grade parking.
Future analysis should consider the opportunity to offset increased construction
costs for below grade parking with ongoing savings in maintenance costs.
Appendix B – Methodology for Site Analysis 19
Building/Circulation totals used a net ratio of 75% net building to 25% circulation as
compared to the current 60/40 net use ratio at Cubberley. 75/25 net use is a
typical, efficient model for this population.
Site estimates also reflect a typical, efficient model for the targeted school or
community use, including better integration of site and circulation space and
landscape areas that are multifunctional.
Estimates of what could fit on the recaptured 9.4 acres were based on the following:
o Softball/baseball field = .75-3.0 acres. Size varies by age of user. The
Cubberley softball fields currently average just over an acre a piece.
o Football field = 1.3 acres.
o 9.4 acres = 409,464 square feet. At 75% efficiency = 307,098 square feet of
single story buildings
They are intended to help readers to picture the size of 9.4 acres of space. If the
space were actually dedicated to playing fields, capacity would be limited by the
shape of the space, buffer zones between fields, drainage features, access areas, etc.
Appendix C – Problem Statement 20
Facilities Subcommittee Problem Statement
Presented to CCAC on 10/3/12
Short Term
1. PAUSD needs revenue that the City is challenged to afford under current budgetary
constraints.
2. Significant infrastructure costs have been deferred and will start catching up with us.
3. It is unclear whether we can fill vacancies left by Foothill College (3 years out). If
not, red flag re: lost revenue (~ $1 million).
4. The City needs to start planning in the short term for continuation of services with
likelihood of at least some future loss of existing space.
5. Negotiation of a lease and/or covenant in the short term should reflect
commitments to current and medium term upkeep and future cooperation.
Overarching Medium and Long Term
1. The District is clear about its desire to reclaim some, and ultimately all, of the
Cubberley site for school use, while the City lacks sufficient other real estate to
accommodate the services currently provided at Cubberley.
2. The current architectural use of the site is extremely inefficient. The ratio of usable
space to circulation space is very poor and to maintain these buildings in the current
configuration for whatever use is a great waste of valuable land.
3. Cubberley offers a tremendous opportunity to design visionary programming and
facilities that can bring our community together, serving students, families and
neighbors for years to come. Delaying or foregoing plans for such a resource
carries substantial opportunity costs that should not be underestimated.
4. This is the last sizable space in the city for redevelopment and to maximize its
flexibility and use, the practicality of multi‐story facilities should be considered.
5. District uncertainty about the type of facilities needed, (full high school or not,
middle school or not, elementary school or not) as well as the chance they will want
to use existing structures, creates a barrier to planning for investment in new
construction at Cubberley for either community or shared use.
• If reuse of existing facilities is a realistic option for the PAUSD, scraping space
before then for community or shared use could limit District flexibility or
increase costs for future school use.
6. Sharing space between community needs and school use offers many advantages for
both parties, but also poses some significant facilities challenges, including:
• Inconsistent architectural standards
• Incompatibilities
Appendix C – Problem Statement 21
• Security issues
• Scheduling issues
• Parking
• Traffic demand management (bus, car, bicycle and pedestrian)
7. To the extent community services are displaced, what off‐site locations can be
repurposed for community use?
Medium Term
1. Significant additional infrastructure investments would be required to extend the life
of current buildings (bare minimum requirements have been identified by IBRC).
2. PAUSD may need some portion of the site, while community needs persist. Can use
of the site be sufficiently maximized to meet both needs?
3. Under both 2 and 3, above, how will support facility needs change (e.g., safe and
convenient access and parking for all modes of transportation: automobile, bicycle,
pedestrian and transit, restrooms, etc.)?
Long Term
1. Even with significant shared use of current facilities, a comprehensive high school on
the “as-is” site would likely conflict with community use of the site.
2. Field and gym use will be particularly impacted, even with new construction – you
can’t build up for those facilities.
3. Shared use with a high school of any size will dramatically increase the need for
support facilities (parking, safe automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit access,
food services, etc.). Planning is critical.
4. Given fluctuations in enrollment and community needs, any new facilities will have to
accommodate flexible programming/use.
5. Given high demand on the site, any construction will require careful planning of
phased transitions.
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 22
Needs For Facilities
Working Paper Authored by Subcommittee Member Jerry August
General
Facilities are places where programs and services occur. The programs/service needs
should drive the requirement for facilities. The City of Palo Alto (CPA) has needs for
both current and future programs and services at the Cubberley site, while the Palo
Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) has future needs at Cubberley for educational
purposes.
Facilities may be specialized--e.g. a swimming pool, or general/multi- purpose. Facilities
often serve several purposes even though they are somewhat specialized--e.g., a theater
may be suitable for music, lectures, drama, but not ballroom dancing or exercise. A
multipurpose room with a simple stage may serve for all of these events in a more
limited way.
Facilities require ongoing financial support by the sponsoring organization--for staff,
utilities, operations, and maintenance, as well as substantial original funding for ongoing
construction and furnishing. A requirement for facilities must take into account an
organization’s capability to sustain these costs. The cost elements of a particular
program/service at a multipurpose facility sometimes are buried within overall facility
costs, so that the true cost of a particular program/service often is not readily available.
The overall cost of a program/service at a specialized facility usually is more readily
discernible.
City of Palo Alto (CPA) Comprehensive Plan: Community Services Element
Programs, and the facilities to support them, should conform to the CPA
Comprehensive Plan when possible. (The Comprehensive Plan is currently undergoing a
comprehensive review and update.) Palo Alto policy has been to provide geographical
diversity of services. Currently there are three CPA facilities comprising a network of
community centers--Lucie Stern in northern Palo Alto, a small community center
adjacent to the Mitchell Park Library (center and library currently being reconstructed,
center size about 15,000 sq. ft. including courtyard), and a much larger Cubberley
Community Center in southern Palo Alto (buildings alone about 176,000 ft. sq.).
Chapter 6 of the CPA Comprehensive Plan is titled Community Services and Facilities.
A background report (“Community Services Background Report”, dated 7/21/09) was
intended to amend that portion of the Comprehensive Plan. Following issuance of the
background report, a series of community service element stakeholder meetings were
held. Five (5) summaries of those meetings are available on the CPA website. As a
result, recent changes were made to Chapter 6 [Reference: CSE Narratives, Chapter. 6,
30 pages].
Chapter 6 covers schools, libraries, parks, community facilities, performing and cultural
centers, as well as police and fire services and facilities. Services/programs for all include
recreation, lifelong learning, and arts. Services and programs for specialized
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 23
populations--children, youth, seniors, and disabled--also are covered. For example, in
the prior plan, Policy C-22 calls for flexible functions at community facilities. Policy C-
24 covers reinvesting in aging facilities and avoiding deferred maintenance. Program C-
19, in support of C-24, covers improvement plans at facilities, including a Cubberley
Master Plan. The new version of Chapter 6 reorganizes the policies and programs, but
covers the same elements.
Page 16 of the 7/21/09 Background Report notes some important challenges that do or
could apply to the Cubberley site, abstracted below:
♦ The Cubberley Community Center is largely owned by the PAUSD and is
therefore dependent on PAUSD needs.
♦ The Parks and Recreation Department has identified a lack of sufficient
playing fields. The need for playing fields is highest on weekdays between 3pm
and 6pm, and on weekends.
♦ Gym space and daycare center capacity are inadequate to meet existing
demand.
♦ The Community Services Department needs to develop improved cost-
recovery strategies to reduce the draw on the general fund for programs and
services.
♦ The City will need to respond to the unique recreation needs of the aging
Baby Boomer Generation.
The needed facilities spelled out are: playing fields, gym space, and daycare
center. The recreation needs of the aging population are not spelled out--
typically they might include simple exercise classes and yoga, swimming, dancing,
light recreational activity like Ping-Pong, billiards, shuffleboards, bocce ball and
horseshoe courts, etc. Some of the aging population also needs mental
stimulation--which can be provided by lectures, broadcasts, films, computer
classes, social network classes, and other adult education. Some of these needs
are currently supplied by Avenidas (partially supported by CPA) at its center in
downtown Palo Alto. Some of the aging population recreation/stimulation needs
could be provided in large or small multipurpose rooms, gyms, classrooms,
lecture halls, auditoriums, and well-equipped audio-visual rooms. Senior services
that include arts and crafts might require specialized equipment in dedicated
rooms--pottery making, kilns, machine and shop tools for wood and metal
sculpture, jewelry making, painting--similar to spaces at Little House in Menlo
Park, or as currently exist in some of the Cubberley individual art studios.
In addition to the needs identified in the Background Report, the Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee (CCAC) recently heard directly from the community regarding its
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 24
needs. CCAC held a public forum on 11/8/2012 to provide an update on its progress,
and to invite community responses. The facilities where vocal community groups
reported shortages were: playing fields, gym space, and childcare. These shortages have
not yet been analyzed or quantified adequately to direct program planning. Speakers at
the forum also supported a continuing need for existing art, music, and dance programs.
Again, a full analysis or quantification is lacking. One non-resident pointed out that she,
and other non-residents who used Cubberley and other community facilities, supported
the CPA economy via dining and shopping in Palo Alto.
CCAC also had community response at the 11/14/2012 CCAC meeting. Five (5)
cooperating community groups requested a wellness center that would house and
integrate their separate programs--Cardiac Therapy Foundation (medically supervised
rehabilitation and information programs), Peninsula Stroke Association, REACH
(Foothill program for post-stroke recovery), Abilities United (formerly CAR) [aquatic
rehabilitation/therapy at the Betty Wright Swim Center], and Avenidas (needs more
space for health and wellness programs for older adults and seniors).
In addition to Chapter 6 of the CPA Comprehensive Plan, and the Background Report
to amend it, the Land Use and Transportation Elements of the Comprehensive Plan also
provide some policies and programs that relate to community centers and services:
POLICY L-61:
Promote the use of community and cultural centers, libraries, local schools, parks, and
other community facilities as gathering places. Ensure that they are inviting and safe
places that can deliver a variety of community services during both daytime and evening
hours.
PROGRAM L-68:
To help satisfy present and future community use needs, coordinate with the School
District to educate the public about and to plan for the future use of school sites,
including providing space for public gathering places for neighborhoods lacking space.
POLICY L-64:
Seek potential new sites for art and cultural facilities, public spaces, open space, and
community gardens that encourage and support pedestrian and bicycle travel and
person-to-person contact, particularly in neighborhoods that lack these amenities.
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.
Cubberley Community Center
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 25
Cubberley, as a former high school site leased and/partly owned by CPA, was not
designed or/built as a community center. Consequently its existing facilities do not
ideally conform to, or readily support, community services desired and envisioned in
CPA’s Comprehensive Plan and its amendments. Likewise, some existing
programs/services at Cubberley may not conform to the CPA Comprehensive
Plan/Amendment, but merely help support overall costs of the Cubberley Community
Center. For example, California Law Review (a worthy not-for-profit tenant) offers
specialized classes not intended for the general community. Additionally, Cubberley
lacks some facilities present in many community centers--e.g., a pool, a café, an exterior
or interior courtyard with seating--that limit the services and programs that can be
offered.
A Master plan for a community center at the Cubberley site (1/30/91) previously was
developed. It covered the entire site--city owned as well as spaces and facilities leased
by CPA. It utilized neighborhoods to provide services. Neighborhoods included were:
athletics, childcare, dancers, education, hourly meeting facilities, music and theater, non-
profit/community organizations, recreation (expanded multipurpose room, distinct from
Gyms under athletics), visual art, and administration and gallery/café. Some of the items
in the master plan were not implemented, or were moved to spaces other than
originally planned.
Most of the buildings and other facilities (track, fields, etc.) at the Cubberley site were
completed by 1955. Some additional buildings (Pavilion, Theater, and others) were
added in the early 1960s. The site was built to then-existing school standards. In
general, the structures have stood up well during the past 57 years, by replacing and
repairing roofs, etc., although it has become increasingly expensive to maintain the
structures. Modifications of structures for child-care services added after the site
became a community center appear to have been built to lower, more temporary,
standards.
The facilities, while usable to support some community services and programs, cannot
be considered modern. For example, air conditioning is generally lacking throughout
the site. Wired internet access is not available throughout the site. Some classrooms
and lecture halls now used by Foothill College have been upgraded with more up-to-
date audio-visual equipment than originally existed, but such improvements are
inconsistent.
The Cubberley site is inefficiently used by modern standards. Existing buildings are
mostly single story, per the 1950’s model of Palo Alto school architecture. The building
layout results in long distances between some buildings, and is inconvenient for a
Community Center. Some very long covered walkways give a foreboding tunnel effect.
Figure 2 (pg. 9 of Facilities Subcommittee Report) shows the overall space utilization.
Existing buildings take up 175,500 sq. ft. (4.0 acres) of space, with circulation (covered
walkways) taking up another 116,148 sq. ft., (2.7 acres). This 60/40 ratio is quite
inefficient--a modern ratio might be 75/25 for the intended community uses. Site open
areas (spaces between and around buildings, amphitheater, etc.) take up 426,897 sq. ft.
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 26
(9.8 acres), while 750 parking spaces take up 239,755 sq. ft. (more than 5.5 acres) of the
35 total acres. The site also supports a football field/track, large playing fields for
softball, soccer, etc. and 6 tennis courts. The fields take up 566,280 sq. ft. (13.0 acres).
The space use is very inefficient.
The city portion of the site (8 acres) is 348,480 sq. ft. Note that if all the of the existing
buildings’ footprint areas (176,000 sq. ft.) were consolidated into one area, it would
cover only 50% of the city portion. Even if the building areas and walkways were
consolidated into one area (291,648 sq. ft.), it would only cover 84% of the city portion.
Clearly, CPA could build a 2-story (or higher) new community center on less than half
of its 8 acres.
Likewise, PAUSD could easily fit a comprehensive high school onto the remaining 27
acres, by more efficient use of the site. As one example, the parking spaces could be
placed under the playing fields and tennis courts, freeing up 5.5 acres, effectively
increasing the PAUSD owned-area to 32.5 acres, even while continuing to use area-
inefficient single story classroom buildings.
Based on current information, PAUSD asserts that for its anticipated future needs of
one or more schools at Cubberley, many of the existing buildings and other facilities
could be directly reused, or modified for reuse, rather than scraped to the ground and
built new, thereby saving some money. The Facilities Subcommittee does not share this
view. Nor is this view consistent with technologically facilitated pedagogy. PAUSD
would still have to pay substantial costs for modern room furnishings, wiring, and
equipment (desks, tables, smart boards, computers, wired or wireless internet access,
etc.) even if it retained 75 year-old (in 2030) basic building shells and interior structures.
Services/Programs at Cubberley Community Center
The neighborhoods/services envisioned in the Cubberley Community Center Master
Plan remain a good starting point for the Facilities Subcommittee to identify facilities for
a Community Center in the near, mid, or far terms. Likewise, additional
services/programs identified by the Community Needs and School Needs
Subcommittees can help identify additional facilities that ought to be considered for the
overall CPA/PAUSD Cubberley site.
All the facilities on the overall site should be shared to the maximum extent consistent
with the separate needs of CPA for a community center and PAUSD for one or more
schools. Sharing (new construction, operations, and maintenance) will result in the
lowest overall cost to the residents of Palo Alto who support both CPA and PAUSD via
taxes and fees.
Community and school services/programs usually are provided in proactive or reactive
modes. In proactive modes, most services are well defined, with identified budgets (or
shares of the budget), priorities, locations, and responsibilities for execution. In reactive
modes, many services are provided in response to events and citizen demands. The
proactive mode tends to prevail for many school services/programs, whereas the
reactive mode tends to prevail for many community services and /programs. School
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 27
districts necessarily provide a well-established, more focused, highly structured, and
usually slowly changing set of educational services. Additionally those services must
comply with state regulations and restrictions, and the accompanying bureaucracies and
inertia. Community services are generally freer of state regulation and communities are
more flexible than school districts in providing the type, quantity, and quality of
services/programs. An advantage of the reactive mode is its flexibility and quicker
adaptation to the inevitable changes in needs and demands for services. A disadvantage
of the reactive mode is that priorities among services often are not set. Then, when
resources (funds, personnel, facilities) are reduced, cut entirely, or even insufficient for
competing demands among services, it becomes politically difficult to reduce, eliminate,
or reallocate services. This has been true for California in recent years (closing parks,
cutting school budgets, reducing CHP staff, deferring maintenance, etc.), as well as for
CPA.
In identifying the future desired services/programs (and therefore the supporting
facilities needed) at Cubberley, both CPA and PAUSD face challenges of uncertainty and
prioritization, in different ways. They also face funding problems for ongoing operations,
and likely will need to have voters pass bonds for large-scale improvements at
Cubberley.
PAUSD Challenges
PAUSD faces considerable uncertainty about what services/programs a high school of
the future (about 2030 or later) will provide, the quantity and kinds of students it will
serve, and what should be the priorities. Certainly PAUSD will continue to offer the
core academic subjects. Certain other services may be provided as well. First, there
may be increasing demand for music, dance, performing arts, fine arts, and crafts often
encountered in economically well-off, highly educated, largely professional areas like
Palo Alto. Second, PAUSD may face a demand from Silicon Valley parents involved in
science, engineering, industry, and business, for modern versions of vocationally
oriented classes--such as software programming/web site design/blog construction
rather than drafting; material sciences laboratories/preparation rather than
casting/foundry/glassblowing; and electronic design/assembly/testing rather than
machine-shop/wood shop/car maintenance and repair. There may be demand for
radio/television/web broadcasting design, delivery, and operations in addition to school
newspaper experience. There may be public demand for environmental impact
curricula. Third, part of this demand may be driven by the perceived employment
opportunities for some graduating students who do not, or choose not, to go directly
to college/university. The New Technology High School in Napa CA is a role model for
the vocational types of services, and is in partnership in many ways with the surrounding
business community. Fourth, PAUSD, known as a high-performance academic district,
may face a demand for less stressful academic tracks than those for college-bound
students enrolling in advanced-placement courses. PAUSD is already trying to cope
with stress-related student suicides (CPA participates in Project Safety Net directed at
teen suicides). Note that the ABAG projections for overall growth of Palo Alto do not
imply that all the growth will be for high-performing students from high-income parents.
Fifth, especially for high school and perhaps even for junior high schools, technology
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 28
advances such as remote computing, simple online courses, and even massive open
online courses (MOOC) likely will affect schools of the future. The advances will impact
the size and quality of teacher staff, the need for information technology support staff
and equipment, very likely the size of classrooms and their technology, etc. It is possible
that the physical space needed for a future high school could be much smaller than at
Palo Alto HS or Gunn HS, if students take courses at home or in other remote
locations, and merely show up for in-class tests or not at all.
Of course, even for the possible reduced size scenario, there will remain a need at
schools for space for the non-academic side of middle and/or high-school--socialization,
personal interaction, formation and interaction with small and large groups, etc. This
cannot readily be quantified into facilities other than general gathering space and places
where students can meet, interact, and work out their own problems and concerns.
Spaces such as patios, courtyards, hallways, gymnasiums, locker rooms, luncheon/eating
space, and sports/recreation areas still will be needed, even for a small future school.
As a result of these uncertainties, and the eventual prioritization needed to select
services/programs while meeting budget constraints, PAUSD may want a different type
of high school (and/or middle school) at Cubberley than now exists elsewhere in Palo
Alto.
The impact of these PAUSD uncertainty challenges on facilities at Cubberley that might
be shared with CPA is somewhat clearer. If PAUSD decides to provide music, etc., then
facilities for music, dance, performing arts, and perhaps fine arts and crafts, potentially
can be shared during non-school hours. Many of these are now provided at the
Cubberley Community Center (on a non-shared basis). Also, if CPA supports individual
musicians, dance teachers and troupes, performing artists, fine artists, craftspeople
(weavers, potters, glass artists, etc.) through below-market rentals of shared space,
potentially PAUSD might utilize those individuals to teach, help teach, or demonstrate,
those skills to students, supplementing its own teaching staff in an economical way.
If PAUSD decides to offer more vocationally oriented classes, sharing would be more
difficult, but not impossible. That is because vocationally oriented classes tend to
require specialized facilities, which are both less usable by the general community, and
often require active supervision while in use. This implies higher user fees to the
community, and limited times due to availability of qualified supervisors. However,
should PAUSD pursue this vocational route, it might well be able to partner with local
Silicon Valley firms for donated equipment, personnel to train students (and teachers),
supervision, etc. Partnering business firms potentially would benefit from tax write-offs
for donated equipment, direct access to qualified graduates, and good public relations.
Such partnering again would be an economical way to supplement teaching staff.
Despite these challenges, PAUSD stands to benefit from financial and programmatic
efficiencies by planning now for future shared use of the Cubberley site. Acreage is
more than adequate to accommodate a future comprehensive high school alongside a
future modern community center even larger than the existing one.
CPA Challenges
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 29
In addition to the challenges listed earlier (see section City of Palo Alto
Services/Programs), Palo Alto faces some uncertain demographic factors. ABAG
projections show CPA should expect significant population growth. PAUSD is
estimating a 2% annual growth rate in student population out to 2030. The implication
is that there will be a similar growth in overall population in CPA of 43 % by then (i.e.,
1.02^18.). It is anticipated there will be a proportional growth in demand for services
and programs throughout CPA. However, most of this population growth is expected
in southern Palo Alto, based on what has occurred in recent years. Therefore the
demand for additional services at a local community center, i.e. Cubberley, may easily
exceed 50 % by 2030.
Another challenge is the lack of available land for more community services and
programs. Palo Alto is largely built out, with little land available to CPA (or PAUSD)
short of eminent domain proceedings. Indeed most of the recent population growth in
Palo Alto has been in high-density residential developments (apartments, condos). A
recent example is the Echelon development in the Charleston corridor. With little
uncertainty, the 8 acres currently owned by CPA at the Cubberley site is probably the
last large parcel of real estate left within the city limits for community services, short of
converting existing parks and municipal facilities to that purpose.
Another challenge is revenue to support services/programs. CPA is already struggling
to meet its budget. It is uncertain whether the projected growth in population will
result in sufficient revenue growth to support growth-related expansion of existing
services/programs at their present quantity and quality level, much less support
additional services such as the senior recreation/stimulation needs or a wellness center.
Another challenge/uncertainty lies in recently proposed major development plans near
downtown Palo Alto in exchange for a new municipal theater or possibly a municipal
services center. This proposal would affect the need for a full theater facility at
Cubberley, and/or revenue needed to pay infrastructure improvement bonds.
Joint Challenge
Both CPA and PAUSD will need to issue bonds for capital construction and
maintenance of future facilities at Cubberley. Voter approval is far more likely if PAUSD
and CPA cooperate and share the Cubberley site, demonstrating to voters that strong
efforts have been made to provide the needed and desired services/programs, while
minimizing overall costs for construction, maintenance, and operation.
Opportunities
The challenges provide opportunities. PAUSD has an opportunity to build a modern
junior and/or high school on the Cubberley site. It has an opportunity to partner with
CPA and other community organizations to minimize costs and improve instruction, as
well as to be seen as more reactive and responsive to community needs. CPA has an
opportunity to build a modern community center on the Cubberley site, while being
more involved in meeting PAUSD needs. It also has an opportunity to be more
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 30
proactive in identifying its policies and priorities for guiding current and future
community services and programs.
Other opportunities arise for both PAUSD and CPA for more involvement with
Stanford University. Stanford is not an explicit participant in considering the Cubberley
site, but it certainly is an implicit one. Many of the PAUSD students come via Stanford
staff and married students. Although Stanford has the greatest impact on nearby
schools, such as Palo Alto H.S., its staff and students are spread all over Palo Alto, and
development of the Cubberley site will affect them. Stanford can certainly inform
PAUSD regarding anticipated technology and teaching changes that will affect future
schools. Likewise recent newly constructed facilities at Stanford can inform the process
of designing, constructing, and equipping school facilities at Cubberley, once the needs
have been established. PAUSD already deals with Stanford regarding school sites and
locations, and this arrangement could be expanded to help inform the process for the
Cubberley site. Likewise, CPA can utilize the anticipated technology, and examples of
modern facilities, for a future community center at Cubberley, as well as for some
currently planned infrastructure improvements. One opportunity for Stanford
University with CPA arises from Stanford Hospital being a premier hospital in terms of
medical care. However, after patients are discharged, they often require extended
rehabilitation and ongoing wellness services. Many of those patients live in Palo Alto
and surrounding areas. Construction of a Wellness and Health Center at a new
Cubberley Community Center would facilitate patient recovery, while permitting
Stanford Hospital and Health Services to readily follow up on long-term benefits of the
treatments received by local patients. An example of this “best practices” effort is the
current teaming between the Cardiac Therapy Foundation (a Cubberley tenant and
renter) and Stanford researchers (Women’s Heart Health at Stanford) on a program
(Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Training). The new Affordable Health Care Act
(“Obama Care”) likely will push all medical delivery systems in this direction.
Impact on Facilities Desired at Cubberley site
It is clear that CPA and PAUSD will need facilities at the Cubberley site by about 2030,
and perhaps sooner. Each entity will need facilities dedicated to its own use. There is
good potential for shared facilities as well, that could result in reduced operating costs
and need for construction bonds for both CPA and PAUSD. The sharing may be done
by time separation (TS--e.g. after school hours, or scheduled public use during school
hours), or may be simultaneous (depending on PAUSD security needs for students).
Outlined below are some of the expected shared and sole use facilities, based on
existing services/programs in PAUSD high schools and at Cubberley Community
Center, along with some possible future services/programs discussed above. The
internal equipment within the facility--computers, audio-visual equipment, smart boards,
monitoring and surveillance equipment, etc. is not listed. It is anticipated that PAUSD
computer systems, files, etc. would not be available to community users because of
confidentiality and security concerns. However, scoreboards, timers and other
equipment used for sports might be shared. In addition to facilities, some costs for
electrical and mechanical infrastructure, operation, and maintenance could be shared.
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 31
Shared Use
Parking (preferably underground)
Maintenance yard (joint and adjacent sections)
Equipment storage and repair (joint and adjacent sections)
Supplies delivery area/dock/storage area (joint and adjacent sections)
Electric power, natural gas, water, fuel, sewage common entry/exit area
Emergency electric power equipment
Offices for maintenance and repair staff
Kitchen
Dining area (indoor and outdoor)
Outdoor stadium and track (TS)
Outdoor playing fields (TS)
Tennis courts (TS)
Restrooms for track, fields, courts (TS)
School gymnasiums (TS)
Pool and aquatic facility (TS)
Auditorium (TS)
Theater (TS)
Theater rehearsal/makeup/costume rooms (TS)
Theater set storage, construction rooms (TS)
Music recital room (TS)
Music practice room (for band, orchestra) TS
Dance studio, if implemented (TS)
Fine arts and craft spaces, if implemented TS
Radio and television broadcast studios, if implemented (TS)
Lecture rooms (TS)
Language learning laboratories (TS)
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 32
Some classrooms (TS)
Some audio-visual rooms (TS)
In addition to facilities, it is anticipated that some staff could be shared as well, reducing
overall operational costs for PAUSD and CPA. Staff that might be shared includes:
Custodial
Administrative
Grounds and Maintenance
Information Technology
CPA Use
Gymnasiums (2 or more)
Individual artist studios
Dance studio(s)
Pre-school childcare
Multipurpose rooms
Meeting rooms
Ballroom
Lecture halls
Auditorium
Some classrooms
CPA administration
Health and wellness center
PAUSD Use
PAUSD administration offices--principal, vice principal, other staff
Information technology center and offices for staff
Many classrooms
Lecture halls
Appendix D – Working Paper – Needs For Facilities 33
Study halls
Gymnasium locker rooms
Teacher’s offices
Nurse/medical office
Science labs
School Library
Cafeteria
Bicycle storage
Student lockers
Student and staff restrooms
Conclusions
o CPA has current needs, and CPA and PAUSD have future needs, for facilities to
provide services and programs at the Cubberley site.
o The needs of both CPA and PAUSD for future facilities at Cubberley should be
better defined than at present.
o The taxpayers of Palo Alto, stand to benefit from financial and programmatic
efficiencies by planning now for future shared use of the Cubberley site.
o Acreage is more than adequate to accommodate both a future comprehensive high
school and an enlarged new community center.
o CPA has a unique opportunity to meet its current and future community service
needs by development of a new comprehensive community center facility on the
Cubberley site.
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Volume 2
Finance Subcommittee Report
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
CCAC
Finance Subcommittee Report
Executive Summary
“I learned some valuable lessons about the legislative process, the importance of
bipartisan cooperation and the wisdom of taking small steps to get a big job done.”
-----Hillary Clinton
The Finance Subcommittee’s work product is comprised of five separate reports
intended to provide their readers with basic information about both financial and
governance issues as they pertain to the Cubberley site.
Report #1 analyzes the current general financial condition of both the Palo Alto Unified
School District and the City of Palo Alto; provides specific financial information about
the Cubberley site, especially in regard to the costs to manage and maintain the site and
the need for and costs of capital improvements.
Report #2 provides an overview of the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop with an
emphasis on the major provisions of the Lease. This report provided the CCAC with
various options for extension and/or modification of the Lease and Covenant.
Report #3 describes three examples of extensive, comprehensive joint use projects with
major similarities to those envisioned for the Cubberley site. The report includes a
listing of the elements essential to creating a successful joint use facility. Attached to the
report is an extensive listing of existing joint use facilities from throughout California.
Report #4 provides information on funding options available to the City and the School
District to both construct and operate a joint use facility.
Report #5 discusses the potential use of Joint Powers agreements or the formation of a
Joint Powers Authority/Agency as a means of governing the construction and operation
of a joint use facility.
The subcommittee’s goal was to provide sufficient, readable background information and
options to enable the CCAC to have informed discussion. Much work in this subject
area remains to be done once the policy-making authorities conclude that the
Cubberley site is to be jointly used and developed.
CCAC Finance Committee Report #1
Financial Analysis of City/PAUSD
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial analysis of City and School District situation, especially as it relates
to Cubberley revenues and expenses
Important Dates:
1955 – Cubberley is constructed
1979 – Cubberley closed as high school; PAUSD rents space to others
1987 – Utility User Tax is adopted by City voters
1989 – PAUSD leases the entire Cubberley facility to the City
2001 – City acquires ownership of 8 acres of Cubberley buildings in swap for
developed property at Terman
December 2013 – Date by which City is to give notice if it does not intend to
renew Cubberley lease for next 5 year option period (2014-2019)
August 2014 – Time at which City must submit to County Registrar of Voters
ballot measure(s) to finance infrastructure improvements to be voted on at
November General Election
The Lease and Covenant Not to Develop:
There are three components to the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop:
1. The lease of the Cubberley Facility – current cost in 2012-2013 = $4.6 million
2. The Covenant Not to Develop – current cost in 2012-2013 = $1.8 million
3. Payment for provision of space at each elementary school for child care –
current cost in 2012-2013 = $640 thousand; utilities for child care spaces –
current cost in 2012-2013 = $56 thousand
There is an annual CPI adjustment built into the document so that each
component increases each year.
Cubberley Finances:
Aside from the lease payments, Cubberley has expenses for:
General operating maintenance: $430,000
Operations, not including mtce: $1,325,000
Cubberley generates revenues of:
Tenant leases $1,620,000
Hourly rentals $823,000
Office space rental by City $73,000
There is a net revenue from all these sources of approximately $760,000.
According to figures in the IBRC report, the City pays the School District
$4/square foot in the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop and collects
approximately $1/square foot in rental revenue.
The City has identified a minimum of $3.3 million of capital improvement costs
over the next 5 year period:
1. $1.4 million in mechanical/electrical ($0 on City buildings)
2. $1.1 million in electrical upgrades ($750 thousand on City buildings)
3. $1.0 million in roofing projects ($375 on City buildings)
Long term, the City has identified $18.8 million in infrastructure improvements
that must be made at Cubberley. Of those, $8.4 million is on City Buildings and
$10.4 is on School District Buildings. This would cover infrastructure
improvements which would extend the life of the buildings for 25 years but most
would need to be accomplished within 10 years. These improvements have not
yet been funded.
Foothill College, the longest term and largest tenant, is scheduled to move to a
new Sunnyvale campus sometime within the term of the next lease option period.
Foothill represents a significant portion of the current tenant lease income.
General Financial Conditions of City and School District
The School District has an operating budget of $159 million. Of that, 6% or $9
million is from lease revenue, $7 million of which comes from the City. The
operating budget contains three reserve funds:
1. The state-mandated “rainy day” fund
2. The basic aid fund; and
3. The budget cuts fund
Given recent actions by the State, the District has been using the budget cuts fund
to balance its budgets. This fund is scheduled to be depleted in the 2013-2014
fiscal year. The School District is counting on robust increases in property tax
revenue and the renewal of the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop to balance
budgets for the 2014-2019 time frame.
The School District is anxious to hold onto the basic aid reserve because of
persistent threats that the State will cut off the small amount of per pupil
contribution that it sends to Palo Alto. This reserve would cover that gap for a
number of years.
The School District is also concerned about the outcome of the November 2012
statewide election. There are two ballot measures which could significantly
impact the finances of the District should either or both fail passage.
Major operating budget gaps are filled most often by school districts by going to
the voters for approval of a parcel tax. The PAUSD last did so in 2010. Voters
are currently paying approximately $613 per parcel per year. There is a cost of
living adjustment built into the current parcel tax so that it increases each year.
The current parcel tax will expire in 2016.
The School District has no permanent capital improvement budget. Instead when
it needs to make significant improvements to buildings or construct new
buildings, it must go to the voters to win approval to issue General Obligation
Bonds.
The current bond measure does not contain any funds that can be used to make
major improvements at Cubberley as all of the secondary school funds have been
expended or encumbered.
As for ongoing maintenance, the General Fund transfers 2.5% of its budget ($4.1
million this year) to the District’s routine maintenance fund. The District also has
a planned maintenance budget, coming from bond funds, in the amount of $2.1
million annually.
The City’s $152 million general fund budget currently and looking out to the
future has a structural deficit. The Council balanced the 2012-2013 operating
budget by instituting over $2 million in structural deficit reductions, over $3
million in one-time savings and by “borrowing” over $300 thousand from
reserves. Future projections do not paint a rosier picture. The property tax
increases that so heavily benefit the School District make up a small percentage of
the City’s tax revenue. The Utility Users Tax which currently raises just short of
$11 million annually is flattening as people shift from use of land line phones to
cell phones (on which no tax is currently collected). Sales tax revenue has
increased recently but is very dependent upon economic conditions.
In the Capital Improvement budget, the IBRC identified a backlog of deferred
maintenance projects on the order of $40 million. The Commission also
recommended that in order not to fall back into a backlog status, the City would
need to budget $32 million annually to keep current. The IBRC also identified
approximately $210 million in new infrastructure projects that need to be built.
Neither Cubberley nor several other items the Council has discussed in recent
times were included in this number.
Summary
There are potentially two remaining 5-year options on the Cubberley lease if
mutually agreed upon by the City and the District. The deteriorating condition of
some of the buildings and the need to invest in them are powerful factors in
forcing the governmental agencies to clarify their mutual goals and interests in the
property. The precarious nature of both agencies’ budgets requires that capital
investment in the Cubberley site be well-planned, deliberate and suited to a long-
term vision for the site.
Attachments:
1. Spreadsheet of current Cubberley revenues/expenses and projected capital
expenses
2. Spreadsheet of projected revenues and expenses for Cubberley for the period
2010-2020
Rev. 02/11/2013
Finance Committee Financial Summary Spreadsheet 10/1/2012
ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET Data from Lease & Covenant Revenues and Expenses (Budget 2013 column) and rounded
OPERATING INCOME INCOME EXPENSE Itemized
Long Term Leases 1,617,000 (Foothill = approx $930k, all other = approx $690k)
Hourly Rentals 823,000
City Office Rental 73,000
OPERATING EXPENSE
Cubberly Lease 4,600,000
Covenent 1,830,000
Child Care 640,000
Child Care Utilities 56,000
Payments to PAUSD 7,126,000
Lease Manangement & Maintenance 430,000
Non‐maintenance Operating 1,325,000
Operating Costs (Total) 1,755,000
Annual Totals 2,513,000 8,881,000
TOTAL NET 6,368,000
LONG TERM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Next 5 years
2018‐2022
Next 15 years
2023‐2036
CURRENT BUDGETED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (per City of PA 2013 Capital Budget) need to clarify if this is part of IBRC identified work
Auditorium Roof 250,000 250,000
Mechanical & Electrical Upgrades 1,450,000 150,000 1,300,000
Electrical Updgrades 1,150,000 150,000 1,000,000 removed from 2013 capital budget
Roof Maintenance 426,000 53,500 106,000 107,000 106,000 53,500
Total Planned Improvements (5 year) 3,276,000
LONG TERM MAINTENANCE (PER IRBC p. 146)
Improvements (next 5 years) 10,200,000 2,040,000 2,040,000 2,040,000 2,040,000 2,040,000
Improvements (years 5‐10) 2,100,000 2,100,000
Improvements (years 11‐25) 6,500,000 6,500,000
Total 18,800,000 2,093,500 2,296,000 3,697,000 2,296,000 3,093,500 2,100,000 6,500,000
With Inflation
9/24/12 Copy of Cubberley Actuals 2011-2021(2).xlsx
Lease & Covenant Revenues and Expenses
2010-2020 (Fiscal Year Basis)
Actual Actual Adj Budget Actual Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected
2010 2011 2012 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Explanation
Revenues
Property Rental (long term leases)1,583,925 1,599,323 1,510,348 1,610,587 1,617,500 1,649,850 1,682,847 1,716,504 1,750,834 1,785,851 1,821,568 1,857,999 Long term rental. Managed by ASD. Includes
dance school and artists. Estimated 2% incremental
increase every year. 1030000-16030
Facilities Rental (hourly rental)927,865 868,318 927,152 840,075 823,000 847,690 873,121 899,314 926,294 954,083 982,705 1,012,186 Hourly rental, managed by CSD. Includes birthday
parties etc. Estimated 3% incremental increase
every year.10300000-16050
Cubberley Rental (City office space)73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 Rent charged for office space.10300000-19790
Total Revenue 2,584,790 2,540,641 2,510,500 2,523,662 2,513,500 2,570,540 2,628,968 2,688,818 2,750,128 2,812,933 2,877,273 2,943,185
Expenses
Payments to PAUSD
Lease 4,349,313 4,405,134 4,605,341 4,508,811 4,604,703 4,742,844 4,885,129 5,031,683 5,182,634 5,338,113 5,498,256 5,663,204 3%growth
Covenant Not To Develop 1,680,684 1,727,786 1,779,619 1,763,654 1,833,008 1,887,998 1,944,638 2,002,977 2,063,067 2,124,959 2,188,707 2,254,369 3%growth
Child Care Sites 566,847 592,790 620,631 594,825 639,250 658,428 678,181 698,526 719,482 741,066 763,298 786,197 3% growth
Utilities (child care sites)46,981 53,603 55,211 55,211 56,039 57,720 59,452 61,235 63,072 64,965 66,914 68,921 3% growth
Subtotal PAUSD 6,643,824 6,779,313 7,060,803 6,922,501 7,133,000 7,346,990 7,567,400 7,794,422 8,028,255 8,269,102 8,517,175 8,772,691 10300000-33490
Departmental Expenditures for Cubberley
Lease Management and Maintenance (PWD and
ASD)
414,772 432,886 418,199 429,115 428,356 441,207 454,443 468,076 482,118 496,582 511,479 526,824 Payment for PWD and ASD salary and non-sal
resources dedicated to Cubb maint. Assume 3%
annual growth.40040003+50030006all
Non-maintenance Operating Expense (CSD)1,505,585 1,446,954 1,324,785 1,348,182 1,325,945 1,365,723 1,406,695 1,448,896 1,492,363 1,537,134 1,583,248 1,630,745 All commitment items for CC 80080602,80080603 &
80040103
Subtotal Departmental Expenditures 1,920,357 1,879,840 1,742,984 1,777,297 1,754,301 1,806,930 1,861,138 1,916,972 1,974,481 2,033,716 2,094,727 2,157,569
Total Expenses 8,564,181 8,659,153 8,803,787 8,699,798 8,887,301 9,153,920 9,428,538 9,711,394 10,002,736 10,302,818 10,611,903 10,930,260
Net (5,979,391) (6,118,512) (6,293,287) (6,176,136) (6,373,801) (6,583,380) (6,799,570) (7,022,576) (7,252,608) (7,489,885) (7,734,630) (7,987,074)
Cubberley Operations Only
Rev 2,584,790 2,540,641 2,510,500 2,523,662 2,513,500 2,570,540 2,628,968 2,688,818 2,750,128 2,812,933 2,877,273 2,943,185
Exp 1,920,357 1,879,840 1,742,984 1,777,297 1,754,301 1,806,930 1,861,138 1,916,972 1,974,481 2,033,716 2,094,727 2,157,569
Net 664,433 660,801 767,516 746,365 759,199 763,610 767,830 771,846 775,647 779,218 782,546 785,616
Factor 1.346 1.352 1.440 1.420 1.433 1.423 1.413 1.403 1.393 1.383 1.374 1.364
Lease credits
Fields (aprox.)(308,438) (230,912) (301,557) (279,573) (301,557) (310,604) (319,922) (329,519) (339,405) (349,587) (360,075) (370,877) Run trial balance for field maintenance credit in
80060313-15990; projected to increase 3% a year
(represents 50% of total cost of 80060313)
Note: The agreement with PAUSD will expire on December 31,
2013 with the option to renew.
1 Revised: 03/24/13
CCAC Finance Committee Report #2
Cubberley Lease Report
I. Overview
This CCAC Finance Committee report reviews the existing agreement between the City of Palo Alto
(City) and Palo Alto Unified School District (District) referred to as the Lease and Covenant Not to
Develop (Cubberley Lease). Some background information and terms are reviewed followed by
recommendations and considerations for actions going forward.
II. Lease Overview
The existing arrangement between the City of Palo Alto (City) and Palo Alto Unified School District
(District) was put into place 1989 to address issues that were of concern to the Palo Alto community at
that time. During the 1980s the District was selling off its parcels of land to raise capital to meet financial
demands and the falling school enrollment seemed to support that trend. As land became more scarce, the
community sought to prevent further District land sales fearing that future growth in student population
would require additional schools and the increasing land scarcity would make that infeasible. The
community developed a solution to the land sales, obtaining the District's agreement not to sell additional
school properties and in turn the City would provide funds to aid in the District's financial problems. The
City obtained funds to pay for the Cubberley Lease as well as other city improvements through a levied
Utility Users Tax, to be collected by the City and paid to the District through the Lease and Covenant Not
To Develop (Cubberley Lease).
The City and District agreed to enter into an agreement that is now the Lease and Covenant Not To
Develop and contains the following major terms:
1) Cubberley Lease Payment: A City lease payment to the District for the use of the Cubberley
property.
2) Child Care Facility Lease Payment: A City lease payment to the District for use of eleven (11)
school facilities in order to provide child care services to the community.
3) Covenant Not to Develop: A City lease payment to the District in return for the District's
commitment to not sell additional District owned land (including Ohlone, Garland, Greendell, JLS,
and Jordan)
4) Lease payments are adjusted annually in line with Consumer Price Index changes.
5) The Lease and Covenant Not To Develop terms included one 15 year term (1/1/90-1/31/04), one City
optional extension of 10 years (1/1/05-12/31/14) and two mutual optional 5 year extensions (1/1/14-
12/31/18 and 1/1/19-12/31/23).
In 1998 the Cubberley Lease was amended to include an agreement to substitute two operating schools
for the opening of one "covenanted" site. The list of Covenanted Sites was modified to exclude Ohlone
and include Juana Briones and Walter Hays. The list of schools where child care was allowed by the City
was expanded to include Ohlone and allowed for future expansion.
In 2002 the Cubberley Lease was amended to account for the land swap where 8 acres of the Cubberley
site was deeded to the City in exchange for the District's reclamation of the Terman location and the
2 Revised: 03/24/13
Cubberley Lease Payment was accordingly reduced by $23,490 per month. The list of Covenanted sites
was modified to exclude the Garland site and include Addison and El Carmelo sites. Also added at that
time was a District Option to open a compact high school at the Cubberley site if necessary, agreeing to
joint use of the gym, cafeteria, theatre, and fields with required 24 months notice.
In the 2002 Lease Amendment and Land Exchange Agreement, both parties were given the "Right to
Acquire" if the other party elects to sell their portion of the Cubberley site. If they cannot agree on a
value, fair market value would be determined by a state-certified appraiser. In 2007, the City did get their
eight (8) acre parcel appraised for approximately $18-22 million.
At this time, the first of the two 5 year extensions is under consideration by both parties with a decision
required by December 31, 2013.
III. Problem Statement
The following issues are a concern at this time regarding the above summarized lease.
1) District Needs
The District has developed a dependency on the lease payment funds, comprising now approximately
4.4% of the District's annual budget as revenue. These funds also constitute approximately 4.6% of
the City's annual budget as an expense.
2) Covenant Not to Develop Now Obsolete
The lease includes a "Covenant Not To Develop" payment that was intended to safeguard District
owned properties from being sold. It is the City's promise to pay the District in return for the District
not selling its land. This is no longer an immediate issue as the school sites identified in the Covenant
are now all in use.
3) Utility Users Tax
During the campaign to pass the Utility Users Tax, it was advertised to the public as a District
financial benefit, creating a belief by the Palo Alto community that one of the major beneficiaries of
the tax funds collected is the District.
4) Lease Payments per Consumer Price Index vs. Utility Users Tax Revenue
The Cubberley Lease calculates annual lease payment adjustments using the Consumer Price Index
which has been steadily increasing over time. The Utility Users Tax revenue which depends on utility
revenues and is used by the City for lease payments, has been leveling off and/or decreasing in recent
years. This is an inconsistent correlation of income and expense for the City.
5) Future District Requirements are Vague
The District cannot predict specific dates for future use although it seems probably clear, using
current projections, that at some time in the 10-15 year time frame the site or a portion thereof may be
necessary for school use.
6) Future City Requirements are Vague
The City has not articulated clearly the community services necessary to remain on the Cubberley site
and exactly how much of the site is required to support them.
3 Revised: 03/24/13
IV. Lease Modification Options
The following recommendations for modifications to the lease are for the short term period, specifically
related to the upcoming renewal of 5 year term (Jan 1, 2014 - Dec. 31, 2018). Mid-term and long-term
recommendations are difficult to predict as they would pertain to the conditions and plans in place at that
time.
Consideration should be given to renew the lease for 5 years to give the City and District time to plan for
future renovations on the site. The following lease modifications may also be considered in the form of an
addendum to the existing lease:
1. Recalculate the annual lease payments to align with the Utility Users Tax revenue trend rather
than the Consumer Price Index.
2. Remove the Covenant Not To Develop payment as it is no longer pertinent to the current
situation.
3. Have the District pay for its share of the projected capital improvements.
4. Have the District contribute to ongoing maintenance and repairs.
5. Increase the amount of child care space leased to the city on elementary schools sites along with a
corresponding increase in child care facility lease payments.
Finance Committee Report #3
Research existing joint use facilities in
other communities for lessons
learned and guidance for our effort.
Outline/Process
•Gathered available documentation on Joint Use projects
•Choose 3 examples to study in depth –based on similarity to Cubberley
–Wadsworth, Ohio High School & Community Campus
–Emeryville, CA Center for Community Life
–Livermore, CA School Upgrades, City Library & Youth Community Center
•Gathered data
–Partners
–Facilities (including sq. ft)
–Total Cost and Funding Mechanisms
–Implementation Timeline
•Common Threads and Lessons Learned
•References
Emeryville Center for Community Life
Partners:
•Emery USD
•City of Emeryville
•9‐12 High School
•K‐8 Lower School
•School Multi‐Purpose Room
•Admin for School & Community
•Community/School Library
•Community Pool
•Community Dance/Aerobic Space
•Community Multi‐Purpose Room
•Community Amphitheatre
•3 level design wTerraces
•Security Control Points
•Phase 2 –theatre, gym, classrooms
Facility Overview
> 750 students
Approx. 7.6 acres
115,100 sq. ft facility
ECCL has Phase 2 plan and Defined Boundaries
Approx. 7.6 acres
115,100 sq. ft facility
Emeryville Funding and Timeframe
•Cost / Funding
Phase 1: $80M (w/ $10M flex)
–School will use a $48M 55% General Obligation Bond
–City will provide $21M in State Redevelopment $s.
•Timeline
–In planning for 10 years‐program plan first issued in 2003
–Currently on 3rd MOU
–Approved the conceptual design March 2012
–Move in date is currently estimated August 2015
ECCL is still in
development and
concern is being raised
over the state
commitment of
redevelopment funds.
•9‐12 High School (1629 students)
•Recreation Facility
•Senior Center
•Health & Wellness Center
•Outdoor and Indoor Pools
•Pediatrics and Dentistry
•Media / Public Library
•Existing Middle school on site
(782 students)
Facility Overview
Approx 65 acres
450,000 sq. ft
•Wadsworth Schools
•City of Wadsworth
•Public Library
•Private Health System
Partners:
450,000 sq. ft
Wadsworth Funding and Timeframe
•Cost / Funding ‐$105M
–$65M from a General Obligation Bond by the Schools
–$24M from Ohio Schools Facility Commission (37% of GOB)
–$16M city commitment for Community Center
•Partners and capital corporate campaign
•Timeline –4 years !!
–Presented to community in May 2008
–Bond approval in November 2008
–School opened in Fall 2012
–Community Center opening scheduled for December 2012
Taking advantage of state funds available pushed the community to take action.
Livermore, CA
•Livermore Valley USD
•City of Livermore
•Livermore Area Park &
Recreation District
Partners:
•Modernize 7 of 20 schools •Youth Community Center •Civic Center Library
Facility Overview –3 projects
Livermore Civic Center Library
1188 South Livermore Ave.
Robert Livermore Community Center
4444 East Ave.
20 School sites
71,000 sq.ft indoor
45,000 sq. ft. aquatic center
56,000 sq.ft
Livermore Funding and Timeframe
•Cost / Funding ‐$150M thru a General Obligation Bond led by the school
–$110M for school upgrades
–$20M Civic Center Library
•LVJUSD received special legislation (EC 18104) authorizing joint use library to be built on
other public entity land within 1 mile of site.
–$20M Youth Community Center
•Timeline –5 ‐10 years
–Two failed votes in the early ‘90s (School Parcel Tax and Parks GOB)
–1975 Tax override set to expire in 2000 gave impetus for action
–Community Survey March 1998
–Bond approval in March 1999 (passed with 82% of the vote)
–Library opened in 2004
–Community Center opened March 2005
–School funds exhausted June 2008
This joint effort was done primarily to save election expenses and to provide a
compelling opportunity that voters would support.
7 Steps to Effective Joint‐Use Partnership1
from document published by Berkeley’s Center for Cities and Schools
1. Identify a local need that a joint use partnership might
address
2. Identify essential joint use partners
3. Develop a positive, trusting relationship with partners
4. Build political support
5. Build a joint use partnership within the context of the local
community
6. Formalize the partnership with an MOU
7. Foster ongoing communication and monitor the progress
and impact
DONE
DONE
IN
PR
O
G
R
E
S
S
Type of Funding for Joint‐Use Projects
through School Districts5
• State General Obligation Bonds: These funds are voted on by the entire state. They can be directed
one or several areas such as education, transportation, and parks. As of June 2008, there was $1.3
million left from Prop. 47, $8.2 million from Prop. 55, and 2.5 million from Prop. 1D, for a total of
$12.1 million. So not a strong prospect for us to pursue.
• Local General Obligation Bonds: School districts use these bond funds to match the state required
contribution for school construction projects. Local bonds must be approved by 55% of the vote
within the district. They are repaid using local property tax revenue. Local bonds have raised $41
billion in the past decade.
• Developers Fees: School districts are allowed to levy fees on new residential, commercial, or industrial
developments for school construction projects. These fees can provide a moderate amount but vary
significantly by community depending on local development.
• Special Bond Funds: Known as “Mello‐Roos” Bonds, these funds allow school districts to form special
districts to sell bonds for school construction projects. These bonds require 2/3 voter approval and
are paid off by the property owners in the special district. These bond funds have produced $3.7
billion in the past 10 years.
Very little state money is available and PA isn’t a strong candidate so local options
are our best bet.
Potential Challenges to Joint Use5
•Aligning Partnership Goals: The long‐term nature of the partnership requires parties to
develop similar goals and objectives for the funding and management of the project.
•Operations and Maintenance: The hours of use, security, and cost maintenance should be addressed
upfront to avoid confusion and misunderstandings.
•Regulatory Constraints: Construction projects have various levels of regulation depending on the
community and the environment. The Field Act contains higher construction standards for school facilities.
Therefore, if community centers and buildings are to be used by school districts, they must also comply
with the Field Act. These types of differences should be reconciled among partners before the project
advances.
•Joint‐Use Fund Restrictions: Requirements set forth in SB 50 state that projects using state school
construction funding must be on property owned by school districts.
•Restrictions on Private‐Public Partnerships: There are currently limited opportunities for public‐private
joint use partnerships.
•Long‐Term Commitment: School districts and their partners have stated concerns about joint‐use projects
and the long‐term costs associated with them. Liability issues may also arise.
Major Takeaways
•Joint Use projects are being done all over in all forms
•It takes time to pull the projects together ‐Project of our scope…
–2‐5 years in Ohio
–5‐10 years in California
•Successful projects have communities that embraced them
–Key tools used: Community surveys, Community advisory committees,
community forums
•Funding comes from a variety of sources but typically the school
takes the lead
–Most successful examples have either outside funds they want to leverage
or a transition in a local tax
•Significant up front work needs to be done on MOU or Joint Use
Agreement to define structure of the project and the relationship of
the entities involved
References
1. Joint Use School Partnerships in California: Strategies to Enhance Schools and Communities August 2008
http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/CC&S_PHLP_2008_joint_use_with_appendices.pdf
CASE 1: OPENING SCHOOL PLAYGROUNDS TO THE COMMUNITY: THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO AND SF UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
CASE 2: BUILDING NEW JOINT USE GYMNASIUMS: GARVEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
CASE 3: EXPANDING CHILDCARE OPPORTUNITIES: CLOVIS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND STATE CENTER COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICT
2. Innovative Approaches to Financing School Construction: The Feasibility of “Public‐Public” Partnership February 2000
http://www.cashnet.org/resource‐center/resourcefiles/65.pdf
3. Joint Use of Public Schools: A Framework for a New Social Contract April 2010
http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/2010_JU_Concept_Paper.pdf
4. California's K‐12 Educational Infrastructure Investments: Leveraging the State's Role for Quality School Facilities in Sustainable
Communities 2012
http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/CCS_2012_CA_K12_Edu_Infra_Exec_Sum.pdf
5. Primer on Joint Use
http://www.cpehn.org/pdfs/Joint%20Use%20Primer%20‐%20CPEHN%204‐09.pdf
6. Emeryville Center of Community Life current website
http://www.emeryvillecenter.org/
7. Wadsworth High School and Community Complex 2008‐2012
http://www.wadsworthcity.com/the‐city/home/community‐collaboration‐information.html
8. Attachment A: Joint Use Resources
LOCATION Purpose TYPE OF
AGREEMENT
Scripps High School | San
Diego, CA
The City of San Diego leased twenty‐five acres to San
Diego Unified School District for the development of
outdoor recreation fields adjoined to Scripps High
School. A joint use agreement was established for the
two entities to jointly use the area, which includes
illuminated softball, soccer, and multipurpose fields.
West Contra Costa Unified
School District | Richmond,
CA
West Contra Costa Unified School District in the San
Francisco Bay Area region has numerous joint use
agreements with the many East Bay cities within its
boundaries. For example, the district recently signed a
new joint use agreement with the City of Richmond for
the use of fields at various school sites throughout the
La Mesa‐Spring Valley
Unified School District | La
Mesa, CA
In this large San Diego suburb, La Mesa Park and
Recreation Foundation provided the funding and the
City of La Mesa's Public Works Department handled
the design and construction for the expansion of a
YMCA sports complex located near several schools.
The Junior Seau Athletic Complex features football and
soccer fields,
Schools as Community Hubs
Pilot Project | San
Francisco, CA
Initiated in 2007, the Schools as Community Hubs Pilot
Project is a joint use agreement between the City and
County of San Francisco and San Francisco Unified
School District (SFUSD). The district allows the city to
unlock outdoor playground areas for open,
unsupervised public use at twelve schools throughout
the city
LA
San Joaquin
http://www.jointuse.org/community‐4/los‐angeles/
http://www.jointuse.org/community‐4/central‐valley/
http://www.californiaconvergence.org/
LOCATION Purpose TYPE OF
AGREEMENT
Poway Unified School
District | Poway, CA
Poway Unified School District, in a
mostly rural area outside San Diego,
leased land to the City of Poway for the
construction of a performing arts
center adjacent to Poway High School.
The city and school district shared in
the construction funding. A joint use
agreement was established outlining
the terms of use, maintenance, and
operations.
San Francisco Unified
School District | San
Francisco, CA
Through its Student Support Services
Department, San Francisco Unified
School District (SFUSD) coordinates
with more than 400 community‐based
organizations (CBOs) to provide
programs and services in nearly all of
the district’s schools. SFUSD works to
align student needs and programs
offered by CBOs, many of whom are
funded by the City of San Francisco’s
Department of Children, Youth, and
Their Families. A wide range of
programs are offered, including before‐
and after‐school activities, tutoring,
mental health services, English as a
Second Language (ESL) training, and
physical activity programs.
LOCATION Purpose TYPE OF
AGREEMENT
San Francisco
Unified School
District | San
Francisco, CA
Through its Student Support Services Department, San
Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) coordinates with
more than 400 community‐based organizations (CBOs) to
provide programs and services in nearly all of the
district’s schools. SFUSD works to align student needs and
programs offered by CBOs, many of whom are funded by
the City of San Francisco’s Department of Children, Youth,
and Their Families. A wide range of programs are offered,
including before‐ and after‐school activities, tutoring,
mental health services, English as a Second Language
(ESL) training, and physical activity programs.
City of Fresno and
Local School Districts
| Fresno, CA
The City of Fresno’s Department of Parks, After‐School,
Recreation, and Community Services (PARCS) provides a
host of services and programs to students and community
members at seventeen area elementary school sites. As
the area’s largest after‐school program provider, PARCS
contracts with local school districts to provide enrichment
program elements for schools receiving After‐School
Education and Safety (ASES) grant funds which support
activities such as art concepts, nutritional education,
leadership training, sports and fitness.
Los Angeles Youth
Center | Los
Angeles, CA
Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and the
Watts/Willowbrook Boys & Girls Club partnered to
establish a youth center at Markham Middle School that
is dedicated to youth development programming. The
center hosts after‐ school programs, creative workshops,
and collaborates with other local organizations. Obtaining
additional funding from the City Attorney’s Office the
partnership was formed, in part, to provide a safe
supervised place for youth activities. LAUSD is working to
expand the center and include a more comprehensive set
of services, such as mental health support, job training,
after‐school enrichment.
LOCATION Purpose TYPE OF AGREEMENT
Santa Clara
County
Education District shall establish and maintain
educational programs, including but not limited to
regional occupational, adult education, fee based
classes, and high school programs, which provide
academic, vocational, and recreational instruction for
students in the Participating District's communities.
Metropolitan
Education District ‐
MetroED 1.1
Parties To This
Agreement
* Campbell Union
High School District;
* East Side Union
High School District;
* Los Gatos‐Saratoga
Joint Union High
School District;
* Milpitas Unified
School District;
* San Jose Unified
School District; and
* Santa Clara Unified
School District.
Beverly Hills,CA Through the JPA, the City provides funding to the
Beverly Hills Unified School District (BHUSD) for a
variety of programs and services. In return, residents
have access to a wide array of educational and
recreational facilities that would otherwise not be
available for City programs and services. The agreement
includes athletic fields, courts and equipment; theaters
and auditoriums; the district’s five libraries; and the
swimming pool for summer aquatics programs. In
addition, the agreement includes janitorial services for
City programs, exchange of Cable TV programming
between the City and the high school and use of school
facilities for emergency exercises.
The four‐year
agreement grants
City funding of more
than $39 million to
the schools in
exchange for the use
of the school district’s
many facilities. The
City and the district
have benefited from
this partnership for
more than 30 years.
San Francisco
Unified School
District | San
Francisco, CA
Through its Student Support Services Department, San
Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) coordinates
with more than 400 community‐based organizations
(CBOs) to provide programs and services in nearly all of
the district’s schools. SFUSD works to align student
needs and programs offered by CBOs, many of whom
are funded by the City of San Francisco’s Department of
Children, Youth, and Their Families. A wide range of
programs are offered, including before‐ and after‐school
activities, tutoring, mental health services, English as a
Second Language (ESL) training, and physical activity
programs.
City of Fresno
and Local
School Districts
| Fresno, CA
The City of Fresno’s Department of Parks, After‐School,
Recreation, and Community Services (PARCS) provides a
host of services and programs to students and
community members at seventeen area elementary
school sites. As the area’s largest after‐school program
provider, PARCS contracts with local school districts to
provide enrichment program elements for schools
receiving After‐School Education and Safety (ASES) grant
funds which support activities such as art concepts,
nutritional education, leadership training, sports and
fitness.
Los Angeles
Youth Center |
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and the
Watts/Willowbrook Boys & Girls Club partnered to
establish a youth center at Markham Middle School that
is dedicated to youth development programming. The
center hosts after‐ school programs, creative
workshops, and collaborates with other local
organizations. Obtaining additional funding from the
City Attorney’s Office the partnership was formed, in
part, to provide a safe supervised place for youth
activities. LAUSD is working to expand the center and
include a more comprehensive set of services, such as
mental health support, job training, after‐school
enrichment.
http://www.metroed.net/jpa.html
http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/filebank/10019‐‐JPA2012FINAL.pdf
1 Revised 03/24/13
CCAC Finance Committee Report #4
Funding Options
1. Overview
This report summarizes funding options for the Palo Alto Unified School District (District) and the City of
Palo Alto (City). Funding mechanisms are reviewed that are commonly used by the City and District along
with a few others that might be potentials for future use. This is not a comprehensive review of all possible
funding mechanisms. Three scenarios for the future of Cubberley facilities are proposed.
Funding mechanisms are methods used to generate revenue streams and/or raise capital. The use of the
revenue and duration of the mechanism is determined at the time the mechanism is created and, in most cases,
must be approved by voters. Income from the funding mechanisms can be used in basically two ways:
1) Ongoing revenue streams may be used directly to augment an operating budget or pay for supplemental
services. Common funding mechanism examples of this type include parcel tax, property tax, utility taxes,
etc.
2) Bonds are issued to raise large amounts of capital. In this case a new or existing revenue stream is
designated to repay the bonds. Various restrictions apply. In most cases, capital raised is used for new
development or capital improvements. Rule of thumb is that $1m/year of revenue for 30 years generates
between $10m to $15m of borrowed capital depending on prevailing interest rates. The most commonly used
bonds for the City and District are General Obligation Bonds.
2. Funding Mechanisms used by City & District
2.1 Parcel Tax
A parcel tax is a fixed annual tax per parcel of real property that generates an ongoing revenue
stream. It requires a 2/3 voter approval. The duration of the tax varies, generally 5-20 years, and
renewals can be approved by voters.
District Parcel Tax History:
2001 - Parcel tax $493 approved 75% generated $5.5m/year, expired 2011
2010 - Parcel tax $589 approved 79% generates $11.9/year expires 2016 (escalates 2% per year)
City Parcel Tax History:
There is currently no parcel tax collected by the city.
2.2 Utility Users Tax
A utility tax is a fixed percentage fee levied on city resident's utility or telephone bills. It requires a
50% voter approval. The duration is determined at the time of approval.
District History:
There is currently no Utility Users Tax collected by the District.
City Utility User Tax History:
1989 - Utility Users Tax of 5% approved over 50% generates $11m/year, no expiration
2 Revised 03/24/13
2.3 General Obligation Bonds
A general obligation bond (GOB) is a funding mechanism whose revenue stream is a property tax fee
per $100,000 of assessed property value. The tax time frame can be anywhere up to 40 years.
Historically it has been 30 years. A GOB generates revenue that can only be used for capital
improvements. GOB requires a 55% voter approval for school districts and 2/3 voter approval for
cities.
District Bond History:
1995 - "Building for Excellence" - $143m bond, tax rate of $35/$100,000 expires in 2024.
2008 - "Strong Schools" - $378m bond passed with tax rate of $44.50/$100,000 expires 2037
2012 - "Strong Schools" increase to $60/$100,000 due to recession to retain 30 year repayment
City Bond History:
2008 - "Measure N" - $78m bond passed with tax rate up to $28.74/$100,000 expires 2037
3. Other Funding Mechanisms for Consideration
3.1 Business License Tax
Tax levied on businesses to generate a revenue stream. Available to City. Majority voter approval
required. In 2009 a ballot measure proposition by the city to tax businesses was defeated.
3.2 Sales Tax
Tax levied on sales revenue to generate a revenue stream. Available to City in 1/8% increments.
Current restrictions limit maximum of 1% available to City. Majority voter approval required.
3.3 Mello‐Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) Bonds
A Mello-Roos CFD is formed for a specific community need and requires the formation of a
"territory". The territory can be any size, including a whole city, as long as all members benefit from
the project funded by the bond. Debt repayment is from revenue collected as a property tax fee per
$100,000 of assessed property long term (generally 30 years). The bonds generate capital that can be
used for capital improvements and services. A CFD requires a two thirds vote of residents or property
owners in the district.
3.4 Certificates of Participation Bond
A Certificate of Participation bond is a general credit of the issuing entity. It is not necessarily backed
by a particular revenue source, but a new revenue source or reallocation of existing resources is
necessary to support the cost of COP debt. A COP also requires the use of an existing asset as
collateral for the debt.
3.5 Utility Revenue Bonds
A Utility Revenue Bond is repaid through Utility rates or charges to customers. Revenue streams
from utilities cannot be used to fund General Fund operations or capital improvements.
3.6 Private Funding
Revenue sources may be available from private sources who are interested in participating in city
improvements. These could be in the form of private financing, contributions, or participatory
funding for joint use.
3 Revised 03/24/13
4. Cubberley Funding Scenarios
Given that no specific plan is in place for the Cubberley Facility and the only "known" requirement is that the
District may need it in 10-15 years, planning options are wide open. Three scenarios with possible funding
options are presented here for consideration.
4.1 No Development at Facility ‐ Use Cubberley "As‐Is"
Option 1 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 10 years. After 10 years,
the agreement terminates and the District can reopen the high school in the existing facilities. The City and
District would have to renegotiate the use of the existing 8 acre parcel owned by the City on which a majority
of the classroom space is located. Today the Cubberley Facility rental income covers its operating costs and
routine maintenance so those costs are not considered a funding need over the next 10 years, although the loss
of the Foothill lease around 2015 may be problematic. Downside is that after 10 years, no community services
would be provided by the City at the Cubberley facility and would have to be relocated.
The District is aware and has stated that the Cubberley facility is not up to par with the other two existing
high schools, Palo Alto and Gunn. Cubberley would have to be renovated and building(s) added to bring it up
to par. That effort would cost at least $100m as estimated in the table below. In addition, over the next 20
years Palo Alto and Gunn high schools are likely to be upgraded and the corresponding upgrades to
Cubberley are not included here.
OPTION 1: No Change to Cubberley
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-10 Capital Improvements City $12.3m Include in 2014 bond
10+ Capital Improvements
*Renovations in
preparation for school
use of 175,000 sq. ft
**New construction of
85,000 sq. ft.
***Purchase/lease 8
acres from city
Relocation of
community services
which includes new
playing fields
District
District
District
District
City
$6.3m
$30.6 m
$42.5 m
$18-22 m
?????????
Increase parcel tax and use on a
"pay as you go basis" meaning
accumulation of funds to build a
project instead of creating debt -
OR- issue new District General
Obligation Bonds.
Based on the City's solution for
relocating services, funds must be
raised accordingly.
* existing 175,000 sq. ft. @ $175/sq. ft. , estimated renovation factor
** average of PA and Gunn High School size is 260,000 sq. ft., assuming Cubberley needs to be the same size
requires building an additional 85,000 sq. ft. at $500/sq. ft., site would need at least a new science
building.
*** Based on an appraisal the City obtained in 2007 for the City's 8 acres
4 Revised 03/24/13
4.2 Phased Re‐Development ‐ City 8 Acres First, District 27 Acres Later
Option 2 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 5 years. In the meantime
the City and District develop a Memo of Understanding (MOU) to develop joint use facilities on the
Cubberley location. In the following 5-10 years, the City builds a Community Center with joint use in mind.
After 10-15 years, the District rebuilds the high school. Costs are based on the $200m construction estimate
provided by the architects and based on acreage, split accordingly.
OPTION 2: Phased Re-development
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-5 Capital Improvements City $6m Include in 2014 bond measure
5-10 Community Center
(with joint use MOU)
City $50 -100m Include in 2014 GO bond measure - or -
Certificate of Participation Bond through the
use or increase of the Utility Users Tax,
local business license tax, or sales tax.
10+ High School
(with joint use MOU)
District $100 -150m PAUSD General Obligation Bond in 2024
when "Building for Excellence" bond
expires
4.3 One Time Re‐Development ‐ 35 acres at once
Option 3 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 5 or 10 years. In the
meantime the City and District develop a Memo of Understanding (MOU) to develop joint use facilities on
the Cubberley location. After 5 or 10 years, the City and District together build a Community Center and
High School with joint use in mind. Costs are based on the $200m construction estimate provided by the
architects.
If the City and District are collaborating on design, construction, and joint use, funding scenarios are much
more flexible. There seems to be some precedent in California that funds raised by schools through general
obligation bonds can be used to build joint use facilities including child care, libraries, gymnasiums, fields,
and performing and visual arts buildings. Therefore it is perhaps the case that bonds can be issued by the
District for capital improvements to build most of the community center uses. The source of additional
revenue streams needs to be investigated to support the needs not met by the District general obligation
bonds.
OPTION 3: One-Time Re-development
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-5 Capital Improvements City $6m Include in 2014 bond measure
5-10 Community Center
and High School (with
joint use MOU)
City &
District
$200-300m District General Obligation Bonds and other
revenue sources TBD.
5 Revised 03/24/13
5. References
California Debt Issuance Primer
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cdiac/debtpubs/handbook.pdf
Partnership for Joint Use, Research Report by Jeffrey M. Vincent
http://media.cefpi.org/CCS_Partnerships.pdf
6 Revised 03/24/13
Appendix A: Funding Options (Financing Mechanisms)
* Note that GO and Mello‐Roos bonds can be thought of as “revenue raising” instruments in that their approval by
voters implements taxes to repay bond holders.
Financing
Vehicle/Instrument to
Issue Bonds
Description
GME
Requirement
(Nov. 2012)
Vote
Requirement
Comments
General Obligation (GO)
Bond*
Property Tax based on % of
assessed value
No 2/3 See accompanying chart
for list of upcoming
regular and mailed
ballot election dates.
Certificates of Participation
(COPs)
Similar to Revenue Bonds No N/A Must have identified
revenue stream for
repayment e.g. new tax
such as Business License
Tax or increase in
current tax such as sales
tax.
Utility Revenue Bonds
Repaid from Utility Rates No N/A Must have identified
revenue stream for
repayment. Utility
bonds cannot be used to
fund General Fund
operations.
Mello‐Roos District Bonds* Special Tax Levy No 2/3 Special Tax Levy used to
repay bonds.
7 Revised 03/24/13
Appendix B: Funding Options (New or Increased Taxes)
*General taxes can be coupled with an advisory measure expressing voters’ preference that tax be used for
particular purpose. If the ballot language itself expressly limits use of tax to infrastructure or other specific
uses, it becomes a Special Tax. Special taxes require a 2/3 vote, but need not be placed on a GME ballot.
New or Increased Taxes
to Support Financing
Vehicles (e.g., COPs)
Description
GME
Requirement
(Nov. 2014)
Vote Requirement Comments
Business License tax
Tax on
businesses
Yes* Majority
3/8¢ Sales Tax
General Tax Yes* Majority Must be voted on at GME
Currently, there is a 1.0%
transactions and use tax in
Santa Clara County. The cap on
these taxes is 2%. (R&T
7251.1). Therefore PA has the
capacity to impose a tax of up
to 1%. Note these taxes may
be imposed only in multiples of
1/8%.
Utility Users Tax
Tax on utility
charges
Yes* Majority
Parcel Tax
(See comment)
Property tax
based on flat
rate per parcel
No 2/3
Parcel tax cannot be pledged
toward bond payments. Can be
used to support programs and
operating expenses.
8 Revised 03/24/13
Appendix C: Comparison of GOB, Mello‐Roos, and Parcel Taxes
Separate document attached provided by Jones Hall dated September 2012.
September 2012
1
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Vote Required? Yes. Yes. Yes.
Minimum
Affirmative Votes
Two-thirds of votes cast. Two-thirds of votes cast. Two-thirds of votes cast.
Qualified Electors Registered voters residing in city. Registered voters in district, if 12 or
more voters reside in district. If
fewer than 12 registered voters
reside in district, vote is of
landowners, one vote per acre.
Registered voters residing in city.
Boundary of Area to be
Taxed
City. Territory of district, as defined by
city council. District could be entire
city or a portion of city, including
non-contiguous areas.
City.
Basis of Tax Assessed value of property. Any reasonable method except
assessed value.
Fixed annual tax amount per parcel,
which may escalate annually.
Method of Tax
Collection
Annual property tax bill. Annual property tax bill or direct
billing.
Annual property tax bill.
Can Seniors be Exempt
from Tax?
No. Yes. Yes, so long as there is a rational
basis for the exemption.
Typical Use of
Technique
Finance capital improvements. Finance capital improvements and
certain annual services.
Augment operating budget or pay
for supplemental services.
* Community Facilities Districts
September 2012
2
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Facilities Eligible for
Financing
Purchase or improvement of real
property (purchase of land or
construction of buildings).
Any facility with useful life of five
years or more (including furnishings
and vehicles).
Any purpose specified in the ballot,
without limitation.
Can Furnishings and
Equipment be
Financed?
No. Yes, provided the equipment has a
useful life of five years or longer.
Yes, without limitation.
Can Tax Revenues be
Used for Purposes
Other than Debt Service
on Bonds?
No. Yes. Pay-as-you-go capital costs,
administrative expenses, and
limited services (set forth in the
Act).
Yes. Any purposes authorized in the
ballot measure, including operating
expenses.
Are Operating Expenses
Eligible for Financing
with Tax?
No. Certain municipal services,
including police, fire, storm
drainage, park, recreation, library,
and hazardous waste removal
services. Also, annual cost of
administering the bonds and the
district.
Yes. Most common use of parcel
taxes is to supplement operating
revenues to maintain current service
level or improve level of service.
Separate Authority
Required to Issue
Bonds?
No. No. Yes. Typically, general fund lease
revenue bonds or COPs authorized
by city council, and proceeds of
parcel tax levy “reimburses” the
general fund.
Type of Bond Sale Competitive sale only, unless
charter city.
Negotiated or competitive sale. Negotiated or competitive sale,
depending on separate bonding
authority used.
September 2012
3
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Debt Limit Amount of bonds outstanding at
any time cannot exceed 15% of
total assessed value.
Value of property in the district
subject to special tax must be at
least three times the amount of
outstanding bonds. Under certain
conditions, the city council can
approve an amount of bonds
exceeding this limit.
No limitation for COPs or lease
revenue bonds.
Bond Security City’s unrestricted ability to raise
property taxes to meet debt
service requirements. Property
tax is a lien on property. County
has authority to foreclose on lien
for payment of delinquent taxes.
Special taxes levied and secured
by a lien on property. City has
authority to initiate accelerated
foreclosure on property for payment
of delinquent taxes, so long as
bonds have been issued by the
district.
City’s general fund. There is no
State law authority to pledge
proceeds of parcel taxes to the
payment of debt services.
Maximum Term of Tax
Levy
As long as necessary to repay
bonds authorized by voters.
As long as necessary to repay
bonds or to pay directly for facilities
authorized by voters. Final year of
tax must be specified.
As specified in the ballot measure.
Maximum Term of
Bonds
Up to 40 years. Up to 40 years. Generally, up to useful life of facility
being financed.
September 2012
4
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Election Date Statewide Election Dates* Statewide Election Dates* or a
special election on a date specified
by the city council to occur between
90 days and 180 days following the
adoption of the Resolution of
Formation for the district.
Statewide Election Dates*
* Election Code Section 1001
September 2012
5
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Advantages • Simple method of taxation.
• Familiar to voters.
• Less time required to develop
financing plan and put before
voters.
• Lower cost financing (lower
bond interest rates and bond
issuance costs).
• If city has a large commercial
property tax base, a large
portion of tax burden could be
borne by non-residential
property.
• Flexibility in determining tax rate
and method of apportioning tax.
• Finance facilities with bonds or
directly by pay-as-you-go.
• Wide range of items eligible for
bond financing, including
facilities, furnishings, and
equipment.
• Can be used to pay for many
annual, recurring services.
• Ability to tailor tax and area to
be taxed in a manner to
enhance voter approval.
• Provision for landowner vote if
CFD has fewer than 12
registered voters.
• Simple method of taxation.
• No limitation on use of tax
proceeds.
• Can be used for facilities and
annual service expenditures.
September 2012
6
COMPARISON OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, MELLO-ROOS AND PARCEL TAXES FOR CITIES
Characteristics General Obligation Bonds Mello-Roos CFDs* Parcel Tax
Disadvantages • Citywide vote and
supermajority approval
required.
• Facilities eligible for bond
financing are limited to real
property improvements, such
as the purchase of land and
construction of buildings.
• Assessed value method of
taxation spreads tax burden
on basis of property value
rather than by direct benefits
received from facilities
constructed with bond
proceeds.
• All property owners in city pay
additional tax.
• Bond financing technique only,
no ability for pay-as-you-go.
• Supermajority vote required.
• More time required to develop
financing plan and put before
voters.
• Higher cost financing (higher
bond interest rates and bond
issuance costs).
• Unfamiliar to voters.
• More complex method of
taxation.
• Higher district formation costs
and annual administration costs
(need to hire a separate
consultant).
• Citywide vote and supermajority
approval required.
• Must have periodic elections to
renew appropriations limit if used
for operating expenses.
• No independent authority to
issue bonds—separate authority
needed.
CCAC Finance Committee Report #5
Joint Powers Agencies/Authorities
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are a number of options for the financing and operating of a joint use facility on the
Cubberley campus. One of those options is to create a Joint Powers Agency or
Authority.
A Joint Powers Agency (JPA) is an entity authorized to be created under Section 6500 of
the California State Government Code (the “Joint Powers Law”)whereby two or more
public entities can operate collectively. “Joint Powers” is a term used to describe
governmental agencies that have agreed to combine their powers and resources to work
on solving their common problems.
Joint powers are exercised when the public officials of two or more agencies agree to
create another legal entity or establish a joint approach to work on a common problem,
fund a project or act as a representative body for a specific activity.
The initials JPA can mean two different things. The first is Joint Powers Agreement,
which is a formal, legal agreement between two or more agencies that want to jointly
implement programs, build facilities or deliver services. Governmental agencies are
called member agencies. One member agency agrees to be responsible for delivery of
service on behalf of the other(s). A Joint Powers Agreement has no specified term but
rather may be short-term, long-term or perpetual.
The second use of the initials is for Joint Powers Agency or Joint Powers Authority. In
this case, the Joint Powers Law is used to establish a new, separate governmental
organization created by its member agencies, but operating at the members’ direction.
Typically, the JPA has numbers of officials from the member agencies on its governing
board.
In the second case, the JPA is distinct from its member agencies. It has its own board of
directors. Once created,the JPA has two types of powers: 1) it has the powers common to
the member agencies which created it; and 2) it has the powers conferred on it by the
California Legislature under Article 4 of the Joint Powers Law, including the power to
issue bonds for public capital improvements. The term, membership and standing orders
of the board of the JPA must be specified in the agreement. The JPA may employ staff
and establish policies independent of the constituent agencies.
A JPA can be formed by action of the governing boards of the participating agencies;
there is no public election needed.
JPA’s can be formed specifically to arrange capital financing by selling bonds. The
bonds create the capital needed to finance construction of public facilities. In some
instances the agency can issue revenue bonds which do not require a vote of the
electorate. It is unclear whether a future Cubberley project would generate enough
revenue to be able to qualify to issue this kind of debt. It would be more likely that the
improvements would need to be funded by the issuance of General Obligation bonds
issued by either the school district or the City (not by the JPA) which in either case would
require a public vote. Another alternative would be for the JPA to issue lease revenue
bonds. These bonds are similar to Certificates of Participation in that each member of the
JPA would be required to identify a new revenue stream or existing resources to pay for
the bonds. Lease Revenue bonds are bonds where the proceeds are used to build or
improve reals property and where the property to be acquired or improved (and in the
case of an asset transfer, an unrelated piece of real property) is leased to one or more
member agencies. The payments to be made by the member agencies under the Lease
create a stream of revenue that serves as the security for the JPA’s Bonds.
Advantages and Disadvantages of a JPA:
Advantages:
JPA’s are flexible and easy to form
JPA’s may be more efficient than separate governments
JPA’s have powers which are different from those of the school district and City,
and those powers may be used to finance the construction of facilities; and
purchase of equipment/
A JPA for Cubberley would cover the entire area that would benefit from the
construction and operation of a joint use facility
A JPA for Cubberley might help attract either private capital or grants because it
would show both agencies’ commitment to work together on a shared facility
Disadvantages:
JPA’s require mutual trust
JPA’s can be hard to keep together for the long-term
JPA’s can be hard for the public to understand and may be perceived as another
layer of government
Resources:
California State Legislature, Senate Local Government Committee, Governments
Working Together, A Citizens Guide to Joint Powers Agreements, August 2007
Section 6500 of the California State Government Code
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
Volume 3
Background and History
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
VOLUME 3
Background and History
Contents
Background Information
from Meeting No. 1 June 1, 2012,
dated September 1, 2011
CCAC Guiding Principles & CMR
City Council meeting: May 14, 2012
Record of Meetings
Background Information
from Meeting No. 1 June 1, 2012,
dated September 1, 2011
City of Palo Alto
Cubberley Community Center
Background Information
September 1, 2011
Table of Contents
1. June 16, 2010 Cubberley Site Discussion Power Point Presentation
2. June 27, 2011 Cubberley Site Discussion Power Point Presentation
3. Foothill-De Anza College Letter of Interest
4. Cubberley Community Center Lease and Covenant Not To Develop
June 16, 2010 Cubberley Site Discussion Power Point Presentation
1
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
SI
T
E
DI
S
C
U
S
S
I
O
N
Ju
n
e
16
,
20
1
0
2
CI
T
Y
/
P
A
U
S
D
Sc
h
o
o
l
Si
t
e
Ch
r
o
n
o
l
o
g
y
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
Si
t
e
Bu
i
l
t
1
9
5
5
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
si
t
e
cl
o
s
e
d
du
e
to
de
c
l
i
n
i
n
g
en
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
PA
U
S
D
le
a
s
e
s
si
t
e
to
va
r
i
o
u
s
te
n
a
n
t
s
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Co
l
l
e
g
e
1
9
7
9
Ci
t
y
ac
q
u
i
r
e
s
Te
r
m
a
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
si
t
e
th
r
o
u
g
h
20
yr
le
a
s
e
to
pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
1
9
8
1
Ci
t
y
en
t
e
r
s
in
t
o
in
t
e
r
i
m
le
a
s
e
fo
r
Jo
r
d
a
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
1
9
8
8
Ci
t
y
en
t
e
r
s
in
t
o
Co
v
e
n
a
n
t
no
t
to
De
v
e
l
o
p
an
d
Le
a
s
e
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
1
9
8
9
PA
U
S
D
re
q
u
e
s
t
s
to
pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
ba
c
k
re
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
Te
r
m
a
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
Si
t
e
fr
o
m
Ci
t
y
1
9
9
9
Fo
u
r
‐Pa
r
t
y
MO
U
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
by
Co
u
n
c
i
l
fo
r
Te
r
m
a
n
–
(i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
sw
a
p
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
/
T
e
r
m
a
n
7.
9
3
ac
r
e
s
)
2
0
0
1
FO
O
T
H
I
L
L
OF
F
E
R
TO
PU
R
C
H
A
S
E
:
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
/
D
e
A
n
z
a
:
1st
Re
q
u
e
s
t
20
0
7
2nd
Re
q
u
e
s
t
le
t
t
e
r
of
in
t
e
n
t
1
1
/
3
/
0
9
3
8
A
c
r
e
s
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
Sh
o
p
p
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Gr
e
e
n
M
e
a
d
o
w
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
4
CI
T
Y
/
P
A
U
S
D
Le
a
s
e
Hi
s
t
o
r
y
Te
r
m
a
n
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
1
-
L
e
a
s
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
O
p
t
i
o
n
t
o
Pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
Jo
r
d
a
n
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
8
-
I
n
t
e
r
i
m
L
e
a
s
e
b
y
C
i
t
y
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Hi
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
9
-
C
i
t
y
L
e
a
s
e
d
a
l
l
3
5
A
c
r
e
s
fr
o
m
P
A
U
S
D
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Hi
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
27
A
c
r
e
s
L
e
a
s
e
d
Le
a
s
e
d
Ow
n
e
d
8 Ac
r
e
s
Cu
b
b
20
0
1
-
C
i
t
y
S
w
a
p
s
Te
r
m
a
n
f
o
r
O
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
of
8
A
c
r
e
s
a
t
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
5
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
St
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
35
To
t
a
l
Ac
r
e
s
‐
27
Ac
r
e
s
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
8
Ac
r
e
s
Ci
t
y
17
5
,
54
0
sq
.
f
t
.
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
‐
94
,
4
0
2
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
76
,
1
3
8
Ci
t
y
75
0
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Sp
a
c
e
s
‐
62
0
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
13
0
C
i
t
y
6
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Gr
o
u
p
s
an
d
Te
n
a
n
t
s
No
t
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
ho
u
r
l
y
re
n
t
e
r
s
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Ar
t
i
s
t
S
t
u
d
i
o
s
(
2
3
)
L.
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
,
L
.
B
o
u
c
h
a
r
d
,
U
.
D
e
l
a
ri
o
s
,
K
.
E
d
w
a
r
d
s
,
M
.
F
l
e
t
c
h
e
r
,
P.
F
o
l
e
y
,
L
.
G
a
s
s
,
M
.
G
a
v
i
s
h
,
B.
G
u
n
t
h
e
r
,
P
.
H
a
n
n
a
w
y
,
A
.
H
i
b
b
s
,
I
.
I
n
f
a
n
t
e
,
S
.
I
n
g
l
e
,
M
.
L
e
t
t
i
e
r
i
,
S
.
K
i
s
e
r
,
M
.
L
o
b
o
,
A
.
Mc
M
i
l
l
a
n
,
J
.
N
e
l
s
o
n
-
G
a
l
,
M
.
P
a
u
l
k
e
r
,
N
.
R
a
gg
i
o
,
C
.
S
u
l
l
i
v
a
n
,
N
.
W
h
i
t
e
,
C
.
V
e
l
a
z
q
u
e
z
Da
n
c
e
S
t
u
d
i
o
s
(
3
)
Da
n
c
e
A
c
t
i
o
n
,
D
a
n
c
e
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
Z
o
h
a
r
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
(
2
)
Ac
m
e
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
P
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
o
r
y
Ch
i
l
d
c
a
r
e
(
2
)
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
s
P
r
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
C
e
n
t
e
r
,
G
o
o
d
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
M
o
n
t
e
s
s
o
r
i
No
n
p
r
o
f
i
t
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
(
4
)
Hu
a
K
u
a
n
g
R
e
a
d
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
,
A
d
o
l
e
s
c
e
n
t
C
o
u
n
s
e
l
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
R
e
s
c
u
e
,
F
r
i
e
n
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
L
i
b
r
a
r
y
7
Le
a
s
e
Te
r
m
s
an
d
Op
t
i
o
n
s
15
Ye
a
r
s
(1
9
8
9
‐20
0
4
)
‐In
i
t
i
a
l
Te
r
m
10
Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
0
4
‐20
1
4
)
*
‐1st
Op
t
i
o
n
5 Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
1
4
‐20
1
9
)
‐
2nd
Op
t
i
o
n
5 Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
1
9
‐20
2
4
)
‐
3rd
Op
t
i
o
n
*N
o
t
i
c
e
to
Ex
t
e
n
d
du
e
to
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
by
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
3
8
Ci
t
y
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
y
e
a
r
b
u
d
g
e
t
g
a
p
s
Re
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
g
r
o
w
t
h
Ch
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
o
n
c
i
t
y
r
a
i
s
i
n
g
n
e
w
re
v
e
n
u
e
s
(B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
t
a
x
b
a
l
l
o
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
de
f
e
a
t
e
d
i
n
2
0
0
9
)
Ri
s
i
n
g
e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
de
f
i
c
i
t
9
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
an
d
I
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
FY
1
9
9
6
-
2
0
0
9
$
6
,
7
5
0
,
0
0
0
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
:
FY
2
0
1
0
–
2
0
1
5
$
8
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
(S
i
n
c
e
1
9
8
9
,
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
p
a
i
d
$
1
1
3
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
L
e
a
s
e
&
C
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
)
June 27, 2011 Cubberley Site Discussion Power Point Presentation
1
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
SI
T
E
DI
S
C
U
S
S
I
O
N
Ju
n
e
27
,
20
1
1
2
8
A
c
r
e
s
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
Sh
o
p
p
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Gr
e
e
n
M
e
a
d
o
w
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
3
CI
T
Y
/
P
A
U
S
D
Sc
h
o
o
l
Si
t
e
Ch
r
o
n
o
l
o
g
y
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
Si
t
e
Bu
i
l
t
1
9
5
5
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
si
t
e
cl
o
s
e
d
le
a
s
e
d
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
FH
D
A
1
9
7
9
Ci
t
y
ac
q
u
i
r
e
s
Te
r
m
a
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
(2
0
yr
le
a
s
e
to
pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
)
1
9
8
1
Co
v
e
n
a
n
t
no
t
to
De
v
e
l
o
p
an
d
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
le
a
s
e
19
8
9
PA
U
S
D
re
q
u
e
s
t
s
to
pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
Te
r
m
a
n
fr
o
m
Ci
t
y
1
9
9
9
Co
u
n
c
i
l
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
s
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
sw
a
p
(7
.
9
3
ac
r
e
s
)
20
0
1
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Of
f
e
r
to
Pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
1st
Re
q
u
e
s
t
20
0
7
2nd
Re
q
u
e
s
t
20
0
9
Re
q
u
e
s
t
fo
r
Of
f
e
r
s
20
1
1
4
CI
T
Y
/
P
A
U
S
D
Le
a
s
e
Hi
s
t
o
r
y
Te
r
m
a
n
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
1
-
L
e
a
s
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
O
p
t
i
o
n
t
o
Pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
Jo
r
d
a
n
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
8
-
I
n
t
e
r
i
m
L
e
a
s
e
b
y
C
i
t
y
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Hi
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
19
8
9
-
C
i
t
y
L
e
a
s
e
d
a
l
l
3
5
A
c
r
e
s
fr
o
m
P
A
U
S
D
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Hi
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
27
A
c
r
e
s
L
e
a
s
e
d
Le
a
s
e
d
Ow
n
e
d
8 Ac
r
e
s
Cu
b
b
20
0
1
-
C
i
t
y
S
w
a
p
s
Te
r
m
a
n
f
o
r
O
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
of
8
A
c
r
e
s
a
t
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
5
TE
N
A
N
T
S
A
N
D
U
S
E
R
G
R
O
U
P
S
6
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
J
FO
P
A
L
K6
,
K
7
Da
n
c
e
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
K5
Go
o
d
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
Mo
n
t
e
s
s
o
r
i
K4
,
K
3
Da
n
c
e
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
L5
Zo
h
a
r
D
a
n
c
e
L
4
Da
n
c
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
L
3
Ac
m
e
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
L
1
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
C
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
V
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
’
s
P
r
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
T1
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
L
a
w
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
D1
,
D
2
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
P
Fr
i
e
n
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
L
i
b
r
a
r
y
LI
B
Ch
i
n
e
s
e
R
e
a
d
i
n
g
H4
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
P
r
e
p
.
H2
,
H
3
Ar
t
i
s
t
s
U
Ar
t
i
s
t
s
E Ar
t
i
s
t
s
F
CI
T
Y
O
W
N
E
D
8
A
C
R
E
S
-
T
E
N
A
N
T
S
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
D5
,
D
6
,
D
7
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
D
3
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
R
e
n
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
(
F
o
o
t
h
i
l
l
$
9
3
3
K
)
$4
2
3
,
4
0
2
.
0
0
7
FO
O
T
H
I
L
L
S
Q
U
A
R
E
F
O
O
T
A
G
E
U
S
E
21
,
1
7
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
/
P
A
U
S
D
O
W
N
E
D
18
,
4
9
3
S
Q
.
F
T
/
C
I
T
Y
O
W
N
E
D
8
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
St
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
35
To
t
a
l
Ac
r
e
s
‐
27
Ac
r
e
s
PA
U
S
D
‐
8
Ac
r
e
s
Ci
t
y
17
5
,
54
0
sq
.
f
t
.
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
‐
94
,
4
0
2
(F
H
oc
c
u
p
i
e
s
21
,
1
7
0
)
27
ac
‐
76
,
1
3
8
(F
H
oc
c
u
p
i
e
s
18
,
4
9
3
)
8 ac
75
0
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Sp
a
c
e
s
‐
62
0
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
13
0
C
i
t
y
9
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Gr
o
u
p
s
an
d
Te
n
a
n
t
s
No
t
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
ho
u
r
l
y
re
n
t
e
r
s
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Ar
t
i
s
t
S
t
u
d
i
o
s
(
2
2
)
L.
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
,
L
.
B
o
u
c
h
a
r
d
,
U
.
D
e
l
a
r
i
o
s
,
K
.
E
d
w
a
r
d
s
,
M
.
F
l
e
t
c
h
e
r
,
P
.
F
o
l
e
y
,
L
.
Ga
s
s
,
M
.
G
a
v
i
s
h
,
B
.
G
u
n
t
h
e
r
,
P
.
H
a
n
n
a
w
y
,
A
.
H
i
b
b
s
,
I
.
I
n
f
a
n
t
e
,
S
.
I
n
g
l
e
,
M
.
Le
t
t
i
e
r
i
,
S
.
K
i
s
e
r
,
A
.
M
c
M
i
l
l
a
n
,
J
.
N
e
l
s
o
n
-G
a
l
,
M
.
P
a
u
l
k
e
r
,
N
.
R
a
g
g
i
o
,
C
.
S
u
l
l
i
v
a
n
,
N.
W
h
i
t
e
,
C
.
V
e
l
a
z
q
u
e
z
Da
n
c
e
S
t
u
d
i
o
s
(
3
)
Da
n
c
e
A
c
t
i
o
n
,
D
a
n
c
e
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
Z
o
h
a
r
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
(
2
)
Ac
m
e
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
P
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
o
r
y
Ch
i
l
d
c
a
r
e
(
2
)
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
s
P
r
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
C
e
n
t
e
r
,
G
o
o
d
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
M
o
n
t
e
s
s
o
r
i
No
n
p
r
o
f
i
t
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
(
4
)
Hu
a
K
u
a
n
g
R
e
a
d
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
,
W
i
l
d
l
i
f
e
R
e
s
c
u
e
,
F
r
i
e
n
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
L
i
b
r
a
r
y
10
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
T
e
n
a
n
t
s
US
E
S
Q
.
F
T
R
E
N
T
/
S
Q
R
E
N
T
AN
N
U
A
L
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
3
9
,
6
7
2
$
1
.
9
6
$
9
3
3
K
No
n
P
r
o
f
i
t
FO
P
A
L
1
,
7
0
0
$
0
.
6
5
$
1
3
K
Hu
a
K
u
a
n
g
6
7
2
$
1
.
1
1
$
8
,
9
0
0
PA
P
r
e
p
2
,
4
9
6
$
1
.
7
9
$
5
4
K
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
R
e
s
c
u
e
1
,
5
6
5
0
0
Pr
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
8
,
7
7
2
$
0
.
2
4
$
2
6
K
Da
n
c
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
s
3
,
1
3
0
$
1
.
1
1
$
4
1
K
Zo
h
a
r
3
,
7
4
0
$
1
.
1
6
$
5
2
K
11
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
T
e
n
a
n
t
s
(
c
o
n
t
)
US
E
S
Q
.
F
T
R
E
N
T
/
S
Q
R
E
N
T
AN
N
U
A
L
Fo
r
P
r
o
f
i
t
AC
M
E
E
d
.
3
,
9
1
0
$
1
.
7
2
$
8
1
K
Ca
l
L
a
w
R
e
v
.
8
0
0
$
2
.
0
8
$
2
0
K
Da
n
c
e
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
3,
0
6
0
$
1
.
6
9
$
6
2
K
Mo
n
t
e
s
s
o
r
i
3
,
0
1
0
$
1
.
7
8
$
6
4
K
Ar
t
i
s
t
s
1
2
,
3
9
5
P
A
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
$0
.
6
7
No
n
R
e
s
$0
.
7
2
$9
4
K
12
Re
v
e
n
u
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
-
D
e
A
n
z
a
$
0
.
9
3
M
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
R
e
n
t
a
l
(A
r
t
i
s
t
s
/
N
o
n
P
r
o
f
i
t
s
,
et
c
)
$0
.
5
2
M
($
0
.
4
2
M
f
r
o
m
C
i
t
y
’
s
8a
c
e
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
H
)
Ho
u
r
l
y
R
e
n
t
a
l
(E
v
e
n
t
s
,
e
t
c
)
$1
.
0
2
M
Ci
t
y
O
f
f
i
c
e
R
e
n
t
a
l
$
0
.
0
7
M
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
$
2
.
5
4
M
13
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Le
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
an
d
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
$0
.
4
4
M
No
n
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
$1
.
7
7
M
To
t
a
l
C
i
t
y
A
n
n
u
a
l
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
$2
.
2
1
M
14
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Pl
a
n
n
e
d
C
I
P
’
s
a
n
d
D
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
20
1
2
-
2
0
1
6
$
1
0
,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
20
1
7
-
2
0
3
6
$
6
,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
To
t
a
l
$
1
6
,
7
0
0
,
0
0
0
An
n
u
a
l
R
o
u
t
i
n
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
$
3
3
2
,
0
0
0
15
Le
a
s
e
Te
r
m
s
an
d
Op
t
i
o
n
s
15
Ye
a
r
s
(1
9
8
9
‐20
0
4
)
‐In
i
t
i
a
l
Te
r
m
10
Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
0
4
‐20
1
4
)
*
‐1st
Op
t
i
o
n
5 Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
1
4
‐20
1
9
)
‐
2nd
Op
t
i
o
n
5 Ye
a
r
s
(2
0
1
9
‐20
2
4
)
‐
3rd
Op
t
i
o
n
*N
o
t
i
c
e
to
Ex
t
e
n
d
du
e
to
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
by
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
3
16
20
1
1
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
P
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
PA
U
S
D
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
L
e
a
s
e
$
4
.
4
8
M
Co
v
e
n
a
n
t
$
1
.
7
3
M
Ch
i
l
d
C
a
r
e
S
i
t
e
s
$
0
.
6
0
M
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
$
0
.
5
2
M
To
t
a
l
$
7
.
3
3
M
17
Ke
y
I
s
s
u
e
s
Se
l
l
o
r
L
e
a
s
e
?
M
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
f
l
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
I
s
s
u
e
s
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
—
o
n
-
s
i
t
e
P
h
a
s
e
1
/
s
h
a
r
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
2
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
a
s
a
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
a
n
d
s
y
n
e
r
g
y
w
i
t
h
ot
h
e
r
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Lo
s
s
i
n
F
o
o
t
h
i
l
l
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
St
a
t
u
s
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
u
s
e
s
i
f
L
e
a
s
e
i
s
n
o
t
e
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Zo
n
i
n
g
—
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
C
i
t
y
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
18
Qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
/
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
Foothill-De Anza College Letter of Interest
Cubberley Community Center Lease and Covenant Not To Develop
CCAC Guiding Principles & CMR
City Council meeting: May 14, 2012
City of Palo Alto (ID # 2861)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/14/2012
May 14, 2012 Page 1 of 2
(ID # 2861)
Summary Title: Cubberley Guiding Principles
Title: Council Approval of Guiding Principles for the Cubberley Policy Advisory
Committee and the City Manager and Superintendent Community Advisory
Committee
From: City Manager
Lead Department: City Manager
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Guiding Principles for
the Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee and the Community Advisory
Committee (CAC) appointed by the City Manager and PAUSD
Superintendent.
Background and Discussion
On May 8, 2012, the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) approved
the draft Guiding Principles without amendments. As Council is aware, the
draft Guiding Principles were revised and forwarded by Council to the
Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) composed of Council Members Yeh,
Shepherd and Klein; and Board Members Mitchell and Townsend. The PAC
met on April 20, 2012 and prepared the draft presented to the PAUSD
School Board. The draft is now before the Council for final approval and is
as Attachment A.
The PAUSD School Board also suggested an additional member of the CAC
in the “Other Community Members” category. Brian Carilli was suggested
to the City Manager and Superintendent and has been added to the draft
CAC list.
May 14, 2012 Page 2 of 2
(ID # 2861)
Timeline
Once Council approves the final Guiding Principles and all suggestions for
the CAC members have been made, Staff will poll the CAC for a convenient
meeting time the 3rd or 4th week of May.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Final Draft Cubberley PAC Guiding Principals (DOC)
Attachment B: PAUSD Board Packet 5.8.12 Action Item 9 (PDF)
Prepared By: Steve Emslie, Deputy City Manager
Department Head: James Keene, City Manager
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
Attachment A
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee
City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent Community Advisory Committee
Guiding Principles
Approved by the Board of Education Agenda May 8, 2012
Draft for the Palo Alto City Council May 14, 2012
The Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of two Palo Alto Unified School
District (PAUSD) Board members appointed by the School Board President and three
City Council members appointed by the Mayor. The PAC shall be the primary advisor to
the Council and the School Board on issues related to the lease and possible re-use or
joint use of the Cubberley campus.
The Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CAC) is jointly appointed by the City
Manager and Superintendent, and shall represent a cross section of Cubberley,
neighborhoods, schools and citywide representatives. The CAC shall review Cubberley
background and history and provide the PAC with community input including but not
limited to possible re-use scenarios, alternative lease arrangements, site plan
configurations, possible funding plans, identification of joint use opportunities and
compatible standards.
1. The City and PAUSD recognize that our citizens have substantial investments, both
emotional and financial in the Cubberley Campus, and shall work to reach
decisions for the benefit of our entire community.
2. The Committees shall maintain open and transparent processes at all times, and
members of the public shall be invited to all meetings. The CAC shall complete a
final report. PAC and CAC meetings shall be audio-recorded with minutes
completed for the PAC, and notes completed for the CAC. (Costs of minutes shall
be cost-shared by the City and PAUSD).
3. Documents, architectural drawings and other written communication provided to
the Committees shall be made available to the general public as soon as possible.
4. The City and PAUSD recognize that Cubberley is a major cultural, educational,
recreational and non-profit resource, very important to the community’s health
and vitality.
5. Acknowledging that each entity has different regulations and governing legislation,
the City and PAUSD shall seek to work cooperatively to explore all practical joint-
uses of the Cubberley campus for both educational and community services.
6. The City and PAUSD have ownership interests in portions of the campus: PAUSD
owns 27 acres and the City owns 8 acres. The parties may consider relocation of
Attachment A
their ownership interests within the site to facilitate optimal site layout and
efficiency.
7. The City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent shall jointly prepare a project
budget for 2012/13, with costs shared equally between the City and PAUSD.
8. While the Policy Advisory Committee planning shall occur as cooperatively as
possible, the City Council representatives and the PAUSD Board Members shall
retain independent recommending authority should consensus not be reached.
9. Maintaining the quality of PAUSD schools is a significant community value, and
planning for a growing population is essential to maintaining educational
excellence and the overall health and well-being of our community.
10. Cubberley programs enrich the community and criteria shall be developed to
prioritize and/or retain existing uses as well as assess prospective new uses.
11. The City and PAUSD recognize that joint-use could result in stronger educational
and cultural programs provided more efficiently.
12. The City Council and PAUSD representatives on the Policy Advisory Committee
shall report, not less often than every other month, to their respective bodies on
Cubberley planning activities.
13. The City and PAUSD shall work to continue community access to Cubberley to the
extent possible. Recreation facilities provided at the Cubberley campus produce
important services benefitting the community at large.
14. The residential neighborhoods surrounding Cubberley shall be considered in
determining the compatibility of possible changes on the Cubberley campus.
15. Transportation issues and access to and within Cubberley shall be considered in
determining possible options including improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
16. All recommendations shall be mindful of the dynamic short-, mid-, and long-term
forces impacting the PAUSD and City.
BOARD OF EDUCATION Attachment: Action 9
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Date: 05.08.12
TO: Board of Education
FROM: Kevin Skelly, Superintendent of Schools
SUBJECT: Cubberley Community Advisory Committee Composition and Cubberley Policy Advisory
Committee Guiding Principles
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE
Governance and Communication
BACKGROUND
A process for discussing the Cubberley site began in November of 2011. The plan is to achieve consensus
on a vision for the future of the Cubberley site one year prior to the City's current lease expiration in
December 2014. The process involves forming three groups: a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made
up of executive staff from PAUSD and the City; a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) to be appoinled
by the City Manager (with recommendations from the School Superintendent); and a Policy Advisory
Committee (PAC) composed of three City Council members (Yeh, Shepherd and Klein) and two PAUSD
member.; (Mitchell and Townsend).
Note: At the last meeting, conceptual site plans were presented and discussed. This pan of the
item from the last meeting has been removed
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC)
The CAC is intended to represent a cross section of Cubberley, neighborhoods, schools and dty-wide
representatives. The members are appointed by the City Manager, with input by the Superintendent of
Schools. They will provide Ihe PAC with community input. A listing of the proposed member.;hip as of May
3, 2012 is attached. The Board is asked to approve this list for consideration by City Council on May 14,
2012 .
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
A draft set of Guiding Principles (GPs) for use by the PAC and CAC has been developed. The GPs are
intended to reflect community values of transparency ensuring that the public is invited to meetings and
offered opportunities to interact with both groups. In addition, the Guiding Principles set up very broad
objectives to clarify that the process is intended to be collaboration between the City and the School district,
emphasizing joint use of the facilities where possible. A discussion regarding these GPs took place at the
PAC meeting on Friday, April 20, 2012 and the PAUSD Board meeting on April 24, 2012. Staff has
provided an updated version of the Guiding Principles based on Board input and recommends approval.
These Guiding Principles are scheduled for consideration by the City Council at its May 14, 2012 meeting .
PROCESS AND TlMELINE
The City's Cubberley lease expires in December 2014. At that time, the lease may be extended an
additional 5 years upon mutual consent of the City and the District. The City's schedule assumes providing
the District notice of its intentions regarding renewal of the lease althe end of 2013 to provide the District
with one year's notice prior to the lease expiration. The first meeting of the CAC was anticipated to be in
early May and there will be approximately t2 months of meetings. As mentioned , the PAC had their first
meeling on Friday, April 20.
As discussed above, the CAC and PAC are scheduled to meet over the course of 2012 concluding their
recommendations in 2013. This timeline allows the Council to engage in lease negotiations with the School
District two years prior to the expiration of the lease in 2014. The timeline anticipates a decision on the
lease by the end of 2013, providing a one-year notice period if either party decides to not exercise the
5 year option to extend the lease.
RECOMMENDATION
The Guiding Principles and Citizen's Ad visory Committee composition, as attached, are recommended for
approval.
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee
City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent Community Advisory Committee
Guiding Principles
Draft for Board of Education Agenda May 8, 2012
The Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of two Palo Alto Unified School
District (PAUSD) Board members appointed by the School Board President and three
City Council members appointed by the Mayor. The PAC shall be the primary advisor to
the Council and the School Board on issues related to the lease and possible re -use or
joint use of the Cubberley campus.
The Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CAC) is jointly appointed by the City
Manager and Superintendent, and shall represent a cross section of Cubberley,
neighborhoods, schools and citywide representatives. The CAC sha ll review Cubberley
background and history and provide the PAC with community input including but not
limited to possible re-use scenarios, alternative lease arrangements, site plan
configurations, possible funding plans, identification of joint use opportunities and
compatible standards.
1. The City and PAUSD recognize that our citizens have substantia l investments, both
emotional and financial in the Cubberley Campus, and sha ll work to reach
decisions for the benefit of our entire community.
2. The Committees shall maintain open and transparent processes at all times, and
members of the public shall be invited to all meetings. The CAC shall complete a
final report. PAC and CAC meetings shall be audio-recorded with minutes
completed for the PAC, and notes completed for the CAe. (Costs of minutes shall
be cost-shared by the City and PAUSD).
3. Documents, architectural drawings and other written communication provided to
the Committees shall be made available to the general public as soon as possible.
4. The City and PAUSD recognize that Cubberley is a major cultural, educational,
recreational and non-profit resource, very important to the community's health
and vitality.
5. Acknowledging that each entity ha s different regulations and governing legislation,
the City and PAUSD shall seek to work cooperatively to explore all practical joint-
uses of the Cubberley campus for both educational and community services.
6. The City and PAUSD have ownership interests in portions of the campus: PAUSD
owns 27 acres and the City owns 8 acres. The parties may consider relocation of
their ownership interests within the site to facilitate optimal site layout and
efficiency.
7. The City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent shall jointly prepare a project
budget for 2012/13, with costs shared equally between the City and PAUSD.
8. While the Policy Advisory Committee planning sha ll occur as cooperatively as
possible, the City Council representatives and the PAUSD Board Members shall
retain independent recommending authority should consensus not be reached.
9. Maintaining the quality of PAUSD schools is a significa nt community value, and
planning for a growing population is essential to maintaining educational
excellence and the overall health and we ll-being of our community.
10. Cubberley programs enrich the community and criteria shall be developed to
prioritize and/or retain existing uses as well as assess prospective new uses.
11. The City and PAUSD recognize that joint-use could result in stronger educational
and cultural programs provided more efficiently,
12. The City Council and PAUSD representatives on the Policy AdviSOry Committee
shall report, not less often than every other month, to their respective bodies on
Cubberley planning activities.
13. The City and PAUSD shall work to continue community access to Cubberley to the
extent possible. Recreation facilities provided at the Cubberley campus produce
important services benefitting the community at large .
14. The residential neighborhoods surrounding Cubberley shall be considered in
determining the compatibility of possible changes on the Cubberley campus.
15. Tran sportation issues and access to and within Cubberley shall be considered in
determining possible options including improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
16. All recommendations shall be mindful of the dynamic short-, mid-, and long-term
forces impacting the PAUSD and City.
Cubberley Community Advisory Panel
Group First Name last Name
Neighborhoods ~
Fair Meadow Tom Vieian
Walnut Grove Tom Crystal
Green Meadow lanie Wheeler
Greendell Michael Bein
Charleston Gardens Jean Wilcox
Midtown Sheri Furman
PAN Ken Allen
Commercia l Retail ~
Charleston Plaza Tenant
Village Properties Damian Cono
PTA's
Fai rmeadow Element ary Claire Kirner
JLS Middle School John Markevitch
Gunn High School Tracy Stevens
Palo Alto High School Susan Bailey
Cubberlev Tenants ,
Child Ca re Rachel Sarnoff
Artist lessa Bouchard
Non Prof it -Cardiac Therapy Jerry August
FOPAl Jim Schmidt
Community/Arts & Services Susie Thorn
Park and Ree Commission
PT&C Greg Tanaka
Other Community Members Diane Reklis
Mandy Lowell
Brian Carilli
Acterra Michael CI05S0n
PABAC William Robinson
City School Traffic Safety Penny Elison
Recreation and Sports league
Soft Ball Mike Cobb
Record of Meetings
CCAC Meeting Schedule & History (Updated 3/8/2013)
Meeting Group Date Time Location
Full Committee June 20, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room G-4)
Co-Chairs June 25, 2012 1:30-2:30pm City Hall (7th Floor Conf. Room)
Full Committee June 27, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs July 9, 2012 1:30-2:30pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee July 11, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs July 23, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee July 25, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs August 6, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee August 8, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs August 20, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee August 22, 2012 6:00-8:00pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Tour of Cubberley August 28, 2012 2:00pm Cubberley (Room D-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs August 29, 2012 4:30-5:30pm Mike Cobb's Office
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs September 4, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee September 5, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs September 17, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee September 19, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs October 1, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee October 3, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs October 15, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee October 17, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs October 29, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee October 30, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Community Forum November 8, 2012 7:30-9:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs November 13, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee November 14, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs November 26, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee November 28, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs December 10, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee December 12, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Stanford (Y2E2 Bldg, Room 300)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs December 17, 2012 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee December 19, 2012 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs January 7, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee January 9, 2013 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs January 14, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee January 16, 2013 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs January 21, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Community Forum # 2 January 24, 2013 7:30-9:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs January 28, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee January 30, 2013 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs February 11, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee February 13, 2013 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Room H-1)
Full Committee February 20, 2013 5:30-7:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Co-Chairs & Subcommittee Chairs February 25, 2013 3:00-4:00pm Mike Cobb's Office
Full Committee February 28, 2013 5:30pm Cubberley (Theater)
Final Report Presentation March 14, 2013 7:00pm Cubberley (Theater)
Key
Full Committee Meetings
Co-Chair Meetings
Co-Chair & Subcommittee Chair Meetings
Study Sessions, Council Presentations, Retreats, and Tours
education child care dance seniors softball
35 acres.
The last large piece of publicly owned land in Palo Alto.
What will its future be?
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Report
Volume 4
Appendices
culture b’ball art meetings music theater soccer
VOLUME 4
Appendices — Contents
CCAC Minutes
Cubberley Master Plan
Cubberley Site Option Maps
Meeting No. 4, 7/11/2012
City of Palo Alto Financial Outlook Presentation
Meeting No. 6, 8/8/2012
PAUSD Financial Outlook Presentation
Meeting No. 6, 8/8/2012
City of Palo Alto Capital Budget Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
PAUSD Interests in Cubberley Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
PAUSD Capital Budget Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
CCAC Problem Statement Matrix
CCAC Forum No. 1, 11/8/2012
CCAC Briefing Book
11/21/2012
Cubberley Tenant and Long-Term Renters Survey Presentation
Meeting No. 14, 11/28/2012
PAUSD Minutes
6/28/2011
PAUSD Minutes
9/4/2012
CCAC Forum #2 Power Point Presentations
1/24/2013
Minority Report
Bern Beecham, Mandy Lowell
CCAC Minutes
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 1
June 13, 2012
Room G-4
(See attached map-G referred to as GAR)
6:00 PM
1. Welcome
2. Self-introductions (1-2 minutes each)
3. Cubberley History and Background
Steve Emslie of the City of Palo Alto gave a background information
presentation on Cubberley including its history and past and present
financial information
Emslie noted that a wide variety of groups currently occupy the facility
including educational, cultural, early-childhood, artistic, health & wellness,
and non-profit groups
Emslie noted the City of Palo Alto pays approximately $7.3M per year to
PAUSD in both rent and for their Covenant Not to Develop. The City in turn
receives approximately $2.5M per year in rental income from the various
groups that occupy the facility. Expenses to operate the facility for the City
total approximately $2.2M per year.
The Utility User's Tax which was passed to aid schools in 1987 after several
school sites had been closed and sold, currently brings about $10 million to
the City.
Bob Golton of the PAUSD described PAUSD's increasing enrollment and how
the school population has grown 2% for nearly every year in the past 20
years
4. Overview of Mission and Guiding Principles
Emslie explained the background on how the Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee (CCAC) was formed and its relationship to the
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (CPAC), a five member panel made-up
of Palo Alto School Board and City Council members.
Emslie told the CCAC members that they were to operate under the
constraints outlined in the Cubberley Guiding Principles document, drafted
by the CPAC, but that the document leaves them a high degree of latitude
Golton thanked everyone for participating and said the two priorities for
PAUSD are (1) the continuation of the revenue stream from the Lease and
Covenant; and (2) the provision for sites to accommodate the increasing
PAUSD enrollment
2
5. Staff support
Emslie introduced the staff who would be working on the project and let the
group know they are a resource for assisting them in their decision making
Emslie also noted that with such a large group staff would first focus on
responding to requests of the majority of the group before responding to
individual requests
6. Discussion of Meeting Logistics
Co-Chairs and Emslie facilitated a discussion of questions, requests, and
thoughts that the group had on meeting logistics/next steps
CCAC Questions/Requests:
o Meetings should focus more on Q & A than staff presentations, thus,
meeting packets should be out up to a week in advance so members
can prepare on their own time (CMO)
o Provide information on PAUSD enrolment projections and what
schools will be needed in the future (PAUSD)
o Provide “who, what, where, when, why, how” information on the
different groups that use Cubberley (CSD)
o Provide “who, what, where, when, why, how” information on all
PAUSD shared facilities (PAUSD/CSD)
o Provide walking tours of Cubberley (and other relevant sites) for
CCAC members who would like to better orient themselves with the
facility (CMO)
o Provide a high-level presentation on City and PAUSD issues and
questions regarding a lease extension (i.e. Why is the lease not being
renewed without question) (CMO)
o Provide information on other facilities in Palo Alto that provide
similar services to Cubberley? (PAUSD/City)
o Provide information on who the hourly renters of Cubberley are
(CSD)
o Provide hard copies of the Cubberley scenario maps (CMO)
o Provide copies of the Cubberley Guiding Principles document (CMO)
o Provide as much information as possible on the website regarding
other similar community centers (CMO)
o Provide information and/or a presentation on extraordinary
information such as what the adjoining properties are, seismic
requirements, etc. (PAUSD)
o Provide information on the City/PAUSD field use agreement
(currently for the middle school sites) (CSD/PAUSD)
o Provide information on deferred maintenance needs at Cubberley
from the City’s Public Works department (PW)
7. Adjournment
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 2
June 20, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H-1
6:00 - 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and Call to Order
2. Overview of high-level Cubberley issues, questions, and concerns
An open-floor, Q & A session occurred around things that were still
unclear to CCAC members.
Jim Schmidt, who was on the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission
(IBRC), conveyed to the CCAC that the IBRC recommended not to renew
the lease.
Ann Dunkin, the Chief Technology Officer for the PAUSD, told the CCAC
that an elementary school and a middle school will be needed in 8 years.
A number of questions were then asked…
Question: Can the City create pin maps of population 10 years out?
Question: What would joint use of the facility look like and what would
the parameters be?
Question: What horizon is the CCAC evaluating needs for? 10 years, 20
years, 30 years?
Question: What are the uses, needs, and potential revenue opportunities
at Cubberley?
Question: Does the Palo Alto City Council want to renew the lease?
Question for PAUSD: What long term proposals can be taken off of the
table?
Question for CPAC: What is the timeframe for Cubberley
recommendations?
Question for CPAC: What did the CPAC mean by “the site?” Is that the
Cubberley lease area only? Does that include Greendell and 525 San
Antonio Road?
Question for CPAC: Should the CCAC consider Cubberley in the context of
the whole City or confine recommendations to the PAUSD lease and City
owned areas only?
Question for CPAC: Is the CCAC planning for Cubberley to eventually be
returned to school only uses or should on-going joint community/school
use be considered?
Question for CPAC: Should Cubberley be used by the City in a way that the
PAUSD can take it back later?
3. Discussion of possible Subcommittee structure
CCAC members had an open floor discussion on subcommittees
including recommendations, opinions, and a vote on which grouping
of subcommittees they preferred.
Winning grouping
o School District Needs
o Community Needs
o Finance
o Facilities
Losing grouping 1
o Programs
o Population Growth
o Finance & Tradeoffs
o Facilities
Losing grouping 2
o What We Want
o What We Have
The CCAC then agreed that all members should submit via email his or
her preferences ranked one through four to Richard Hackmann by
3:00pm on Friday, June 22 for tabulation
4. Oral Communications
None
5. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 3
June 27, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
6:00 ‐ 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of June 13 and June 20 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Continuation of the overview of high‐level Cubberley issues, questions,
and concerns including draft questions for the Cubberley Policy Advisory
Committee (see the attached revised list of CCAC high‐level issues,
questions, and concerns, pages 3‐5)
1A – PAUSD can do them at a cost for the city on a 10 year horizon
1B – PAUSD said the board will be meeting on this in the fall
o Bern Beecham said to find out what the schools do not need not just
when they will need certain things
o Questions were asked about wanting detailed information on what
the straight line projections show for when a new elementary, middle,
and high school will be needed
o What is the relationship between the growth of the schools and the
growth of the city?
2A – Facilities subcommittee should handle this
2B ‐ Staff should distribute Appendix H and the Executive Summary of the
IBRC Final Report
3A – Rob De Geus said to reference the sheet distributed last week on all of
the different services that are offered at Cubberley
o There are limited facilities elsewhere for where all of the functions at
Cubberley could go
o Could be creative and relocate stuff elsewhere but to think that we
could relocate even half of what is here it would be tough
o Susan Bailey asked what percentage of users are residents versus
non‐residents of the different uses at Cubberley
2
o What would happen if this facility were no longer here? What would
be lost, what would move, what don’t we know?
o Look at what hours of the day Cubberley facilities are used
o Beecham said look not only at the uses but also at the square footage
and what might be able to be doubled up
o Pam Radin asked if there is a model of a facility like this elsewhere
that can be studied
3B – Policy driven question for the PCAC
3C – Yes but there is still a need
3D – There has been progress but it’s hard to say what the true demand is
because the demand is so high it cannot be fully accommodated
o Is the use and saturation point during afternoon and weekend hours,
during the day, or at all times?
o What are the times when the fields are needed most?
o Currently kids have priority over adults and residents have priority
over non‐residents
o Efficiencies are being done where they can be such as the El Camino
park renovation
o Get figures on resident versus non‐resident percentages of use
3E – Gyms and dance studios are unique uses that come to mind
4A – This should be discussed in the School Needs and Community Needs
subcommittees
o Steve Emslie said there are a wide variety of projections and
implications with the ABAG numbers but those should be discussed in
more detail
4B – Even without housing growth there is a household size growth which
impacts schools
o City is seeing more people without necessarily housing growth
5A – Schools have an approximately $160M budget and taking away the $7M
per year would have serious impacts (the loss of about 85 teachers)
5B ‐ Utility users tax discussion including the implications of no longer
paying the PAUSD payment
o Would stopping the PAUSD payment eliminate the tax?
o What are the odds it would be subject to a referendum if the PAUSD
payment is stopped?
5C – What is the market value of the space at Cubberley if it were opened to
the free market?
o Where would one have to go if he or she couldn’t get the rates he or
she is currently getting at Cubberley? East Bay, San Jose, nowhere, etc.
6 – Question for the CPAC
7A – This will be addressed in future conversations
7b – TBD based on future decisions
7C – Theoretically possible but we would need to look into this much further
o Are there state policies we should be aware of?
3
o Look at the Menlo Atherton theatre and what the shared nature of
that facility has meant for other organizations
7D – Addressed by subcommittee
7E – Addressed by subcommittee
8A ‐ Question for CPAC
8B – General policy question
5. Appointment of subcommittees and discussion of subcommittee process
Subcommittee assignments were distributed (see attached list, page 5)
6. Schedule next meeting
Doodle to be sent out
7. Adjournment
Cubberley Community Advisory Commission(CCAC)
Revised
High Level Issues and Questions
1. School Enrollment:
A. What are PAUSD’s projections for school facility needs short medium
and long term (including and understanding of uncertainty and
variability of assumptions)?
B. What are the timeframes for an elementary, middle, and high school?
2. Capital Improvements and Finances:
A. What capital expenses are required for Cubberley to remain status quo?
B. What are the City’s long term financial obligations for City‐wide
infrastructure maintenance?
3. Community Serving Uses:
A. What are the community‐serving uses unique to Cubberley? From
child care to the arts, what are the alternatives (or not) for relocating
and/or prioritizing those services if they aren't part of the Cubberley
future?
B. Should the CCAC assume joint City/PAUSD uses for the long‐term?
C. Are there programs and uses that are duplicated elsewhere in the City?
4
D. What are the playing fields needs and uses?
E. What are the facilities unique to Cubberley (example, the gym) and the
future of the services related to those facilities if displaced from
Cubberley?
4. Population and Housing Growth:
A. What are the City’s population and housing growth based on ABAG
housing mandates? Are there adequate Community facilities to
accommodate projected
B. How will the demographic profile of Palo Alto change? Will there be a
change in community services provided?
5. PAUSD Finances:
A. What would the impact of reducing City lease and covenant payments
be to School programs and services?
B. How can the City and PAUSD collaborate to ensure school finances are
stable and the City can catch up with its infrastructure obligations?
C. What is the market value of the subleases and what is the revenue
potential?
6. City Ownership and adjacent PAUSD properties: What role if any would
the City’s 8 acres and PAUSD’s Greendale and 525 San Antonio Sites have
in resolving long term school and community service needs?
7. Re‐Use of Cubberley:
A. What could a potential re‐use or re‐construction of the Cubberley
campus offer in the way of additional community center and school
facilities?
B. How could construction be phased to minimize disruption to schools
or community services?
C. Would it be possible to share school facilities when not in use by
PAUSD?
D. How will visual or other construction impacts be made compatible
with the adjoining neighborhoods?
E. How will site access from vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians be
facilitated to reduce traffic and traffic related impacts on the
surrounding community?
5
8. General Policy
A. Does the City want to renew the Cubberley lease with PAUSD?
B. What should the future of Cubberley be?
Name Subcommittee Chair
Mike Cobb CCAC Co‐Chair N/A
Mandy Lowell CCAC Co‐Chair N/A
Diane Reklis Community Needs YES
Tom Crystal Community Needs
Sheri Furman Community Needs
Rachel Samoff Community Needs
Tom Vician Community Needs
Jean Wilcox Community Needs
Susie Thom Facilities YES
Jerry August Facilities
Brian Carilli Facilities
Damian Cono Facilities
Penny Ellson Facilities
Jennifer Hetterly Facilities
Jim Schmidt Facilities
Lanie Wheeler Finance YES
Ken Allen Finance
Susan Bailey Finance
Michael Bein Finance
Lessa Bouchard Finance
William
Robinson
Finance
Anne Wilson Finance
Bern Beecham School Needs YES
Claire Kirner School Needs
John Markevitch School Needs
Pam Radin School Needs
Tracy Stevens School Needs
Greg Tanaka School Needs
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 4
July 11, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
6:00 ‐ 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
a. None
3. Approval of June 27 meeting action notes
a. Approved
4. Presentation by Cubberley site plan architects
a. No formal study of the site has been done
i. The study that was done was theoretical and was not based on
formal policy direction
b. The previously generated Cubberley site plans looked at capacity
issues and what could fit on the site, again, it was a theoretical study
c. Perceived needs were determined by talking to a limited group of
individuals, it was not an all‐encompassing evaluation as the current
process is
d. There are many things at Cubberley that still need to be evaluated
further which is why the CPAC and CCAC were formed
e. The main objective in the architects original exercise was to see how
many square feet of space they could put on the lot while still having
all of the necessary parking and open space needed for the schools
and community facilities
f. City/school joint use of facilities is the current trend around the
country
g. By having facilities for both city and school uses located on a single
site you gain benefits for each of them that you would not have
otherwise
h. Middle school and high schools have different athletic field uses but
the field dimensions do not change so the same land area is necessary
regardless of whether a middle school or high school is built
i. There are a lot of problems with moving the elementary school based
on the flow of children to the site and the necessary circulation to get
to an elementary school
j. Question: Are shared facilities considered a security threat by PAUSD?
k. The different site plan options generated by the architects looked at
scenarios that ranged from few shared facilities to many shared
facilities and what the impacts of that are in terms of site planning
5. Brief subcommittee status reports
a. The School Needs subcommittee had questions for the PAUSD
demographer
b. Request: Put subcommittee meetings on the website
c. Request: Put a note on the website that if someone plans on attending
a subcommittee meeting and is not a part of that subcommittee that he
or she should call the subcommittee chair and let him or her know that
he or she is coming
d. The Community Needs subcommittee is looking at services city wide
and seeing where services might be able to be located elsewhere
6. Schedule next meeting(s)
a. Wednesday, July 25
b. Wednesday, August 8
c. Wednesday, August 22
7. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 5
July 25, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
6:00 ‐ 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of July 11th meeting action notes
Approved
4. Discussion of 7/19/12 Policy Advisory Committee responses to questions from
CCAC
i. The CCAC should assume that the short-term of the scope is the renewal
periods, the medium term will be when the need arises for a middle/high
school, and the long-term will be the useful life of new structures.
i. The CCAC should consider in the short-term some form of lease renewal
but not be constrained by it, in the medium-term assume a need for at least
one additional school on the site but in a manner that makes it so community
needs can still be served there, and in the long-term understand that new
buildings will be needed (if they are not constructed sooner). The CCAC
should focus their efforts on the short, medium, and long term using a
50/40/10 ratio.
The CPAC advised the CCAC that they should take a 50/40/10 approach to
their Cubberley recommendation meaning that the focus of the CCAC’s work
should be 50% on the near-term needs, 40% on the middle-term needs, and
10% on the long-term needs.
Request: Confirm what the middle term of the 50/40/10 equation references.
Is there an implication that a middle and/or high school will for sure be
needed or is that conclusion still yet to be made?
Cobb said the timeline for the CCAC’s recommendations has changed. The
due date is no longer July 2013, it is now February 2013.
Cobb and Beecham said the CCAC has responded to that due date by
proposing that a “coarse grain” report be delivered in February 2013 and a
“fine grain” (or final) report be delivered in the summer of 2013.
2
Cobb said driving the need to get the recommendations completed by
February 2013 is both the upcoming lease expiration and the potential of a
bond measure.
Question: What are the issues surrounding a joint City/PAUSD bond measure
since they have different geographic boundaries? Can it be done as one
ballot measure or does the City and PAUSD need separate, parallel measures?
What would the passage requirement be?
o The Finance Committee said they are looking into this issue
ii. The Greendell and 525 San Antonio sites should be considered as part of
the CCAC scope, but will most likely be needed for an elementary school
given their location.
ii. The Greendell and 525 San Antonio sites can be considered as part of the
CCAC scope, but will most likely be needed for an elementary school given
their location an remain unchanged.
Staff/Cobb said the CPAC was theoretically open to the possibility of
refiguring that site but based on the practical needs of an elementary school
the CPAC couldn’t see any scenario where it could be moved from its current
location.
iii. In Considering Relocation of Community/non-profit uses, the CCAC should
not consider off-site locations
iii. In considering relocation of community/non-profit uses, the CCAC need
not find off-site locations
Beecham clarified, and staff agreed, that there was no edict from the CPAC
that everything that is at Cubberley must stay at Cubberley. Rather he
understood the CPAC as saying that anything that the CCAC determined
should no longer be at Cubberley was not the CCAC’s responsibility to
relocate. Relocation would ultimately be the responsibility of the City (and
possibly the PAUSD).
Cobb said the CCAC’s job is to figure out what services/needs should be at
Cubberley noting that the CCAC represents so many different Cubberley
stakeholders for just that reason.
Some thought providing no recommendations for potential relocation sites
might unnecessarily raise fears among the Cubberley tenants
o Staff suggested a that if it is determined that a service should not be
housed at Cubberley the CCAC suggest that it is relocated elsewhere in
the City just not get into the details of where
o Cobb believes there is a way to work around not raising those fears
and encouraged creativity in the recommendations
Beecham said the CPAC charged the CCAC with prioritizing the existing uses
as one of its tasks
3
iv. It should be assumed that there will always be a need for both school and
community uses on the site.
iv. It should be assumed that there will always be a need for both school and
community uses on the site but that doesn’t mean at any single point in time
the entire site will be used for both school and community uses on the site.
That said, the CPAC is comfortable with the exploration of joint use.
Staff said the role of the CCAC is to find creative uses for the site that meet
the needs of both the City and PAUSD
Beecham clarified that the CCAC should assume that there will always be a
need for City and PAUSD use at the site but that doesn’t mean it has to reflect
the arrangements currently at the Cubberley site
Skelly clarified that if joint use does occur those facilities will be driven in
part by the architectural standards that the PAUSD has to adhere by
v. The CCAC should assume that the City and PAUSD intend to renew the
Cubberley lease, but that should not inhibit creativity.
v. The CCAC should assume that the City and PAUSD have a desire to keep
something going at the Cubberley site but whether or not that is done
through the renewal of the existing lease is still TBD.
Beecham clarified saying that the Council would entertain a new lease
arrangement and the PAUSD would entertain anything that maintains their
revenue stream.
Staff will notify the CCAC of when the next CPAC meeting is
Beecham recommended staff further clarify and revise the summary
provided to the CCAC of the most recent CPAC meeting and staff agreed
Cobb also commented in response to a question that he believes the CCAC
interim and final reports should be written by the CCAC members not staff,
and others agreed
5. Subcommittee reports (Formerly agenda item #6)
Subcommittee Chairs were invited to attend the Co-Chair’s planning
meetings held the Monday prior to CCAC meetings
Subcommittee Chairs to email staff their subcommittee meeting minutes so
they can be posted to the web
School Needs Subcommittee
o PAUSD presented data on school projections/needs
o The short term data was great but it became clear that the School
Needs Subcommittee needs to find out from the CCAC what
information the CCAC needs from them
Facilities Subcommittee
o Developing their approach for facility needs around “what if”
scenarios
o Identified six categories of facilities relevant to Cubberley
1. School
4
2. Community
3. Joint use
4. Recreation
5. Site support (parking, pedestrian ways, etc.)
6. Child care
o Discussed exploration of the Sobrato non-profit model in San Jose,
Milpitas, and Redwood City
o Also looking at a portion of the site as possibly revenue generating
Finance Subcommittee
o Planning to show revenue opportunities
o First exploring the history of revenue flow, bonds, timelines, and
other financing mechanisms currently being considered to
understand possibilities
o Will study other communities’ joint-use examples from a financial
perspective to determine how they work
o Will valuate private revenue generation options
o Will explore new lease scenario possibilities
o Will explore a joint powers district
Community Needs Subcommittee
o Four questions will drive their subcommittee’s process
1. What programs/services are currently offered at Cubberley
and who is using them (age, residency, etc.)?
2. Are these programs/services provided elsewhere in town?
3. Is there a demand for more of these programs/services?
4. What other community needs exist that are not currently
offered? How will population growth impact these
program/service needs?
o Will also evaluate the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan amendment that
addresses future community needs
6. Discussion of Subcommittee timeline and milestones (Formerly agenda item #5)
CPAC has condensed the timeline for when they would like a
recommendation from the CCAC so staff asked the subcommittees to keep
that in mind when working on their deliverables
Beecham proposed that each subcommittee have their intended deliverables
prepared by the CCAC meeting on August 8th
CCAC then discussed the final report and what it entails
o The 50/40/10 approach was identified as a significant policy
constraint given to them by the CPAC
Many felt the long-term needs are more important and that the
long-term should drive the short-term but that is not how it
stands now based on the CPAC policy direction given
Beecham noted the CCAC needs to understand what is needed in the long-
term so the City Council and PAUSD can make a lease decision in the short-
term
5
Cobb would like to take what has been discussed at this meeting back to the
CPAC and see what can be agreed upon
Cobb proposed that at the August 8th CCAC meeting that CCAC milestones are
discussed including proposals from each subcommittee about when they can
complete their assignments
CCAC members reiterated frustrations with the time constraints given to
them by the CPAC
Cobb reiterated his vision that the CCAC give the CPAC an interim report in
February 2013 and then continue working until they can finish a more
detailed, final report
A discussion then ensued on what the subcommittees had worked on so far
and thoughts people had on each of them
Schmidt said that the work of the Finance Subcommittee made him a little
uneasy because he felt it’s one thing to take a scenario and assign cost
estimates to it but it’s another thing to say having estimated it to cost x
dollars here is the way we propose to pay for it – those are very different
things
Beecham said regarding the Finance Subcommittee that he would like the
subcommittee to as much as possible put themselves in the shoes of the
PAUSD and City Council and consider their current financial situation when
making recommendations so any recommended proposal has the best
chance of working
Member said when thinking about the lease and a possible renewal the CCAC
should consider what lease variations are out there that might work for all
involved parties aside from the lease that currently exists
Member asked what the total square foot cost of any improvements would be
beyond just the construction cost (example: loss of revenue during
construction, etc.)
It was reiterated that the current Cubberley site plans are only intended to
aid the CCAC in their thinking, the CCAC is not limited by those site plans
Request: Have Cobb create a draft project timeline for the CCAC final report
and present it at a future meeting
Cobb suggested that the Community Needs Subcommittee should be the one
to do an initial evaluation of what services are currently at Cubberley and
which should stay and which might be located elsewhere
Shared facilities require staff so it must be determined who will staff any
shared facilities that are recommended
School Needs Subcommittee wants to know if PAUSD can dedicate any land
at this point to certain school uses or if all of the land needs to remain flexible
to a variety of different possible school uses
School Needs and Community Needs subcommittees should identify needs
they both have that could be served through shared facilities
6
7. Schedule next meeting(s)
Once the school year starts a Doodle poll will be done of the CCAC to
determine the optimum meeting date and time factoring in school year
commitments
Next meetings
o August 8
o August 22
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 6
August 8, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
6:00 ‐ 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of July 25 meeting action notes
Approved
4. High‐level discussion of City and PAUSD finances
City Finances Discussion
City of Palo Alto Administrative Services Director Lalo Perez presented on
City of Palo Alto finances (SEE ATTACHED PRESENTATION)
Perez explained a large component of structural budget issues is salaries and
benefits. Those are being addressed in major ways through reforms in labor
contracts but more work is needed
City avoids the use of reserves for budget gaps
City has been very lucky to have maintained high property tax rates through
the Great Recession but there was a sales tax did dip from approx.
$22M/year to as low as $18M/year and only now in FY 2013 is it projected to
be back near that $22M/year mark
Perez then explained the impact of the growing pension and medical
liabilities and the efforts to increase employee contributions
PAUSD Finances Discussion
PAUSD Chief Business Official Cathy Mak presented on PAUSD finances
(SEE ATTACHED PRESENTATION)
PAUSD is facing many of the same issues as the City
PAUSD is facing a potential approx. $5M budget deficit for the coming
fiscal year
State funding for PAUSD has dramatically decreased since FY 2009 going
from $17M/year to less than $6M/year
2
PAUSD has been averaging about 2%/year enrollment growth
5. Subcommittee reports on milestones and deliverables
Facilities
Presented four deliverables and dates:
1. Doing a detailed analysis of the types of facilities at Cubberley and their
uses including a matrix outlining types of Cubberley facilities, their
condition, and use by September 20
2. Determining various scenarios for the Cubberley site when facilities are
added and the challenges posed by various scenarios including joint use.
Will evaluate possible scenarios for Cubberley site in the short, medium,
and long‐term, including joint uses, by October 15
3. Evaluating a facility rebuild vs. remodel including wide‐ranging estimated
costs of maintaining the status quo, remodeling the facility, or rebuilding
it by November 15
4. Thinking differently about how the site can be used including “outside the
box alternatives” by December 1
School Needs
Presented seven deliverables and dates:
1. Listing all PAUSD properties and their relevant characteristics/limitations
by September 22
2. Identifying the types of shared facilities PAUSD would need/be interested
in by October 6
3. Obtaining critical assumptions regarding demographics, ABAG
projections, City response to ABAG projections, etc. by October 13
4. Wants to know the total acreage at Cubberley that PAUSD likely will use
for future school use by October 13
5. Wants to know the total acreage at Cubberley for which PAUSD can give
rights to for by October 20
6. Wants to know the terms for turnover of City‐built facilities to PAUSD at
lease termination by November 3
7. Wants PAUSD policy decisions on will a school facility be built on Stanford
lands, what a new high school at Cubberley would look like, what should
be expected on a 20‐30 year time horizon, any possible changes in student
density at each level, and desired limitations on the City's use of its 8 acres
by November 10
Finance
Evaluating the terms of the current Cubberley lease and covenant not to
develop
Examining potential funding mechanisms that could be used to construct
new facilities on the Cubberley site
3
Doing extensive research of existing joint use facilities in other communities
including how they came about and how they are governed
Evaluating whether a joint‐powers agreement can fund and manage the site
Community Needs
Would like to form a Joint Use sub‐subcommittee
Creating a table of current Cubberley users and what they are paying
Looking at potential new users and services based on other communities and
what services have been requested there that are not currently provided at
Cubberley
Doing a community survey through the neighborhood associations to see
what services residents want
Evaluating future users and how the space can be maximized
Evaluating resident vs. non‐resident use
Evaluating what services have wait lists
Looking at the geographic location (and balance) of Cubberley users
Looking at increasing cross cultural experiences at Cubberley and how
increased community connections can be fostered at the site
6. Discussion of the CCAC Final Report schedule and timeline
Cobb said at the next CPAC meeting that the CCAC final report due date
will be finalized
Cobb explained the expectations for the CCAC final report and what will
be required to get it done on time
7. Future meetings
Cobb said the CCAC will continue meeting every other week
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 7
August 22, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
6:00 ‐ 8:00 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
3. Approval of the August 8 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Introduction and Q & A with CCAC architect John Northway
Northway talked about the importance of understanding the problem first
and working on the solution only after the problem is thoroughly
understood
Northway explained that if this ever goes to a bond measure being able to
clearly explain what the problem is, what the solution should be, and why
will be very important
Northway wants the subcommittees to bring back what their “problem” is
to the next meeting to start forming a picture of the larger problem
Northway said to focus on Cubberley and not to worry too much about the
larger problems of the City since the CCAC was asked to limit their
recommendations to the site
5. City of Palo Alto and PAUSD Capital Budget Presentation
Phil Bobel of the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department presented a
Power Point on the capital budget (SEE ATTACHED)
Bobel explained the background of the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon
Commission (IBRC) recommendations and the subsequent Council
discussion of those recommendations
He explained how Cubberley is and isn’t accounted for currently in the
budget planning process.
Bobel explained that up‐keep of Cubberley in a limited manner is included
in the budget process but not funding for long‐term rebuilding.
2
Bobel explained that most of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
expenditures in slide 8 of the attached Power Point are in the next ten
years even though it reflects a 25 year horizon
Bobel noted that he believes the cost estimates for maintaining the facility
over the next 25 years is thin beyond 10 years and would likely need
additional funding
Bob Golton of the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) presented a
Power Point on the PAUSD capital budget (SEE ATTACHED)
Golton presented on the status of current capital projects under way and
the funds allocated for them
Golton said that voter approved bond funds for PAUSD use have already
been allocated to the individual school sites even if the projects have not
yet been identified
Approximately $33 M of funds have been reserved for construction to
accommodate PAUSD growth
6. Review of the discussion at the August 21 PAUSD Board meeting of the
Cubberley related Board enclosure
Mandy Lowell explained that the PAUSD is interested in looking for a
fourth middle school site that could or could not be at Cubberley (SEE
ATTACHED POWER POINT)
A big issue is that PAUSD wants flexibility and the City (and some of the
community) wants certainty
o The City and PAUSD are also at different phases of their bond
interests
Question: Is there an impediment to building a City only facility on the
City’s 8 acres?
A major part of the problem is the lack of clarity
7. Discussion of the CCAC Final Report schedule and timeline
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie reported out on the status of the
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (CPAC) timeline
Emslie said that the CPAC wants the CCAC input in part to decide if
Cubberley should be included in a city bond measure for infrastructure
needs
Emslie reported that the CCAC Final Report must be done by February 28,
2012
The CPAC is interested in the foreseeable school uses, community uses,
range of priorities, and joint use scenarios at Cubberley
Frustrations about the timeline of the process were expressed again by
CCAC members
3
8. Future meetings
a. Discussion of expected future subcommittee reports
Emslie mentioned that the CCAC Co‐Chairs would like one or two
subcommittees presenting updates at each meeting
9. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 8
September 5, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
George Browning spoke
o CCAC members should make sure to read what the IBRC wrote
about Cubberley
o The City should be clearer about what is expected of the artists
who rent space at Cubberley including how they exhibit and how
their rented space is used
3. Approval of the August 22 meeting action notes
Approved with the change of 2012 to 2013 on page two of the draft
4. Introduction by CCAC Architect John Northway
Thinks the work of the CCAC is going well and commends everyone for
their work so far
Wants everyone to keep working toward defining “the problem” and
believes progress on this front has been made
5. Presentation by the School Needs Subcommittee followed by a group
discussion and questions
School Needs Subcommittee Chair Bern Beecham lead the presentation
o Beecham reiterated the School Needs Subcommittee deliverables
o Presented preliminary conclusions
o SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT
o Beecham presented the spreadsheet that shows the acreage per
student at all of the PAUSD schools
Showed significant variance
High schools were about 45 acres on average vs. full
Cubberley site is 35 acres
2
o Presented what happened at the September 4, 2012 PAUSD Board
meeting including the PAUSD Cubberley interests
Co‐Chair Lowell added that the School Board purposefully left things open
ended to allow the CCAC to do its work
A number of clarifying questions were asked on PAUSD positions
PAUSD Superintendent Kevin Skelly then presented clarifying information
o Need for a middle school could arise by 2020
o PAUSD is evaluating all options for land use and recognizes one
story options are not the future
o A lot of questions were asked about what was driving the school
boards position and Skelly communicated that it is based on a long
history of enrollment growth and Board positions
Problem stated: maximum flexibility limits what you can do on the site
Problem stated: the sometimes conflicting wants and needs of all parties
involved with the Cubberley site
6. Response by the Finance, Facilities, and Community Needs Subcommittee
Chairs to the School Needs Subcommittee presentation
Finance Subcommittee mentioned a few problems:
o Both the City and PAUSD are dealing with budget problems
o PAUSD wants to keep the $7 M payment from the City and the City
feels like it needs some or all of it for other expenses
A number of “problem” statements about Cubberley were then made:
o Prioritization is difficult
o Determining what uses the City should subsidize on the site is
difficult
o Using existing facilities is cheap but does not allow as much
potential density
o CPAC direction to focus only on the Cubberley site does not allow
for other site consideration
o Uncertainty around the question “if an important community use is at
Cubberley and this site becomes unavailable will the use be able to
continue elsewhere”
o Maintaining maximum flexibility for PAUSD at the site significantly
impacts what the City can do with the site including a potential
bond measure
o PAUSD wants to keep the $7 M in rental revenue but the City
budget issues make that payment difficult
o Community acceptance of a bond measure for Cubberley is
questionable
o The City rushing to 2014 bond measure may force an eight acre
community center bond measure without PAUSD
Would PAUSD/the community support that?
o Joint bond for a joint‐use facility would need to be built to State
Architect’s standards and would be more expensive
3
o There may be effects on operating budgets if changes are made to
programming uses
o Needs for the site may shift over time
o PAUSD and community needs are growing in parallel
o How the uses at Cubberley should be determined is difficult
A number of facts were also raised in the course of discussion:
o Maintenance need is $33M to “keep dry” in the short‐term
o Additionally, currently unbudgeted funds are needed for
maintenance in the mid‐term at the site
7. Future meetings
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 9
September 19, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Theater
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the September 5 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Finance Subcommittee presentation, definition of problem, and discussion
Presentation given by CCAC Finance Subcommittee Chair Lanie Wheeler
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT PRESENTATION
Wheeler went over what the main problems from a financial perspective are
that the group should try and solve
Wheeler noted the high number of changes that have occurred since the lease
and covenant not to develop were originally signed and recognized similar
changes were likely to continue occurring
Wheeler noted the implications that the uncertainty of this site has on
operations, maintenance, sit planning, etc.
From a financial perspective, anything done on the site independently by the
City or PAUSD impacts the other due to the fact that possible uses done in
tandem are much different than independent site use
Site improvement funding undertaken in tandem has different geographic
boundaries and voting requirements to be aware of
Question: Is the City set on a 2014 ballot measure?
Councilmember Schmidt noted there are shorter term needs the City is trying
to address and has targeted 2014 as the time to do that but with a consultant
being hired many different project package scenarios will be considered
Finance subcommittee will consider unconventional funding avenues but will
leave most of the political viability discussions to the CCAC as a whole
Question: Will the Finance subcommittee write down political viability
questions that arise in the course of their discussions for discussion by the
CCAC as a whole?
2
Question: Will there be reluctance from North Palo Alto to fund Cubberley
renovations in South Palo Alto?
5. Community Needs Subcommittee definition of problem, staff update on
Cubberley tenants survey, and discussion
Presentation given by CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane
Reklis
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT PRESENTATION
Reklis went over the main problems facing their subcommittee including
overall problems and short‐, medium‐, and long‐term problems
Discussed the needs that all of the different users at the facility have
Recognized that joint use will necessitate change
Reklis noted that Cubberley uses have ebbed‐and‐flowed in the past and
consideration of building a facility that can do so in the future should be
given
Consideration will also be given to needs that might have no relocation
alternative and those that are conducive to joint use versus those that are not
Community Services Division Manager Rob De Geus then updated the CCAC
on the Cubberley survey of tenants
De Geus said staff had received 40 of the 70 surveys back
Said they have a three tier approach to results:
o All users
o Users by category
Example: dance studios or artists
o Individual users
Said of the 40 survey responses received so far 50 percent of users share
space
Many users need specialized facilities
Facilities are in use from as early as 6:00 AM to as late as 11:00 PM
25 percent of respondents said they would go out of business without space
at Cubberley and many others said they would have to leave Palo Alto
Question: Can professional help on the surveying be obtained?
6. School Needs Subcommittee definition of problem and discussion
Discussion on this subject delayed until later in the meeting
7. Discussion of inter‐subcommittee communication
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb led a brief discussion on inter‐subcommittee
communication
Request: Make sure that all reports are shared with the entire committee
Subcommittees agreed to reach out to one another when an opportunity to
collaborate presents itself or is necessitated
3
8. Discussion of potential joint use sites to visit and the process for visiting
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie said that based on joint use facility
interest staff will put tours together of joint‐use facilities but asked that
CCAC members work through staff to help with coordination
Emslie said staff welcomes suggestions for those site tours
Request: A presentation from Emeryville on their proposed joint use facility
6A. School Needs Subcommittee definition of problem and discussion
Presentation given by CCAC School Needs Subcommittee Chair Bern
Beecham
Said the subcommittee is looking at how PAUSD may want the eight acres
used in the future and how they may be affected by them
Looking at a possible development pattern for the Cubberley site as the
school starts building out projects
Question: How does ABAG affect projections?
Beecham reiterated that the subcommittee doesn’t have a reason to use
anything different than the PAUSD 2% enrollment growth projection
Beecham said the School Needs Subcommittee is also looking at non‐
traditional site uses including having specific facilities for art, science, etc.
located at Cubberley that students from both PALY and Gunn could use
9. Future meetings
Staff will send a Doodle to the CCAC to find an alternative meeting day for the
currently scheduled October 31st meeting
CCAC architectural consultant John Northway said he was very excited about
the opportunity here and that he thought it was time to start concluding
work on the problem identification step of the process and start working on
the solutions step
Discussion occurred of how to organize the group based on a final report that
will contain alternatives but no decisions were made
Cobb and Emslie proposed a community forum in October/November to
solicit input from all segments of the community on what their vision for the
future of Cubberley is
10. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 10
October 3, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
3. Approval of the September 19 meeting action notes
Unanimously approved
4. Discussion of Cubberley forum & volunteer identification
a. Scheduled for November 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM
Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell said staff will prepare an advertisement for the
CCAC members that they can distribute to the groups they represent
Lowell asked for day of volunteers to sign‐up and a clipboard was passed
around. The volunteers who signed‐up to assist are:
o Pam Radin (help with question asking)
o Bern Beecham
o Diane Reklis
o Claire Kirner (can help from 7:30 PM on)
o Sheri Furman (help plan the presentation)
o Steve Emslie (staff)
o Rob de Geus (staff)
o Tommy Fehrenbach (staff)
Co‐Chair Mike Cobb recommended purchasing advertising in newspapers
but Lowell didn’t agree so that is still TBD
It was communicated that the forum would be at Cubberley but it had not
been determined where at Cubberley
A discussion then ensued on where at Cubberley the forum should be held
and whether it would be a large presentation or smaller breakout groups
Members also brainstormed ideas about the content of what would be
discussed
Beecham suggested the CCAC present the problem statements and the do
Q & A and see what people think they need to know
2
Staff was directed to see if the Cubberley Theater or Pavilion was free that
day
The CCAC concluded that further discussion needs to occur about what
exactly will be presented/discussed at the forum and that a program for
the evening would have to be established so the objective of the event can
be communicated to residents
The CCAC voted to have the first meeting in the Cubberley Theater so staff
was directed to reserve that room for November 8
Community Services staff member Rob de Geus expressed concerns about
the theater idea so he will look into other locations to have the meeting at
Staff was also directed to make sure all CCAC meetings are on the City
calendar and to have Jim Keene incorporate the CCAC meetings in his City
Manager’s comments at Council meetings
5. Presentation by the Community Needs Subcommittee
6. CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane Reklis, with the
assistance of Community Needs Subcommittee member Sheri Furman,
gave the presentation
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT
Reklis said a lot of people think South Palo Alto is already getting a new
community center with the construction of Mitchell Park Library
Reklis communicated that this is a much smaller facility in scale and
operation when compared to Cubberley and would not come close to
meeting the needs of Cubberley
Reklis then discussed the unique community facilities that are already in
place
Cobb noted that Cubberley is the only major community center in Palo
Alto and that this group needs to define community center as part of their
evaluation process so they can work around that definition
Reklis discussed community centers in other communities and some of
the services they provide
Furman then described the matrix of public and private service offerings
they are creating including the providers
Furman then described their evaluation of the community users at
Cubberley based on the staff survey results of Cubberley tenants
CCAC member Penny Ellson then described the one year Sunnyvale study
that was done to gauge community needs
Staff noted that a comprehensive needs analysis of Palo Alto would take
more time than the CCAC has but a board brush analysis was agreed upon
de Geus noted that the staff survey written responses were not as detailed
as hoped so he and staff are doing follow‐up calls with individual users
Beecham asked the CCAC the question, “What do we need to have to make
an informed recommendation by February 28?”
Lowell wants to know what can be done in x amount of square feet
Reklis expanded on potential new uses or services at Cubberley
3
7. Presentation by the Facilities Subcommittee
CCAC Facilities Subcommittee member Brian Carilli presented
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT
He said since he was limited on time he would not read through the slides
and would instead show a map he created of where community services
are located in Palo Alto and the tremendous opportunity/value this site
presents
Carilli reiterated his feeling that this group really needs to think big about
what can be done on the site
He referenced his professional experience in site planning and said that a
better understanding of what should be/is going to be built on the site is
still needed
In response to some questions Carilli expressed his feeling that using the
existing site as‐is in the manner the PAUSD has suggested they would
consider is very short sited and not a good use of the land
The group discussed the level of detail that the CCAC should get into and
what is appropriate and what isn’t but no consensus on that was reached
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie then spoke and tried to clarify a few
points:
o He said Carilli was getting into a level of detail he didn’t have to in
order for the CCAC to generate recommendations that will help
inform the discussion that is going to occur between the City and
the PAUSD on what to do with the site
o He also said if the group feels they need staff to do needs
assessment work that the City does not currently have staff to do
that but consultants could be hired to assist with that process on a
case‐by‐case basis
Ellson said before she goes she wants the CCAC to look at the short,
medium, and long term recommendations the CCAC Facilities
Subcommittee has in their Power Point presentation and that although
they were not read through at the meeting those recommendations, not
the site planning, represented the majority of the Subcommittee’s work
Emslie then spoke and tried to clarify a few more points:
o He noted that when the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission
(IBRC) made their recommendations for the Municipal Services
Center (MSC) they created as one of their deliverables a scope of
study that could be used by a consultant for a study of the site in
the future but didn’t try to do the study themselves
o He also noted when the IBRC discussed Cubberley they made
broad recommendations about the site not specific
recommendations for what should happen with the infrastructure
there
4
o He reiterated his recommendation to let go of some of the detail
and keep the analysis at a higher level
Carilli then reiterated his feeling that until the CCAC defines what should
be built on the site it is impossible to organize the site
It was agreed upon that some level of site uncertainty needs to be
accepted as a part of this process
8. Discussion and brainstorming of subcommittee next steps
Not discussed due to time constraints
9. Future meetings
The next CCAC meeting is October 17
10. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 11
October 17, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Theater
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
George Browning of Palo Alto spoke
3. Approval of the October 3 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Discussion and brainstorming of recommendations and alternatives for the short
term (5 years)
The CCAC randomly divided into three groups and came up with the following
answers to the questions below:
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Exercise For October 17 Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
Development of Short Term (5 years, 2015‐2019) Issues—Small Group Discussions
At the October 17, 2012 meeting, the CCAC Steering Committee suggests that we have a
discussion focused on the short term issues associated with Cubberley’s future. The Steering
Committee proposes starting with the short term issues inasmuch as much of the data and
background necessary to consider meaningful recommendations, alternatives and
comments have substantially been presented by the Subcommittees. Future CCAC
discussions will address medium and long term issues after all Subcommittee deliverables
are available to the full CCAC.
The proposed format is for the CCAC to break up into 3 random groups insuring that each
group has at least one representative from each Subcommittee. The discussion should take
about 30 minutes followed by a 5 minutes presentation from each group to the CCAC.
Comments, questions, recommendations and alternatives and will be recorded and available
2
to the full CCAC for our on‐going discussion and as input for the development of the draft
committee report.
The following questions are provided to frame the short term issues to facilitate
conversation and brainstorming:
1. Should the City Renew its lease with PAUSD for an additional 5 years?
a. If the City were to renew its lease, under what conditions? How would a revised
covenant address on‐going needs?
b. What are recommendations for changes to tenants and rents?
c. Should PAUSD and the City share in maintaining Cubberley?
d. How should the lease be structured to maintain maximum flexibility for the future
uses of Cubberley?
2. Is it feasible to include a community facility on the City’s 8 acres in the 2014
Bond measure? Is this a community need?
3. What actions or planning activities should PAUSD and the City undertake during the next 5
years to advance the determination of the best possible future of Cubberley, and build a
consensus for that future?
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Group 1
Question 1
Renew a lease for 5 years
Question 1B
Transfer, in some process, the city’s 8 acres to the school district (Voted Yes 6‐0)
Remove covenant not to develop and renegotiate $2M (Voted Yes 6‐0)
Share maintenance costs and planning (Voted Yes 6‐0)
Find a way for more child care at Cubberley and other PAUSD sites (Voted No 5‐1)
Include access to and/or preserve other PAUSD fields and gym space (Voted Yes 4‐2)
City to offer leases to tenants for same 5 years (Voted No 5‐1)
Question 2
No, not feasible (Voted No 1‐5)
Question 3
Develop MOU defining joint use of site
Group 2
Question 1
Yes, city has lots of uses, school has few in short term
Lease doesn’t have continued utility in present form
Considerable issues in relation to all city infrastructure challenges (IBRC reference) but
was only looked at from financial point of view
Is 5 year lease the right amount of time?
o Foothill 3 years…
3
Does current covenant lock 5 years?
o Could be amended on mutual agreement
Question 1A
Need to start with existing lease, delete what doesn’t work
Maintenance issues in short term
Under what conditions would it be renewed?
Term equal to 3 or 5 years? Or related to departure of Foothill?
What does city get for covenant not to develop?
Has become meaningless in current time
Could amend lease to eliminate/change to other city benefit
New covenant could make sense in today’s time
Possibility of school district assuming responses for some of the immediate capital
improvements (some are on school owned buildings)
School District could make commitments to build full size fields or multi‐use available to
city on new builds outside Cubberley (possible shared uses)
Reasonably accessible joint‐use sites (price, availability)
Use ‘joint‐use’ thinking above specific to Cubberley – shift maintenance and upkeep to
School District
Classrooms for programs, fields, irrigation, etc.
Childcare: make an agreement to expand at other sites to offset city’s investment at
Cubberley
Question 1B
Serious reevaluation on tenants
Who is chosen and how
Charge
Serious gap that could be improved
Maximize availability/profit
Less subsidy
More property manager mindset
Better utilization of resource
Do it gradually
Maybe different way stop use space
Question 1C
Yes
Zoning may be prohibitive
Departure of Foothill may be opportunity for new tenants to generate money
Rents should cover maintenance for facility (day‐to‐day and capital/deferred)
o Should be cost neutral
o Corrective, ongoing, preventative?
o Timing/plan is‐at
Question 1D
What could you put into 5 year lease that could bind ‘flexibility’?
What form should the lease renewal take to maximize opportunities?
4
Lease isn’t problem, common vision by School District and city needs to be decided and
executed
Could covenant be used to shape the vision?
o Timeline for concrete planning
o MOU to ‘use 5 years productively
o Continue discussions as decisions become clearer
o Otherwise, loss of valuable time
o Is resolving worth it?
o Should we wait?
o Some flexibility there now, could keep status quo
Question 2
No to a 2014 bond measure
o It is a community need
o Need to know competing needs for bond measure
o Could be desirable to keep something for 8 acres on 2014 bond
o School has more support for bond
Can go to voters with less detail on projects
City needs more detail
Doing bond for just 8 acres might be problematic in public perception/uncertainty
Could we, through lease/covenant build in obligations to come to affirmative agreement
on some plan and force parties to agree?
o If city goes ahead with plan to develop 8 acres on its own, it may not be best
plan for City/PAUSD/both
Don’t want to confine to city vs. school on acreage
Question 3
Sit down in good faith and talk about what School District and City have in common
o Professional proctoring
o Come with specifics
o Could build common use spaces in the interim
o Neither party currently has money – need votes
o Could go to voters together
Possible (Finance committee)
o ‘Educational purposes’ is broadly defined (55% bond)
Go through tenants and answer questions regarding here vs. somewhere else
Big question is does city and school district want to work together?
Put together the data/decision makers can have good factual basis for discussions
Fully informed for proper judgment
Craft affirmative action obligation for each arty
If enrollment continues to increase, discussion about alternative timetable
Group 3
Question 1
Keep open? Status Quo
o Planning will take 5 years and incremental periods to allow for planning
o Strive to honor tenant business plans
5
Question 1A
Commitment from school district and city to work cooperatively to plan all 35 acres, the
whole site:
o District to share funding for planning
o Hard to expect school district to design school
o Clarify maintenance issues
o Quality conditions/ for subsequent terms or extensions
o Lease renewals/and period extensions (3‐5 years/10 years?)
o Is the 8 acres in the right place (land configuration)?
o What 8 acres would meet community needs?
o Don’t lock into something we would regret
Question 1B
Uses need to reflect inter‐generational, multi‐cultural needs (cultures = people)
o Implement city bike plan for better access to Cubberley
o With new tenants, the tenants to share responsibility for improving the
room/facility (refinishing dance floor for example)
o Tenants to chip in special assessment for improvements (like homeowner
assessment or fee around the facility)
o New tenants pay higher rates
o No grandfather clause for low rates
o We should look at criteria for all renters – just like there is for selection of artists
Question 1C
Costs – Should be shared, but how?
o By square footage
o Tenant fees to be covered by tenants
o If school district is sharing maintenance, it should be eased into
Question 1D
Tenants need some sense of certainty (lease)
Initial lease 3‐5 years and at least one year increments thereafter
Year to year lease and tough for renters/tenants
Need to have a clear long‐term overall plan so that we don’t prolong the campus
uncertainty – within 2 years
Need to consider a ‘new model’ for what the future high school may look like – Not
same old model
School design to reflect ‘modern’ teaching design and flexibility as much as possible
Question 2
Multiple sources of site assessment – the more analysis/perspectives the better
Access to other high school fields need to be part of the whole deal (not to develop)
Include gyms, pools, and child care space
Bond for 8 acres? Too soon in 2016?
o Goal for 2014 should be complete redevelopment plan
o Go for comprehensive bond just for Cubberley
o 2016 may be affected by Presidential election cycle
o Don’t’ wrap Cubberley with sewer infrastructure bond
o Bond measures for “make‐shift” community center facility won’t pass – do it
right
o Joint use programs take 5‐10 years to do right
6
Question 3
Alternate transportation strategies (bike, bus, shuttle, pedestrian)
Maintenance of building should be built in x timeframe?
Consider grants for these special ethno studies
Design must be flexible – adaptive to changing needs
Question 4
Use the time before the bond to do adequate planning and thoughtful design
Something will be built in x years, but it needs to be done right (condition of lease joint
funded)
Use of full site – including San Antonio should be planned before anything built
(Elementary school needs to fit in well, don’t box in options)
Needs to be a real strategy/mechanism for broad community input on designs – not just
committee
The design team much include ethnographic specialist instead of ‘standard’ architects to
understand the problem
Need to have ‘observational planners’
Full cultural assessment to meet all cultural needs
The design needs to be unique to our community/needs
Regardless of design costs – do it right. Don’t scrimp
5. Discussion of Cubberley forum
a. Thursday, November 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM at the Cubberley Theater
Time was changed to 7:30 PM
6. Future meetings
a. Next CCAC meeting will be October 30th or November 1st
7. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 12
October 30, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
3. Approval of the October 17 meeting action notes
Approved with minor revisions incorporated
4. Update on the October 18 CPAC meeting
City of Palo Alto Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie gave a brief update of
the meeting
Emslie communicated that the CPAC had requested things such as:
o CCAC should rewrite their problem statements
o City revenue measure in 2014 is considering lots of different things
and is not focused on Cubberley but the City does want there to be
resolution on what the future of Cubberley will be by that time
o City wants clear direction on whether or not they should renew the
lease and what they might construct
o City wants CCAC to prioritize what services should be provided at
Cubberley
o Supportive of the community forum
o Think of it as an opportunity not a problem
o Think of it as highest and best use for Cubberley
5. Presentation on joint use facilities
Presentation made by CCAC Finance Subcommittee member Susan Bailey
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT
Bailey presented three joint use facilities
She looked for common threads and lessons learned from all of the projects
2
1. Emeryville Center for Community Life
Approximately 7.6 acre/115,100 SF facility
Cost = $80 M
Has been in plan since 2003
Now in their third MOU but are starting site work soon
The repeated MOUs are the result of the redesign efforts
Facility includes K‐12 education facilities for 750 students, multipurpose
rooms, administration space, a school and community library, a community
pool, and more
Project is being driven by the Superintendent and Mayor together
2. Wadsworth Community Campus
Approximately 65 acres/450,000 SF facility
Cost = $105 M
Facility includes a new high school for 1,629 students, recreation facility,
senior center, indoor and outdoor pools, and a public library. A middle
school is not included in the cost but is already on site
3. Livermore Facility
Modernizing seven of 20 schools and doing community enhancements as a
part of three projects
Facilities include new schools, a youth community center, and new
community library
Driven by the superintendent of the school district
Had to get special legislation for the joint use library to be built
They passed it by doing one election that combined multiple community
needs
Bailey then mentioned a study of seven steps to effective joint‐use
partnerships. They include:
1. Identify a local need that a joint use partnership might address
2. Identify essential joint use partners
3. Develop a positive, trusting relationship with partners
4. Build political support
5. Build a joint use partnership within the context of the local
community
6. Formalize the partnership with an MOU
7. Foster ongoing communication and monitor the progress and impact
A number of questions and comments then occurred:
Comment: Jim Schmidt mentioned that the documents for the MOU of the San
Jose library are available online
Request: Bailey was asked to provide her full list of joint‐use facilities
Question: Clarify what amount of a building has to be used by schools and
how the sale and passage of the bonds would work if done at the 55% voter
approval threshold
3
6. Discussion of the Cubberley forum including the public outreach plan
a. Thursday, November 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM at the Cubberley Theater
Emslie gave an overview of what could be expected
The forum will start with a 15‐20 minute presentation including the
Cubberley 101 presentation by staff followed by a presentation of the CCAC
problem statements by CCAC architect John Northway
Written questions will then be taken and answered first to be followed by
oral communications
Sheri Furman asked staff to explain at the forum what is different about
Cubberley Community Center when compared to Mitchell Park Library &
Community Center and Lucie Stern Community Center
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb said that ads for the event will be going out in the
papers
Cobb also asked all CCAC members to send the ad out to the organizations
they are a part of
PAUSD staff member Robert Golton said PAUSD will send the ad to all of the
parents as well
Cobb said he will also do a press release for the event
Cobb said add a paragraph on your own about why this is important to the
specific group you represent when you send the ad out
A passive information table will be set‐up at the event
CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane Reklis is going to provide
a one page handout on what’s special about Cubberley that her
subcommittee created
Cobb said to let City of Palo Alto staff member Richard Hackmann know if
you would like to help with the forum
7. Future meetings
Lowell said if you have agenda items you want to see at a future meeting let
the Co‐Chairs know
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 13
November 14, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
Lisa Hendrickson from Avenidas spoke on behalf of a number of health
and wellness groups who provide services in the community and their
desire to build a state‐of‐the‐art community center on the Cubberley site
An unidentified member of Good Neighbor Montessori spoke in support of
keeping a Montessori at the Cubberley site
3. Approval of the October 30 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Debrief of the Cubberley Community Forum
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie gave an update on what happened at
the forum
CCAC member Sheri Furman said the CCAC would need a future
community forum to discuss site options
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb said the CCAC needs at least one follow‐up
forum that both presents site options and reaches out to a broader
audience
CCAC member Rachel Samoff said that non‐residents using the Cubberley
site is not a bad thing
CCAC member Penny Ellson said she wished that possibilities of the site
were presented at the forum in terms of what can be done with that
amount of acreage
CCAC member Jennifer Hetterly said that she wished the forum had been a
little more thought provoking
2
5. Further discussion of the October 17 breakout group brainstorming on
Cubberley short‐term scenarios
CCAC Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell asked people to discuss the October 17
breakout group conclusions but also brought up the medium and long‐
term scenarios so people were aware of what some of the proposals are
Samoff mentioned a decision making process where the City and PAUSD
work on the long‐term solution during the short‐term while also having a
discussion about how they will share maintenance costs
CCAC member Susan Bailey said the Finance Committee has discussed
recalculating the annual lease payments to align with the Utility Users Tax
revenue trend rather than the Consumer Price Index trend and because
the current lease includes things having to do with Palo Alto Community
Childcare (PACC) increase the amount of space leased to PACC on
elementary school sites and increase their lease payments
Furman said that if there is another five year lease there needs to be an
agreed upon design use, CCAC member Brian Carilli agreed
Carilli again advocated joint use with the City maintaining a major
presence at the site
Lowell said the scenarios indicate what was discussed not what will be
decided upon
Bailey asked if the PAUSD can get beyond its statements that it needs the
whole site and discuss joint‐use or if they will be hung up on that
Carilli said that both the City and PAUSD work for the citizens and this
citizen advisory committee should say joint‐use must work
Cobb mentioned that some services might not have a home if joint‐use
occurs and what can be kept at Cubberley and what can’t should be
studied
The topic came up that an assessment of what is at Cubberley still has not
been finalized but a report has been put together that’s a jumping off
point for a larger community needs assessment
It was concluded that more information is needed about what is at
Cubberley such as who the renters are including long‐term hourly users
CCAC member Bern Beecham said he thought the long‐term site needs at
Cubberley are too uncertain at this time to create a plan for site
redevelopment nor does the CCAC have the information necessary to raise
the political support for such an undertaking
It was requested that at the next CCAC meeting a presentation is done by
Rob De Geus of Community Services on what is currently at Cubberley
Beecham said that until one of these buildings is taken down we do not
need more space because we have enough space and on top of that
Foothill Community College is leaving meaning the site meaning 20%
more space will soon be available for lease to new renters
Beecham asked to outline a process by which the community can evaluate
its community service needs
3
Hetterley asked to have all conclusions for the five‐year scenario listed
together
6. Outline of the medium‐term and long‐term potential Cubberley site
scenarios and requested input
The following five medium and long‐term scenarios were discussed…
1. Cubberley used for a comprehensive high school in the future using all
35 acres.
2. Cubberley used for a non‐comprehensive high school in the future
using no more than 27 acres.
3. City retains 8 acres (possibly in a different location on the site than
currently assigned) and the PAUSD retains 27 acres with each
determining their respective uses.
4. The entire Cubberley site becomes a joint use facility.
5. No decision about a high school is made and there is no high school use
on the site for a 20‐25 year time period.
CCAC member Jerry August asked to change number two from “non‐
comprehensive high school” to “high school use”
Lowell said that staff will be sending out a CCAC briefing book before
Thanksgiving break containing further information on what each of the
subcommittees has concluded and information discussing pros and cons of
each of the five scenarios
CCAC member Ken Allen said we should change from reactive to proactive
in our process
7. Future meetings
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 14
November 28, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
A unidentified member of the public asked the CCAC how they can make
recommendations about the future use of the site when they do not yet know the
future of education
3. Approval of the November 14 meeting action notes
Approval postponed at the request of staff until the December 12th meeting
4. Presentation on the CCAC Action Plan Matrix by CCAC Architect John Northway
Prior to a discussion of the CCAC Action Plan Matrix City of Palo Alto Community
Services staff member Rob De Geus made a presentation on Cubberley tenants and
long‐term users
o SEE DE GUES’S ATTACHED PRESENTATION
Following De Gues’s presentation a number of clarifying questions were asked by
CCAC members
5. Presentation on the ground rules for the CCAC member small group discussions of
the CCAC Action Plan Matrix
CCAC Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell communicated that the group is to breakout into small
groups and brainstorm thoughts and ideas about the CCAC Action Plan Matrix. All
ideas were to be captured by the scribe of each small group and not filtered at this
time
2
6. CCAC member small group discussions of the CCAC Action Plan Matrix including the
brainstorming of issues, questions, and concerns
Issues, questions, and concerns raised by small group participants are captured in
red with the original text in black
o SEE ATTACHED SUMMARIES
7. Report out on the CCAC member small group discussions of the CCAC Action Plan
Matrix
Each group presented the statements that were made during their brainstorming
sessions as captured in the attached summaries
8. Future meetings
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie said that due to the Christmas holiday the CCAC
will be meeting December 12th & 19th instead of December 12th & 26th
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb and CCAC member Brian Carilli said that the December
12th meeting would be held at Stanford to give the group an idea of what can be built
on eight and a half acres
Cobb said that at the a December 19th meeting the group should be prepared to take
votes on some major issues concerning their ultimate recommendations
9. Adjournment
www.danceconnectionpaloalto.com
Dear CCAC, PAUSD and City of Palo Alto Representatives,
The dance studios at Cubberley Community Center were asked to submit a description of our value to the
Palo Alto community. Dance Connection is currently both a lease and hourly rental tenant, and we hope
to remain in our current location in L5 and K5 (former lease) as well as L6 (hourly) as long as possible.
Here are some features which highlight the uniqueness of Dance Connection in the Palo Alto Community:
History: Dance Connection has been a tenant at Cubberley since 1988 --(the "oldest" dance
school still remaining at Cubberley) on an hourly rental basis, and a lease tenant since 1995.
We assumed a second leased space in 2005, and are hoping for a third room if one becomes
available. We are renting space hourly in L6 for the maximum number of weekday rental
hours, and also rent space 3 afternoons per week from Zohar, and 5 afternoons per week at
Reach Fitness Center in downtown Palo Alto. Our wish would be to have a space, even a
shared space at Cubberley instead of renting elsewhere.
Who do we serve? 99% of our students are the youth in our community, ages 3 to 18 with a
vast majority from Palo Alto.
What do we offer? Dance instruction for regular classes and workshops. We bring in
professional dancers and choreographers to work with our students on a regular basis.
Performing opportunities for all dance students in a formal theatre. Competitive and non-
competitive dance teams to perform for all community events and participate in instructional
dance conventions as well as attend professional performances and events.
1. Our DCDT (Dance Connection Dance Teams) include children who want to dance without
competing. Anyone can join this dance club and be involved in extra community
performances and events.
2. Ballet Company serves our youth who love ballet. Professional choreographers visit Palo
Alto to create choreography for our dancers to perform both classical and modern works.
3. The DCPC (Dance Connection Performing Company) is a competitive, highly skilled group
of serious dancers who dedicate their time to dancing. Palo Alto Dance Connection has been
a top award winner at regional competitions with some students attending nationals. This is
the SYTYCD (So You Think You Can Dance) of our Palo Alto Community. Though we
appreciate the talent, the award that our teachers and parents most appreciate winning is the
"best studio" award for friendly, polite, and respectful dancers.
Community Events: Dance Connection has always been actively involved in our local
community events including:
1. May Fete Parade
2. City of Palo Alto Toys for Kids program with an annual benefit performance from
the start of DC until 2002 with Dance Connection as a large provider of new toys for
our local youth including East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park as well as Palo Alto.
3. Annual Breast Cancer Benefit which has been co-sponsored by the City of Palo Alto.
This will be our 11th annual benefit at the Cubberley Theatre in 2013 with all
proceeds to benefit a breast cancer organization such as SF Komen for the Cure. The
City has donated the theatre rental for the performance, and Dance Connection pays
the theatre technical staffing and all other expenses.
4. We are holding our 14th Annual Nutcracker Ballet at the Spangenberg Theatre. Local
talent and homegrown community involvement at its finest where parents and
children can perform together. Please join us!
5. Annual Winter Showcase performance for M Company in San Jose to benefit a
cancer organization or other medical foundation.
6. Donations to all local schools and community organizations for several years. Dance
Connection provides Nutcracker and other performance tickets (Cinderella, Coppelia,
and Sleeping Beauty Ballets) or Summer Dance Camp scholarships to our local youth
and community. DC also offers scholarships to students in financial need.
7. Los Altos Festival of Lights Parade
8. Any other community event. We performed at the California Avenue Farmer's
Market Blossom Birth Halloween Carnival recently. A Halloween themed
performance which even included Nutcracker variations in pointe shoes on the
"street" stage! Next month, we will perform some Nutcracker pieces at the Fairmont
Hotel for the Christmas in the Park Breakfast with Santa. When we are asked to
perform for the community, we are there!
9. Nutcracker PJ Story Time: Each year, we have a story time the Friday night before
our Nutcracker performance. Free to children ages 4-8 at our studio with children
wearing their pajamas to learn about the Nutcracker Ballet and see some of the
characters dance and visit with them.
Director/Founder: Cindy Ginanni, a third generation Palo Alto resident. My grandfather,
Eugene Raffarin was the chef to Lucie Stern. We are honored to live in the home purchased
by Aunt Lucie for my grandparents, who came from France. My husband, Mark is a teacher
at Jordan Middle School along with our oldest son, Joe. Our daughter-in-law teaches at
Terman Middle School. Our youngest son manages a local restaurant, and our daughter is an
artist who lives in Steamboat Springs, CO. Growing up, our children enjoyed the benefits our
community has to offer--including education, recreation, and arts. We hope to pass this along
to the future of the Palo Alto children.
Goals: Palo Alto Dance Connection hopes to remain at Cubberley, and our plan is to stay
until we are "kicked out." We will be happy with a 5 year lease, ecstatic with a 10 year lease,
and even glad to remain month to month. Sharing space with a PAUSD or private school or a
community center fits our youth-oriented values, and we welcome the opportunity to plan for
the future in a positive way.
Thank you for the time you dedicate in your efforts to promote the good of the community for everyone.
Sincerely,
Cindy Ginanni
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 15
December 12, 2012
Stanford’s Y2E2 Building
473, Stanford, CA 94305
Room 300
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the November 14 and November 28 meeting action notes
Approved as amended
4. Presentation by the CCAC Facilities Subcommittee
CCAC Facilities Subcommittee Chair Jennifer Hetterly presented a Power Point on how co‐
location might work from a space perspective (ATTACHED)
Hetterly explained that with a redesigned site that maximizes potential efficiencies the
square footage of the site can be greatly increased and, in their opinion, can meet the needs
of both the City and PAUSD
Hetterly communicated this message by showing both current maps of the site and pie
charts that show the break‐down of how land at Cubberley is currently being used
Hetterly reiterated her subcommittee’s support for underground parking
5. Presentation by the CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee
CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane Reklis presented a Power Point on the
demands, services, and needs of Cubberley and its users (ATTACHED)
Reklis noted that demand for services will increase at all age levels as the population of Palo
Alto grows
She does not believe that it is within the scope of the committee to determine who should
be tenants and instead recommends a community services needs study done by a
professional
Believes current programs can be maintained while allowing flexibility for future City and
PAUSD site needs
A discussion on these two presentations by the CCAC members then occurred
CCAC member Brian Carilli commented that the Cubberley site, as currently designed, is
extremely inefficient and with rebuilt structures could drastically increase the capacity of the
site
2
CCAC members agreed that other options for PAUSD school design should be explored
because the land costs of Palo Alto have changed the ability of the PAUSD to construct
structures in the way they have historically
CCAC member John Markevitch commented that just because larger structures can be built
an understanding of the impact of those efficiencies should be known on the student quality
of life
CCAC members then discussed preferences and ideas they had for a rebuilt Cubberley site
specifically related to how the school structure itself might be built
CCAC members then discussed the impacts that action or inaction would have on the status
quo and the costs associated with such action or inaction
Question: Can construction be done in stages?
The CCAC then continued their discussion of the site specially around operational efficiencies
such as bicycle and pedestrian access for local residents
6. Tour of the Y2E2 building
The CCAC went on a tour of the building
7. Future meetings
The next CCAC meeting was set for December 19th at 5:30 PM at Cubberley
8. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 16
December 19, 2012
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
Palo Alto Adult School Principal Kara Rosenberg spoke and recommended
that the group ensure facilities are maintained that can support high
quality programs that are broadly appealing and have sufficient parking
and lighting.
3. Discussion and voting on initial Cubberley policy proposals
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb introduced the topics that will be discussed and
asked the group to keep the conversations at a high‐level as much as
possible
CCAC Members Present for Voting
Susan Bailey Penny Ellson Jim Schmidt
Bern Beecham Sheri Furman Greg Tanaka
Michael Bein Jennifer Hetterly Lanie Wheeler
Lessa Bouchard Claire Kirner Jean Wilcox
Brian Carilli Mandy Lowell Anne Wilson
Mike Cobb Diane Reklis
Tom Crystal Rachel Samoff
The CCAC started by discussing which of the five medium‐term and long‐
term scenarios they should recommend
Scenarios Summary
Scenario A The entire Cubberley site becomes a joint / shared City / PAUSD
use facility.
2
Scenario B The City retains 8 acres and the PAUSD retains 27 acres with
each cooperatively determining their respective uses. (In this
scenario, the location of the 8 acres on the site may be changed
if mutually agreed).
Scenario C The City pursues planning for and use of its 8 acres independent
of the PAUSD plans/uses for their 27 acres.
Scenario D No decision is made about the medium‐term use of the
Cubberley site by the PAUSD, with the assumption that there
will be no high school use for a 15 – 25 year time period (status
quo). The PAUSD decision regarding the use of the site for a high
school will be made at some future time, but not immediately.
Scenario E The entire 35 acre site will eventually be returned to PAUSD
uses.
Scenarios D and E were removed from the CCAC’s list of recommended
scenarios
Members expressed strong support for Scenario A but made note of
potential difficulties with it and recognized that another scenario might
have to be eventually selected
Recommendation Vote
It is the strong recommendation of the CCAC to recommend
Scenario A
17‐0‐0
The CCAC then discussed how to phrase a number of subsequent
recommendations they felt should be made now that Scenario A had been
selected as their recommended alternative
Recommendation Vote
The City and PAUSD should renegotiate a [lease extension]
option with additional conditions
17‐0‐0
CCAC member Greg Tanaka arrived
Recommendation Vote
The current covenant not to develop should be removed from a
Cubberley lease extension
18‐0‐0
Recommendation Vote
The current covenant not to develop should be removed from a
Cubberley lease extension
18‐0‐0
The CCAC acknowledged that addressing different issues independently
affords them greater flexibility in their recommendations and helps to
clarify their position on each issue
3
Recommendation Vote
Childcare should continue to be provided at school sites and is
important for the community
18‐0‐0
A long discussion then ensued about pros and cons of a five‐year lease
versus a 10‐year lease
It was understood that it is likely major renovations on the full site would
not take place for at least 10 years but many members expressed an
interest in recommending a shorter lease because they felt it would
encourage the City Council and School Board to act faster
The CCAC then discussed what the best milestones would be in a revised
lease to ensure that the City and PAUS proceeded with an expedited site
planning process
CCAC Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell arrived
Recommendation Vote
Operating costs should not be shared in a five year window 19‐0‐0
Recommendation Vote
Facility upgrades beyond routine maintenance should be
negotiated
19‐0‐0
CCAC member Jim Schmidt left
Recommendation Vote
Capital expenses in the first five years of the lease extension
should be shared
15‐2‐1
Recommendation Vote
A site master plan needs to be developed in the first five years
[of any lease extension]
18‐0‐0
Recommendation Vote
In the first five years [of any lease extension] there should be a
community needs assessment with professional support
17‐0‐1
Recommendation Vote
The CCAC should recommend a five year lease extension that is
automatically extended to ten years if certain milestones are
met
10‐3‐5
4
The CCAC recognized that the 10‐3‐5 vote on the lease extension term
described above was not sufficient for their final report and would need to be
revisited
4. Future meetings
City of Palo Alto Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie and Cobb informed the
CCAC that they should be prepared to meet weekly until the end of
February following New Years
5. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 17
January 9, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the December 12 and December 19 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Continued discussion and voting on initial Cubberley policy proposals
CCAC Co‐Chair Mike Cobb introduced the topics that will be discussed and
asked the CCAC to work towards getting through as many policy
recommendation votes as possible. He reminded the CCAC that there did not
appear to be a consensus recommendation from the last meeting on whether
the CCAC should recommend a five or a ten‐year lease and his hope is that
they would be able to reach a consensus on that issue tonight.
CCAC Members Present for Voting
Ken Allen Mike Cobb Diane Reklis
Jerry August Tom Crystal Rachel Samoff
Susan Bailey Penny Ellson Jim Schmidt
Bern Beecham Jennifer Hetterly Lanie Wheeler
Michael Bein Claire Kirner Jean Wilcox
Lessa Bouchard Mandy Lowell Anne Wilson
Brian Carilli John Markevitch
It was discussed that an MOU should guide the creation of a master plan for
the site and that ultimately the MOU might go through multiple iterations but
there needs to be an initial agreement to get the process started. It’s
important an MOU come before a master plan is created.
It was agreed that a community needs assessment should also be developed
at the same time as the master plan.
2
Recommendation Vote
As a condition of any lease extension or renewal, an MOU shall
be developed within one year of its execution that determines
how a community needs assessment and master plan will be
developed within five years.
19‐0‐0
Ken Allen arrived
The CCAC discussed the role that expanded joint‐use of existing facilities
should have in a lease extension and it was agreed upon that this is
important for the City and PAUSD to explore because it is reflective of their
willingness to work together which is important to the CCAC.
It was then discussed and agreed upon that this is a general, free‐standing
recommendation that is not intended to be included in a lease extension.
Recommendation Vote
The City and PAUSD shall explore the possibility of expanding
City/PAUSD joint‐use agreement models including the
expansion of joint‐use at City and PAUSD facilities.
20‐0‐0
It was discussed that improvements to Cubberley shall be identified that can
serve most, if not all, current and potential site uses but funding and
implementation methods do not have to be identified within the one‐year
horizon.
Recommendation Vote
As a condition of any lease extension or renewal, within one
year of its execution near term improvements to Cubberley shall
be identified that can serve most, if not all, current and potential
site uses (example: restrooms for playing fields).
20‐0‐0
It was conveyed that there is currently a review process in place that is used
by the City for who gets space when it becomes available at Cubberley.
It was clarified that the group is OK with things being terms of the lease that
have not yet been completed (example: a mandate to enter into a MOU can be
in a lease even if the referenced MOU has not been drafted).
It was clarified that some of these recommendations are recommended as
conditions of agreements not agreements themselves.
Recommendation Vote
Any new leasing of the space should be done so in the context of
the developing MOU, community needs assessment, and revised
master plan.
20‐0‐0
3
It was generally agreed that funding site improvements at Cubberley is not
compatible with a 2014 bond measure because of time constraints and
general uncertainties surrounding the project.
It was proposed that some near‐term Cubberley needs be considered for
inclusion in a 2014 bond measure; however, it was ultimately agreed upon
that logistically that would not work because bonds can only pay for “bricks
and mortar,” not analysis, and at this time further analysis is what’s needed.
Recommendation Vote
A long‐term master plan for Cubberley should not be part of a
2014 ballot measure.
20‐0‐0
The CCAC discussed the pros and cons of a five‐year versus a ten‐year lease
but once again the group was not able to reach a consensus on which
alternative they should recommend.
For the sake of future conversations a straw vote was taken of the CCAC of
which alternative they favor and the results are presented below but not all
CCAC members present voted.
Straw Vote Vote
5 year lease 8 In favor
Straw Vote Vote
10 year lease 9 In Favor
5. Update and discussion regarding the next CCAC Community Forum
It was stated that the next CCAC forum would be Thursday, January 24th at
7:30 PM in the Cubberley Theater.
6. Future meetings
The next CCAC meeting is Wednesday, January 16th at 5:30 PM
7. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
DRAFT Action Notes
Meeting # 18
January 16, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Theater
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the January 9 meeting action notes
Approved as amended
4. Continued discussion and voting on initial Cubberley policy proposals
CCAC Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell introduced the agenda item and led the
continued discussion on this item
CCAC Members Present for Voting
Susan Bailey Jennifer Hetterly Jean Wilcox
Bern Beecham Claire Kirner Anne Wilson
Lessa Bouchard Mandy Lowell
Brian Carilli Diane Reklis
Mike Cobb Rachel Samoff
Tom Crystal Jim Schmidt
Penny Ellson Lanie Wheeler
Group decided that talking about a five‐year versus a ten‐year lease cannot
be a stand alone discussion and must be done in the context of the
parameters that would be associated with either lease alternative
CCAC School Needs Subcommittee Chair Bern Beecham suggested that the
group discuss what they want the lease to accomplish instead of just the
length of the term (since that seems to be causing the group trouble)
City of Palo Alto Community Services Division Manager Rob de Geus said it
would take at least one to two years for a community needs assessment to be
completed
The group then had a discussion of the benefits of a ten‐year lease and the
opportunities that would present
2
It was communicated that currently City Manager Jim Keene has the
authority to enter into up‐to a five‐year leases at Cubberley without City
Council approval
Straw Vote Vote
Recommend a 10‐year lease with a reopener clause at year 5 if
certain criteria are not met
6‐10‐0
Straw Vote Vote
Recommend a 5‐year lease with an additional 5‐year option that
is executed with mutual consent
10‐6‐0
Throughout the course of the conversation recommendations came up that
were generally agreed upon with no discussion necessary. Those items are
captured in the list below:
Items of Consensus with a 5‐Year or 10‐Year Lease
Criteria must be established that forces policymakers to make real progress on
Cubberley within the first five years
A MOU and site master must be a part of any lease extension
Consistent with Cubberley rental policies, income should be maximized
Funding for maintenance or redevelopment needs to be determined within the
first five years
Lessa Bouchard left
Penny Ellson left
A discussion then occurred around site governance and the fact that drafting
and entering into all of the referenced agreements (MOU, site master plan,
etc.) will require a policy making structure to be in place
Recommendation Vote
The City and PAUSD should further investigate alternative forms
of governance and determine a governance structure for joint
use of Cubberley
14‐0‐0
Rachel Samoff left
The group then had a discussion of whether or not moving forward with
joint‐use excludes the City from building a facility on its 8‐acres before the
PAUSD builds something
3
Then a number of comments were made that the City moving forward with
construction on its own 8‐acres is not what is intended by recommending
joint‐use and that the full 35‐acre site should be developed in unison
Jim Schmidt left
Recommendation Vote
Phased construction should occur consistent with the MOU and
site master plan to minimize disruption to existing users
11‐0‐1
5. Update and discussion regarding the next CCAC Community Forum
Information about the next CCAC forum on January 24th was provided
6. Future meeting
Next CCAC meeting is Wednesday, January 30th
7. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
DRAFT Action Notes
Meeting # 19
January 30, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Theater
5:30-7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the January 16 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Community Needs Subcommittee presentation on how to select future
Cubberley tenants when space becomes available
Presentation was made by Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane
Reklis
SEE ATTACHED POWER POINT
CCAC members had a conversation about the pros and cons of this
methodology
CCAC member Penny Ellson asked if the presented selection criteria would
be helpful to policymakers.
Multiple CCAC members asked if it would be possible to really quantify all
tenants in this way
CCAC members recognized that the process for selecting new tenants was
difficult but did not believe that the presented methodology would be that
easy to implement and had concerns about being able to accurately
quantify the applicants in the manner presented
2
5. Continued discussion and voting on initial Cubberley policy proposals
CCAC Members Present for Voting
Ken Allen Tom Crystal Diane Reklis
Susan Bailey Penny Ellson Jim Schmidt
Bern Beecham Sheri Furman Lanie Wheeler
Michael Bein Jennifer Hetterly Jean Wilcox
Lessa Bouchard Claire Kirner Anne Wilson
Brian Carilli Mandy Lowell
Mike Cobb John Markevitch
Susan Bailey left
Question # 1 Discussed: Should the CCAC recommend the inclusion of the
next five-years of deferred maintenance costs in a 2014 bond measure?
Group discussed pros and cons of going out for such funds and whether or
not it should be limited to the first five years
Based on the direction of the conversation by the group, Deputy City
Manager Steve Emslie proposed wording the following recommendation as
follows:
Recommendation Vote
The CCAC recommends the City Council include in a 2014 bond
measure the flexibility to include capital improvements
necessary to maintain building life for 10 years at Cubberley
18-0-0
Lessa Bouchard left
Question # 2 Discussed: Given the flattening and potential decline in UUT
revenues, should the new lease continue to include an automatic CPI inflator?
CCAC members decided not to vote on this
Question # 3 Discussed: In the new lease, should PAUSD contribute to the
cost of ongoing maintenance and routine repairs?
CCAC members decided not to vote on this
Question # 4 Discussed: There have been $18 M of capital improvements
which have been identified to extend the life of the buildings for 25 years
($10 M on PAUSD owned buildings; $8 M on City owned buildings). Funding
for these improvements has not been identified. Should the costs be shared
between the City and PAUSD?
By way of the vote on Question # 1 the CCAC decided there will not be a vote
on Question # 4
Question # 5 Discussed: What should the CCAC recommend occur in the
event that the City and PAUSD are not able to successfully accomplish the
task that will be outlined for them to complete in the first five years of a lease
extension?
CCAC members decided not to make a recommendation on this
3
CCAC members then had a discussion about a recommendation made on
December 19, 2012 that ended in a 10-3-5 vote and how by changing the
categorization of the vote they would be able to more accurately reflect the
tone of the conversation that night. From that conversation they came up
with the following recommendation:
Recommendation Vote
Change the recommendation made on December 19, 2012 that
reads “The CCAC should recommend a five year lease extension
that is automatically extended to ten years if certain milestones
are met” from a recommendation to a straw vote
17-0-0
It was also requested and agreed upon that the dates of any policy
recommendation votes should be added to any record of them
6. Discussion of the CCAC final report outline
Finance Subcommittee reported they are on their second to last draft
School Needs subcommittee reported they are almost done with their
report
Finance Subcommittee reported they are basically done with their report but
might need to clean it up slightly
Community Needs Subcommittee is down to the final revisions of their
report
7. Discussion of how the CCAC will present its final report and findings
Co-Chair Mike Cobb reported his plan for presenting the CCAC’s findings,
the main element of which is holding a joint, public meeting in early
March with the City Council and School Board at Cubberley
The CCAC was agreeable to this and staff will poll the policymakers for
that joint session
8. Future meetings
Next meeting is Wednesday, February 13, 2013 at 5:30 PM
9. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 20
February 13, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Room H‐1
5:30‐7:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the January 30 meeting action notes
Approved
4. Update and discussion on the February 7, 2013 CPAC meeting
Co‐Chair Mike Cobb conveyed the message that he felt he received from Mayor
Scharff that the CCAC’s recommendations don’t seem to be specific enough
School Needs Subcommittee Chair Bern Beecham brought up the concern that some
members of the CPAC expressed that the CCAC’s current recommendations seem to
be “kicking the can down the road”
Finance Subcommittee Chair Lanie Wheeler conveyed that the three City Council
members of the CPAC expressed some concern that the CCAC was not making a
recommendation of what the City should do with their eight acres on its own in the
event that joint‐use doesn’t work out
Co‐Chair Mandy Lowell conveyed that the CPAC might need clarification on the term
joint‐use and what is meant by that.
o Does the CCAC really mean integrated use or do they mean joint‐use?
Beecham also conveyed the message that some members of the CPAC want to use
citizen volunteers and not consultants to do the next round of work the CCAC is
recommending
o Cobb noted that because of this the CCAC needs to make the case for what
professionals bring to the table
5. Presentation and discussion of the Facilities Subcommittee and School Needs
Subcommittee draft final reports
2
Beecham started by going through the draft School Needs Subcommittee final report
Beecham noted his group did not try to dispute the projections of the PAUSD
demographer
Beecham noted the uncertainty surrounding ABAG and how it could impact both
school enrollment and the overall City population
Beecham reiterated the main drivers of enrollment increases are the economy and
housing growth along with the sustained quality of the PAUSD schools
o As long as those stay somewhat stable over time the projections are fine for
the most part
Beecham is happy to take input on how he can clarify any recommendations the
School Needs Subcommittee is making and why
Facilities Subcommittee Chair Jennifer Hetterly then went through the draft Facilities
Subcommittee final report
The CCAC went over again the issues that have arisen with joint‐use and the
implications they have related to future facilities and a joint‐use master plan
CCAC decided not to make changes to the report as drafted and keep the
recommendations general in nature as they currently are
CCAC member Brian Carilli reminded the CCAC that five years is a long time in a lot of
instances but not in long term, join‐use planning such as this
6. Presentation and discussion of what is meant by joint‐use
CCAC clarified that their vision is for true joint‐use of the buildings with PAUSD and
the rest of the community using the same buildings at different times
Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie reiterated the comments he had heard about
people being concerned with the general public using buildings with school students
so what joint‐use specifically means needs to be clarified
7. Discussion of next steps and the final report review process
Joint City Council/PAUSD forum where the CCAC will present their findings will be
scheduled for early to mid‐March
o The final report will be distributed one week in advance
8. Future meetings
Next meeting: Wednesday, February 20
9. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
Action Notes
Meeting # 21
February 20, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Cubberley Theater
5:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the February 13 meeting action notes
Approved as amended to clarify CCAC School Needs Subcommittee Chair
Bern Beecham’s statement on ABAG changes
4. Presentation and discussion of the Finance Subcommittee and Community
Needs Subcommittee draft final reports
CCAC Finance Subcommittee Chair Lanie Wheeler presented the draft
Finance Subcommittee final report
Wheeler gave an overview of their draft final report and the major
recommendations in it
Wheeler answered questions about their draft recommendation 4.3: “One
Time Re‐Development of Cubberley” and how that process would go
CCAC members clarified that a clear figure on what it will cost to construct
a joint‐use facility would be helpful at this time, and will be necessary in
the future, but currently one does not exists so only ranges of what those
costs might be should be presented
CCAC Finance Subcommittee member Susan Bailey and Wheeler
explained how a joint‐use facility could be bonded through a vote that
only requires the 55% vote threshold (versus the two‐thirds vote
threshold) if it is done through the PAUSD
CCAC Finance Subcommittee member Anne Wilson in response to CCAC
member concerns agreed to add line items to draft recommendation 4.3:
“One Time Re‐Development of Cubberley” to clarify the costs associated
with a Cubberley joint‐use rebuild
CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Chair Diane Reklis presented the
draft Community Needs Subcommittee final report
2
CCAC members had a discussion on the proposed community needs
assessment and how both the City and the PAUSD would be involved in that
CCAC members concluded that the City and PAUSD should work on the
community needs assessment cooperatively from the beginning
CCAC members also agreed that professionals were needed for the
community needs assessment and the site programing they are
recommending
o CCAC members agreed they are not qualified to do, or capable of
doing, these tasks themselves as the CPAC has suggested because of
the magnitude of the scope of work
Community Needs Subcommittee reminded the CCAC that the City and
PAUSD have worked together for a while at school sites by having City
childcare on elementary school sites
5. Discussion of next steps
CCAC final report is due to the printer on Friday, March 8
CCAC final report will be distributed on Wednesday, March 13
CCAC final report forum is likely to be Wednesday, March 20
6. Future meetings
Next meeting will be Thursday, February 28th instead of Wednesday,
February 27th because the State of the City speech is February 27th
o The meeting will start at 5:30 PM and will not have an end time to
ensure are necessary issues are resolved
7. Adjournment
1
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC)
DRAFT Action Notes
(Will stay draft as these are the action notes from the last meeting so they can’t be approved)
Meeting # 22
February 28, 2013
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
Cubberley Theater
5:30 PM
1. Welcome and call to order
2. Oral communications
None
3. Approval of the February 20 meeting action notes
4. Presentation and discussion of the draft CCAC Final Report Problems &
Solutions summary document
CCAC discussed a number of edits they wanted made to the CCAC Problems &
Solutions summary document
o CCAC decided to call it the Opportunities & Solutions document in the
final report instead of the CCAC Problems & Solutions summary
document
CCAC member Penny Ellson requested there be a history of Cubberley up
front that lays out a lot of the big picture issues and facts that are the basis
for the CCAC’s conclusions
City of Palo Alto Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie recommended an
expanded history based on what is currently described in the document
Ellson also requested a greater emphasis on site accessibility occur in the
document
CCAC School Needs Subcommittee Chair Bern Beecham suggested that who
owns which acres at Cubberley should be clarified in the document
CCAC member Brian Carilli reiterated “the owners are the public”
CCAC Facilities Subcommittee Chair Jennifer Hetterly raised the issue of
when the property will be taken back under School District control versus
when a new high school will open
2
Beecham stated he felt there was a bias in the document towards the City in
the tone of what was written and the editor should work to change that
o The group agreed a bias was not intended
CCAC agreed to strengthen the point that what is needed is the best solution
for the community as a whole not for just the City or the School District
CCAC continued talking through each page of the draft CCAC Final Report
Problems & Solutions summary document making changes as they went
Beecham stated that $7 M would be equally painful a loss for the School
District as it would be for the City
Prior to the end of the meeting Hetterly moved, seconded by Ellson, that the
City should not relinquish ownership of its 8 acres on the Cubberley site
CCAC Members Present for Voting
Jerry August Penny Ellson Rachel Samoff
Bern Beecham Sheri Furman Jim Schmidt
Lessa Bouchard Jennifer Hetterly Lanie Wheeler
Brian Carilli Claire Kirner Jean Wilcox
Mike Cobb Mandy Lowell Anne Wilson
Tom Crystal Diane Reklis
Recommendation Vote
The City should not relinquish ownership of its 8 acres 13-4-0
5. Discussion of next steps
CCAC decided they did not need to meet again
CCAC agreed that all edits could be incorporated by the report editor
CCAC Co-Chair Mike Cobb
6. Future meetings
None
7. Adjournment
Cubberley Master Plan
Cubberley Site Option Maps
Meeting No. 4, 7/11/2012
2
3
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Ce
n
t
e
r
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
vs
.
Ma
s
t
e
r
Pl
a
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
4
5
6
7
8
City of Palo Alto Financial Outlook
Presentation
Meeting No. 6, 8/8/2012
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Ad
v
i
s
o
r
y
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Au
g
u
s
t
8,
20
1
2
1
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Fo
u
r
‐Ye
a
r
Vi
e
w
FY
20
1
0
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
FY
20
1
1
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
FY
20
1
2
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
FY
20
1
3
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
To
t
a
l
Ga
p
$1
0
.
0
$
7
.
3
$
3
.
2
$
5
.
8
$2
6
.
3
On
e
‐Ti
m
e
Ad
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
$3
.
0
$
0
$
3
.
3
$
3
.
4
$9
.
7
St
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
Ad
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
$7
.
0
$
7
.
3
$
0
$
2
.
4
$1
6
.
7
2
3
FY
20
1
3
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Bu
d
g
e
t
Ga
p
(i
n
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Be
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
G
a
p
(
4
/
3
0
)
(
$
5
.
8
4
4
)
Re
v
e
n
u
e
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
4
.
4
7
4
Re
v
i
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
G
a
p
(
1
.
3
7
0
)
Ne
t
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
i
n
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
b
u
d
g
e
t
1
.
0
4
8
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
(
2
.
2
0
0
)
Le
s
s
P
u
b
l
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
n
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
1
.
5
0
0
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
(
$
1
.
0
2
2
)
Ad
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
6
3
2
Fi
n
a
l
B
u
d
g
e
t
G
a
p
*(
3
9
0
)
*C
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
a
o
n
e
-
t
i
m
e
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
r
a
w
4
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Im
p
a
c
t
s
Cl
o
s
e
d
St
a
t
i
o
n
7 (S
L
A
C
–9
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
)
Ad
d
e
d
6 Pa
r
a
m
e
d
i
c
& 4 Op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
6 Fi
r
e
f
i
g
h
t
e
r
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
Fr
o
z
e
7 Po
l
i
c
e
Of
f
i
c
e
r
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
in
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
, Pu
b
l
i
c
Wo
r
k
s
an
d
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Fr
o
z
e
5 Li
b
r
a
r
y
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
so
m
e
mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
fe
e
s
Re
d
u
c
e
d
st
a
f
f
in
An
i
m
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
(e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
)
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Re
v
e
n
u
e
by
Ty
p
e
$1
5
3
.
0
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
5
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Ma
j
o
r
Re
v
e
n
u
e
s
6
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
by
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
$1
5
2
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
7
8
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Ex
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
9
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
Bu
d
g
e
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
(i
n
mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
T
o
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
of
T
o
t
a
l
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
$
1
5
3
.
0
$
2
3
.
9
$
1
7
6
.
9
3
7
.
1
%
En
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
F
u
n
d
s
$
2
6
4
.
7
$
3
5
.
8
$
3
0
0
.
5
6
2
.
9
%
To
t
a
l
$
4
1
7
.
7
$
5
9
.
7
$
4
7
7
.
4
1
0
0
%
*
E
x
c
l
u
d
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
F
u
n
d
C
I
P
s
t
o
t
a
l
i
n
g
$
3
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
10
Y
e
a
r
T
r
e
n
d
-
C
i
t
y
w
i
d
e
P
e
n
s
i
o
n
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
Pa
i
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
(
$
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
,
F
Y
2
0
1
2
F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
e
d
,
F
Y
2
0
1
3
A
d
o
p
t
e
d
)
11
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
by
Fu
n
d
$6
2
.
9
0
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
12
13
En
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
F
u
n
d
s
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
Av
e
r
a
g
e
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
B
i
l
l
•
Ga
s
r
a
t
e
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
–
1
0
%
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
•
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
3
2
.
7
%
(
a
s
o
f
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
2
)
•
Wa
t
e
r
r
a
t
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
–
1
5
%
•
Re
f
u
s
e
r
a
t
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
–
v
a
r
i
e
s
,
a
b
o
v
e
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
s
3
2
-
g
a
l
c
a
n
•
Wa
s
t
e
w
a
t
e
r
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
–
5
%
•
St
o
r
m
D
r
a
i
n
&
F
i
b
e
r
O
p
t
i
c
s
r
a
t
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
2
.
9
%
(
C
P
I
)
14
En
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
F
u
n
d
H
i
g
h
l
i
g
h
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
–
Dr
a
f
t
re
p
o
r
t
re
c
e
i
v
e
d
en
d
of
Ju
l
y
–
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
ad
d
e
d
3 FT
E
an
d
re
c
l
a
s
s
e
d
2 FT
E
La
n
d
f
i
l
l
Cl
o
s
u
r
e
(R
e
f
u
s
e
Fu
n
d
)
–
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
9 FT
E
–
$8
.
9
M
ex
p
e
n
s
e
de
c
r
e
a
s
e
wh
i
c
h
in
c
l
u
d
e
s
:
•
$1
.
6
M
l
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
r
e
n
t
•
$6
.
1
M
l
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
C
I
P
•
$0
.
4
M
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
/
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
•
$0
.
8
M
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
&
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
15
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
Ch
a
n
g
e
s
FY
2
0
1
2
A
d
o
p
t
e
d
F
T
E
1
,
0
1
6
.
6
0
Mi
d
y
e
a
r
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
8
.
2
5
FY
2
0
1
2
A
d
j
u
s
t
e
d
F
T
E
’
s
1
,
0
2
4
.
8
5
FY
2
0
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
(
1
0
.
5
)
FY
2
0
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
1
,
0
1
4
.
3
5
*
*I
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
1
4
F
r
o
z
e
n
F
T
E
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
F
T
E
i
n
F
Y
2
0
1
1
w
a
s
1
,
0
7
8
.
5
0
F
T
E
16
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Ad
v
i
s
o
r
y
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Au
g
u
s
t
8,
20
1
2
PAUSD Financial Outlook Presentation
Meeting No. 6, 8/8/2012
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
U
n
i
f
i
e
d
S
c
h
o
o
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
1
20
1
2
-
1
3
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
Ju
n
e
1
2
,
2
0
1
2
2
BU
D
G
E
T
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
/
F
I
N
A
N
C
I
A
L
RE
P
O
R
T
I
N
G
/
C
A
L
E
N
D
A
R
FO
R
T
H
E
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
&
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
B
U
D
G
E
T
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
2
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
P
A
U
S
D
B
u
d
g
e
t
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
2
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
S
i
g
n
s
t
h
e
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
S
t
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
Au
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
2
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
C
o
u
n
t
y
o
f
S
a
n
t
a
C
l
a
r
a
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
F
i
r
s
t
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
P
A
U
S
D
B
u
d
g
e
t
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
C
o
u
n
t
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
-
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
er
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
F
i
r
s
t
I
n
t
e
r
i
m
P
A
U
S
D
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
P
A
U
S
D
E
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
3
R
e
l
e
a
s
e
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
S
t
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
3
C
o
u
n
t
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
-
T
r
e
a
s
u
r
er
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
Ma
r
c
h
2
0
1
3
S
e
c
o
n
d
I
n
t
e
r
i
m
P
A
U
S
D
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
Ma
y
2
0
1
3
S
t
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
U
p
d
a
t
e
Ma
y
2
0
1
3
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
M
a
y
R
e
v
i
s
e
&
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
3
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
P
A
U
S
D
B
u
d
g
e
t
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
3
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
S
i
g
n
s
S
t
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
3
Ag
e
n
d
a
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
A
c
t
u
a
l
s
f
o
r
2
0
1
1
-
1
2
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
f
o
r
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
Re
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
Tr
e
n
d
s
Bu
d
g
e
t
b
a
l
a
n
c
i
n
g
Mu
l
t
i
y
e
a
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Un
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
i
e
s
Go
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
t
a
x
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
Do
w
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
s
k
/
u
p
s
i
d
e
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
We
i
g
h
t
e
d
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
4
20
1
1
-
1
2
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
A
c
t
u
a
l
s
Ba
s
i
s
f
o
r
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
B
u
d
g
e
t
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
F
u
n
d
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
f
u
t
u
r
e
b
u
d
g
e
t
cu
t
s
o
f
$
1
2
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
,
a
n
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
o
f
$
3
5
0
k
s
i
n
c
e
s
e
c
o
n
d
in
t
e
r
i
m
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
u
e
t
o
:
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
,
l
o
t
t
e
r
y
,
a
n
d
K
-
3
C
S
R
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
De
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
s
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
b
u
d
g
e
t
s
,
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
N
P
S
,
a
n
d
de
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
a
l
b
u
d
g
e
t
s
On
e
-
t
i
m
e
s
a
v
i
n
g
s
o
f
$
1
.
3
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
h
e
a
l
t
h
c
o
s
t
s
,
de
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
n
d
i
n
g
f
u
n
d
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
5
20
1
2
-
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
6
20
1
2
-
1
3
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Bu
d
g
e
t
BE
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
F
U
N
D
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
Re
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
/
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
/
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
Av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
F
u
t
u
r
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
C
u
t
s
$3
1
,
1
0
5
,
9
8
8
$1
8
,
3
8
7
,
1
8
0
$1
2
,
7
1
8
,
8
0
8
IN
C
O
M
E
$1
5
7
,
6
9
9
,
7
1
8
EX
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
$
1
6
3
,
2
4
1
,
2
1
9
Ex
c
e
s
s
o
f
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
o
v
e
r
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
(
U
n
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
)
(
$
5
,
5
4
1
,
5
0
4
)
EN
D
I
N
G
F
U
N
D
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
Re
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
/
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
/
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
Av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
F
u
t
u
r
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
C
u
t
s
$2
5
,
5
6
4
,
4
8
4
$1
8
,
4
1
3
,
8
1
4
$7
,
1
5
0
,
6
7
0
So
u
r
c
e
o
f
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
s
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
7
20
1
2
-
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
2.
0
%
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
g
r
o
w
t
h
(
$
2
,
2
2
3
,
0
0
0
)
Bu
d
g
e
t
i
s
b
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
M
a
y
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
$5
.
3
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
d
u
e
t
o
s
t
a
t
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
e
d
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
“
f
a
i
r
s
h
a
r
e
”
c
u
t
s
(
t
o
t
a
l
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
-
$
1
2
.
6
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
)
Pa
r
c
e
l
t
a
x
-
$
1
1
,
9
0
0
,
0
0
0
PI
E
i
n
c
o
m
e
-
$
4
,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
Le
a
s
e
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
–
3
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
No
s
t
a
t
e
/
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
c
a
r
r
y
o
v
e
r
d
o
l
l
a
r
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
,
o
n
l
y
1
2
-
1
3
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
8
Re
v
e
n
u
e
T
r
e
n
d
s
–
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
9
‐
2,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
4,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
6,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
8,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
10
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
12
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
14
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
16
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
18
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
20
0
8
‐09
2
0
0
9
‐10
2
0
1
0
‐11
2
0
1
1
‐12
2
0
1
2
‐13
St
a
t
e
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Pa
r
c
e
l
Ta
x
Le
a
s
e
s
‐
Su
r
p
l
u
s
Si
t
e
s
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
PI
E
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Re
v
e
n
u
e
T
r
e
n
d
s
–
P
e
r
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
10
T
o
t
a
l
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
*
20
0
8
‐09
2
0
0
9
‐10
2
0
1
0
‐11
2
0
1
1
‐
12
2
0
1
2
‐13
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Ta
x
1
0
6
,
1
9
4
,
1
3
4
10
9
,
2
8
9
,
6
9
5
11
0
,
1
2
6
,
7
6
7
11
1
,
2
0
7
,
0
0
0
11
3
,
3
8
3
,
0
0
0
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Ta
x
‐
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
E
d
2
,
7
8
8
,
5
3
7
2,
9
8
4
,
6
6
3
2,
8
9
1
,
6
4
1
2,
7
5
6
,
3
5
6
2,
4
8
3
,
8
3
8
Pa
r
c
e
l
Ta
x
9
,
3
4
6
,
2
0
4
9,
4
5
2
,
0
7
3
11
,
3
8
3
,
6
1
7
11
,
6
8
3
,
5
1
2
11
,
6
8
3
,
9
3
3
St
a
t
e
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
1
6
,
8
7
7
,
1
6
8
12
,
8
0
6
,
1
0
8
13
,
8
5
5
,
5
2
8
10
,
0
9
5
,
5
6
7
5,
3
3
3
,
2
6
0
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
5
,
2
5
8
,
1
9
3
5,
2
6
7
,
7
9
6
5,
2
3
6
,
7
4
1
5,
5
4
5
,
9
9
5
3,
3
9
0
,
9
8
1
Le
a
s
e
s
‐
Su
r
p
l
u
s
Si
t
e
s
8
,
3
9
5
,
3
5
9
8,
5
3
4
,
4
6
0
8,
7
2
7
,
2
3
2
8,
8
4
2
,
4
4
2
9,
1
7
5
,
2
4
1
To
t
a
l
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
14
8
,
8
5
9
,
5
9
5
14
8
,
3
3
4
,
7
9
5
15
2
,
2
2
1
,
5
2
6
15
0
,
1
3
0
,
8
7
2
14
5
,
4
5
0
,
2
5
3
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
20
0
8
‐09
(
3
,
4
0
9
,
3
4
2
)
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
20
0
8
‐09
‐2%
* Ex
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
lo
c
a
l
so
u
r
c
e
s
E
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
11
t
h
Da
y
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
1
1
,
4
3
1
11
,
6
8
0
12
,
0
2
4
12
,
2
8
6
12
,
4
6
6
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
20
0
8
‐09
1
,
0
3
5
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
20
0
8
‐09
9
%
D
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
20
0
8
‐09
(
1
,
3
5
5
)
$
%
D
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
fr
o
m
2
0
0
8
‐09
‐10
%
*N
o
t
e
s
:
To
t
a
l
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Fu
n
d
Re
v
e
n
u
e
do
e
s
no
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
do
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
fr
o
m
PI
E
,
PT
A
or
an
y
ot
h
e
r
do
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
lo
c
a
l
re
v
e
n
u
e
to
th
e
sc
h
o
o
l
s
.
Us
e
o
f
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
s
2
0
1
2
-
1
3
11
20
1
2
-
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
-
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Pe
r
s
o
n
n
e
l
B
u
d
g
e
t
s
St
e
p
a
n
d
C
o
l
u
m
n
c
o
s
t
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
10
g
r
o
w
t
h
t
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
(
8
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
c
l
a
s
s
r
o
o
m
t
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
an
d
2
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
t
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
)
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
R
e
t
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
S
y
s
t
e
m
(
P
E
R
S
)
r
a
t
e
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
f
r
o
m
1
0
.
9
2
3
%
t
o
1
1
.
4
1
7
%
(
$
1
2
5
,
0
0
0
)
Un
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
(
U
I
)
r
a
t
e
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
f
r
o
m
1.
6
1
%
t
o
1
.
1
0
%
(
$
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
He
a
l
t
h
a
n
d
W
e
l
f
a
r
e
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
d
u
e
t
o
l
o
s
s
o
f
o
n
e
-
t
i
m
e
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
J
o
b
s
F
u
n
d
s
(
$
1
.
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
)
,
a
l
t
h
o
u
g
h
c
a
r
r
y
o
v
e
r
fu
n
d
s
s
t
i
l
l
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
12
20
1
2
-
1
3
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
-
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
Ot
h
e
r
n
o
n
p
e
r
s
o
n
n
e
l
b
u
d
g
e
t
s
:
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
3%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
n
d
r
e
f
u
s
e
20
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
w
a
t
e
r
20
%
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
g
a
s
10
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
n
o
n
-
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
u
i
t
i
o
n
an
d
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
(
$
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
Bu
d
g
e
t
f
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
co
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
r
e
m
a
i
n
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
l
y
f
l
a
t
13
Bu
d
g
e
t
B
a
l
a
n
c
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
$8
.
1
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
b
u
d
g
e
t
d
e
f
i
c
i
t
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
,
i
f
t
h
e
Go
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
t
a
x
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
p
a
s
s
(
$
5
.
3
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
cu
t
t
o
P
A
U
S
D
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
b
u
d
g
e
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
:
$2
.
6
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
i
n
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
b
u
d
g
e
t
re
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
$5
.
5
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
u
s
e
o
f
f
u
n
d
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
No
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
s
i
t
e
s
14
15
10
.
2
0
%
10
.
6
9
%
12
.
7
7
%
5.
6
2
%
0.
3
6
%
8.
1
9
%
6.
9
6
%
9.
9
9
%
7.
1
4
%
11
.
1
5
%
2.
9
2
%
0.
9
4
%
1.
1
6
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
0.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
4.
0
0
%
6.
0
0
%
8.
0
0
%
10
.
0
0
%
12
.
0
0
%
14
.
0
0
%
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13*
2013-14*
2014-15*
2015-16*
2016-17*
2017-18*
Ch
a
n
g
e
I
n
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
Am
o
u
n
t
a
n
d
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
*E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
$8
3
7
,
0
7
2
$1
,
0
3
3
,
2
3
3
$3
,
0
9
5
,
5
6
1
$2
,
2
2
3
,
2
0
0
$2
,
4
0
6
,
4
6
3
$2
,
4
5
4
,
5
9
2
$4
,
8
9
7
,
6
0
9
$5
,
6
5
7
,
4
2
2
$7
,
4
8
1
,
6
4
3
$3
,
7
1
4
,
3
5
5
$2
4
8
,
0
1
2
$5
,
7
3
5
,
5
6
2
$5
,
2
6
9
,
3
4
9
$8
,
0
9
1
,
2
2
5
$6
,
3
6
2
,
2
9
8
$1
0
,
6
4
8
,
3
9
6
$2
,
2
6
7
,
6
6
4
$2
,
3
1
3
,
0
1
7
$2
,
3
5
9
,
2
7
8
16
3.
1
6
%
0.
0
5
%
-0
.
7
9
%
2.
0
0
%
1.
8
7
%
1.
9
6
%
1.
5
4
%
2.
1
6
%
2.
1
5
%
2.
3
2
%
2.
1
1
%
2.
9
5
%
2.
1
8
%
1.
4
7
%
2.
2
9
%
2.
0
9
%
2.
4
8
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
-1
.
0
0
%
-0
.
5
0
%
0.
0
0
%
0.
5
0
%
1.
0
0
%
1.
5
0
%
2.
0
0
%
2.
5
0
%
3.
0
0
%
3.
5
0
%
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13*
2013-14*
2014-15*
2015-16*
2016-17*
2017-18*
Ch
a
n
g
e
I
n
E
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
#
o
f
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
27
2
30
7
5
20
3
-7
9
19
9
19
0
23
1
23
5
25
9
24
1
34
4
26
2
18
0
16
2
26
6
28
5
32
3
27
2
*E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
17
6.
8
2
%
10
.
6
3
%
13
.
6
7
%
3.
5
5
%
-1
.
4
9
%
6.
1
1
%
5.
3
4
%
7.
6
6
%
4.
8
9
%
8.
6
3
%
0.
7
7
%
-2
.
1
2
%
-1
.
2
1
%
0.
5
3
%
-0
.
2
8
%
-0
.
0
8
%
-0
.
4
7
%
-0
.
0
4
%
0.
0
0
%
-4
.
0
0
%
-2
.
0
0
%
0.
0
0
%
2.
0
0
%
4.
0
0
%
6.
0
0
%
8.
0
0
%
10
.
0
0
%
12
.
0
0
%
14
.
0
0
%
16
.
0
0
%
Ch
a
n
g
e
I
n
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
T
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
P
e
r
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
Am
o
u
n
t
a
n
d
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
$3
3
7
$5
6
1
-$
1
0
2
$2
3
5
$7
9
8
$3
8
3
$4
1
3
$5
7
9
$3
9
8
$7
2
$7
4
2
-$
1
9
8
$4
8
-$
1
1
1
-$
8
-$
4
3
-$
3
*E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
$0
As
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
t
o
2
0
1
7
-
1
8
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
We
a
k
g
r
o
w
t
h
o
u
t
l
o
o
k
f
o
r
t
h
e
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
s
t
a
t
e
e
c
o
n
o
m
y
On
g
o
i
n
g
$
1
2
.
6
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
t
a
t
e
“
f
a
i
r
s
h
a
r
e
”
c
u
t
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
g
r
o
w
t
h
a
t
2
%
f
o
r
a
l
l
f
i
v
e
y
e
a
r
s
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
r
t
e
e
n
t
h
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
s
i
t
e
a
n
d
l
o
s
s
o
f
r
e
n
t
a
l
re
v
e
n
u
e
f
o
r
G
a
r
l
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
b
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
i
n
2
0
1
4
-
1
5
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
f
u
n
d
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
f
u
t
u
r
e
b
u
d
g
e
t
cu
t
s
o
f
$
1
2
.
7
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
w
i
l
l
b
e
f
u
l
l
y
e
x
h
a
u
s
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
e
n
d
o
f
20
1
4
-
1
5
18
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
&
B
a
s
i
c
A
i
d
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
19
Re
s
e
r
v
e
f
o
r
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
Un
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
i
e
s
Fu
n
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
Av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
Fu
t
u
r
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
C
u
t
s
Ba
s
i
c
A
i
d
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
TO
T
A
L
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
EN
D
I
N
G
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
TO
T
A
L
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
FU
N
D
EX
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
20
1
1
-
1
2
$4
.
8
3
.
0
%
$1
2
.
7
7
.
8
%
$9
.
5
5
.
8
%
20
1
2
-
1
3
$4
.
9
3
.
0
%
$7
.
2
4
.
4
%
$9
.
5
5
.
8
%
20
1
3
-
1
4
$4
.
9
3
.
0
%
$3
.
4
2
.
1
%
$9
.
5
5
.
8
%
20
1
4
-
1
5
$5
.
0
3
.
0
%
$0
.
0
0
.
0
%
$9
.
5
5
.
7
%
20
1
5
-
1
6
$5
.
0
3
.
0
%
$0
.
0
0
.
0
%
$9
.
5
5
.
8
%
$2
7
.
0
1
6
.
6
%
$
2
1
.
6
1
3
.
2
%
$
1
7
.
8
1
0
.
9
%
$
1
4
.
5
8
.
7
%
$
1
4
.
5
8
.
8
%
$1
6
2
.
4
$
1
6
3
.
2
$
1
6
4
.
4
$
1
6
6
.
2
$
1
6
5
.
9
*
A
l
l
a
m
o
u
n
t
s
i
n
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
Im
p
a
c
t
o
f
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
T
a
x
I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
If
ta
x
in
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
fa
i
l
s
20
1
2
-
1
3
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
2
0
1
4
-
1
5
2
0
1
5
-
1
6
2
0
1
6
-
1
7
2
0
1
7
-
1
8
Def
i
c
i
t
8
,
1
3
6
,
5
0
4
7
,
5
6
5
,
3
6
9
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
8
0
5
,
2
4
9
,
4
9
5
7
8
3
,
5
7
5
6
4
9
,
8
7
1
Bud
g
e
t
S
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
2
,
5
9
5
,
0
0
0
3
,
8
2
5
,
0
0
0
3
,
8
1
1
,
1
6
4
5
,
2
4
1
,
8
5
0
8
7
6
,
5
3
0
7
4
7
,
8
9
0
Use
F
u
n
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
5
,
5
6
8
,
1
3
8
3
,
7
7
3
,
6
3
6
3
,
3
7
7
,
0
3
4
-
-
-
En
d
i
n
g
F
u
n
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
C
u
t
s
7
,
1
5
0
,
6
7
0
3
,
3
7
7
,
0
3
4
-
-
-
-
If
ta
x
in
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
pa
s
s
e
s
20
1
2
-
1
3
2
0
1
3
-
1
4
2
0
1
4
-
1
5
2
0
1
5
-
1
6
2
0
1
6
-
1
7
2
0
1
7
-
1
8
Def
i
c
i
t
2
,
8
4
4
,
5
0
4
2
,
2
7
3
,
3
6
9
5
,
6
7
5
,
3
4
2
7
,
6
0
3
,
2
2
2
4
,
9
0
6
,
4
0
4
7
6
9
,
9
5
5
Bud
g
e
t
S
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
2
,
5
9
5
,
0
0
0
-
-
3
,
4
7
2
,
7
4
9
4
,
8
7
9
,
2
7
6
8
6
4
,
4
7
7
Use
F
u
n
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
2
7
6
,
1
3
8
2
,
4
2
1
,
3
8
6
5
,
8
4
5
,
3
8
3
4
,
1
7
5
,
9
0
1
-
-
En
d
i
n
g
F
u
n
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
C
u
t
s
1
2
,
4
4
2
,
6
7
0
1
0
,
0
2
1
,
2
8
4
4
,
1
7
5
,
9
0
1
-
-
-
Bu
d
g
e
t
Sce
n
a
r
i
o
s
to
th
e
Gov
e
r
n
o
r
'
s
Pro
p
o
s
a
l
Do
w
n
s
i
d
e
R
i
s
k
Go
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
t
a
x
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
f
a
i
l
s
We
i
g
h
t
e
d
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
Sl
o
w
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
g
r
o
w
t
h
Hi
g
h
e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
g
r
o
w
t
h
21
Up
s
i
d
e
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
Go
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
t
a
x
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
p
a
s
s
e
s
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
g
r
o
w
t
h
a
b
o
v
e
2
%
Lo
w
e
r
t
h
a
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
g
r
o
w
t
h
22
We
i
g
h
t
e
d
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
Go
v
e
r
n
o
r
h
a
s
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
i
n
t
h
e
M
a
y
R
e
v
i
s
e
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
a
l
i
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
a
n
y
l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
o
r
s
o
p
p
o
s
e
pr
o
p
o
s
a
l
Ma
n
y
w
i
n
n
e
r
s
a
n
d
l
o
s
e
r
s
Re
l
i
e
s
o
n
u
n
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
g
r
o
w
t
h
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
f
u
n
d
e
d
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
w
o
u
l
d
l
o
s
e
a
l
l
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
c
a
l
fu
n
d
i
n
g
23
City of Palo Alto Capital Budget
Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
1
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Au
g
u
s
t
22
,
20
1
2
2
IB
R
C
Catc
h
-
u
p
$4
1
.
5
3
Ke
e
p
-
u
p
$2
.
2
IB
R
C
N
e
w
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$2
1
0
.
7
f
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
IB
R
C
Ne
w
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
1
‐
Pu
b
l
i
c
Sa
f
e
t
y
‐
Fi
r
e
St
a
t
i
o
n
3&
4
‐
MS
C
‐
An
i
m
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
‐
Ot
h
e
r
2
1
IB
R
C
l
i
s
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
n
o
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
t
i
m
e
fr
a
m
e
f
o
r
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
;
I
B
R
C
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
ex
c
l
u
d
e
d
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
2
Ci
v
i
c
C
e
n
t
e
r
,
L
A
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
t
,
B
y
x
b
e
e
P
h
a
s
e
I
I
,
1
0
1
Bi
k
e
/
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
B
r
i
d
g
e
IB
R
C
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
IB
R
C
Catc
h
-
u
p
$4
1
.
5
3
Ke
e
p
-
u
p
$2
.
2
IB
R
C
N
e
w
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$2
1
0
.
7
f
Co
m
p
o
s
t
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Po
s
t
Of
f
i
c
e
Ai
r
p
o
r
t
RW
Q
C
P
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Pe
d
/
Bi
k
e
P
l
a
n
Ci
t
y
+
Ne
w
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
IB
R
C
Ne
w
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
1
‐
Pu
b
l
i
c
Sa
f
e
t
y
‐
Fi
r
e
St
a
t
i
o
n
3&
4
‐
MS
C
‐
An
i
m
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
‐
Ot
h
e
r
2
1
IB
R
C
l
i
s
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
n
o
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
t
i
m
e
f
r
a
m
e
f
o
r
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
;
I
B
R
C
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
t
e
nt
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
ex
c
l
u
d
e
d
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
2
Ci
v
i
c
C
e
n
t
e
r
,
L
A
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
t
,
B
yx
b
e
e
P
h
a
s
e
I
I
,
1
0
1
B
i
k
e
/
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
B
r
i
d
g
e
3
$4
.
2
M
a
n
n
u
a
l
c
a
t
c
h
-
u
p
o
v
e
r
1
0
y
e
a
r
s
6
7
8
Ac
r
e
s
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
Sh
o
p
p
i
n
g
Ce
n
t
e
r
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
Te
r
r
a
c
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Gr
e
e
n
M
e
a
d
o
w
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
8
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Ne
e
d
s
(T
h
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
of
$)
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
C
I
P
T
o
t
a
l
CI
P
FY
2
0
1
2
C
a
t
c
h
‐Up
K
e
e
p
Up
Ow
n
e
d
$
3
8
1
$
3
,
8
7
1
$
4,
4
8
0
$
8,
3
5
1
Le
a
s
e
d
$
3
6
1
$
3
,
0
9
6
$
7,
3
8
0
$
1
0
,
4
7
6
To
t
a
l
$
7
4
2
$
6
,
9
6
7
$
1
1
,
8
6
0
$
1
8
,
8
2
7
9
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
St
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
35
To
t
a
l
Ac
r
e
s
‐
27
Ac
r
e
s
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
8
Ac
r
e
s
Ci
t
y
17
5
,
54
0
sq
.
f
t
.
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
‐
94
,
4
0
2
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
76
,
1
3
8
Ci
t
y
75
0
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Sp
a
c
e
s
‐
62
0
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
‐
13
0
C
i
t
y
10
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Au
g
u
s
t
22
,
20
1
2
PAUSD Interests in Cubberley Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
8/22/2012
1
Cubberley Update
Kevin Skelly, Ph.D.
Superintendent
August 21, 2012
Palo Alto Unified School District
PAUSD Interests
1. Continuation of the revenue from the Lease and
Covenant. Loss of this ongoing, almost $7 million
would require major structural cuts to the PAUSD
educational program.
2. Preservation of the option to reopen Cubberley
sometime in the future including the possibility of
multiple comprehensive schools / for maximal
usage for educational purposes as a third
comprehensive high school to meet
enrollment projections.
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
8/22/2012
2
Board Information Needed from CPAC & CCAC
Clarifying current and desired uses for Cubberley
including possible combined use opportunities.
This would include the period under
consideration for renewal (the five years from
2014 to 2019) and more long term.
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
Identifying criteria to prioritize present and
future community uses and examine Cubberley
capacity.
**While this is more an issue at the City level since they currently
have responsibility for the site, any scenario that places PAUSD
educational functions on the campus will either add to the
programs on the campus or reduce the non‐PAUSD space
available to the community.
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
Board Information Needed from CPAC & CCAC
8/22/2012
3
Consider complementary infrastructure
maintenance needs of the site and alternative
ways to pay for them. While there have been
some studies of these needs done in the past,
having the CCAC and CPAC’s thinking in these
areas would be helpful for the Board.
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
Board Information Needed from CPAC & CCAC
Considering some post‐2014 Cubberley lease
alternatives that would give some certainty to
Cubberley users and the community while
meeting the interests of the District and the
City of Palo Alto.
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
Board Information Needed from CPAC & CCAC
8/22/2012
4
Additional Request to the Board –
Regarding a Fourth Middle School Site
Staff would like to explore the possibility of an
alternative site for a middle school and utilize
some consulting services to help in this regard.
While land for a middle school would be difficult
to find, staff believes that a strong effort to find a
suitable alternative space for a middle school is
warranted at this time.
**BOARD APPROVED THIS REQUEST
August 21, 2012 Palo Alto Unified School District
PAUSD Capital Budget Presentation
Meeting No. 7, 8/22/2012
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Bu
d
g
e
t
s
20
1
2
‐20
1
3
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
Un
i
f
i
e
d
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Bu
d
g
e
t
s
Fu
n
d
B
e
g
.
Ba
l
.
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
•
De
f
e
r
r
e
d
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
$1
.
4
M
$
0
.
4
M
•
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Fu
n
d
$
1
.
6
M
$
0
.
1
M
•
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
Fu
n
d
$
0
.
1
M$
‐‐
‐
M
•
Pl
a
n
n
e
d
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
$2
.
6
M$
‐‐
‐
M
•
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Fu
n
d
$
2
.
9
M
$
0
.
7
M
•
St
r
o
n
g
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
Bo
n
d
$3
8
6
.
0
M$
‐‐
‐
M
CCAC Problem Statement Matrix
CCAC Forum No. 1, 11/8/2012
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
A
D
V
I
S
O
R
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
—
P
R
O
B
L
E
M
S
T
A
T
E
M
E
N
T
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
s
n
Ne
e
d
to
wo
r
k
in
a wi
l
l
i
n
g
pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
to
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
th
e
be
s
t
us
e
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
’
s
35
a
c
r
e
s
to
se
r
v
e
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
.
n
Ho
w
sh
o
u
l
d
Ci
t
y
’
s
ac
r
e
s
be
us
e
d
?
A 5
y
e
a
r
le
a
s
e
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
mu
s
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
pl
a
n
s
f
o
r
sh
o
r
t
/
m
e
d
i
u
m
te
r
m
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
a co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
to
pl
a
n
lo
n
g
e
r
te
r
m
.
n
Wh
i
c
h
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
ho
u
s
e
d
at
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
sh
o
u
l
d
be
re
t
a
i
n
e
d
?
Wh
i
c
h
s
h
o
u
l
d
re
m
a
i
n
th
e
r
e
an
d
wh
i
c
h
wi
l
l
ne
e
d
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
e
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
?
n
Th
e
r
e
is
a sig
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
gr
o
w
i
n
g
li
s
t
of
d
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
ne
e
d
s
.
n
Ho
w
ca
n
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
of
ne
w
le
a
s
e
/
c
o
v
-
e
n
a
n
t
te
r
m
s
mit
i
g
a
t
e
co
s
t
s
to
PA
an
d
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
s
to
cu
r
r
e
n
t
a
n
d
me
d
i
u
m
,
te
r
m
up
k
e
e
p
an
d
fu
t
u
r
e
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
?
n
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
jo
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
/
S
c
h
o
o
l
us
e
an
d
ho
w
ca
n
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
/
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
be
t
w
e
e
n
PA
an
d
PA
U
S
D
b
e
fo
s
t
e
r
e
d
in
th
e
sh
o
r
t
te
r
m
to
se
c
u
r
e
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
lo
n
g
te
r
m
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
/
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
?
n
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
im
p
a
c
t
of
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
fo
r
sc
h
o
o
l
us
e
s
?
n
Ne
e
d
to
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
th
e
re
v
e
n
u
e
st
r
e
a
m
f
r
o
m
th
e
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
le
a
s
e
by
co
n
t
i
n
u
i
n
g
t
h
e
le
a
s
e
fo
r
5 ye
a
r
s
.
n
Ne
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
a si
t
e
fo
r
a ne
w
m
i
d
d
l
e
sc
h
o
o
l
..
.
if
on
e
is
no
t
to
be
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
,
th
e
le
a
s
e
co
u
l
d
b
e
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
fo
r
10
ye
a
r
s
.
n
S
h
o
u
l
d
th
e
le
a
s
e
be
re
n
e
w
e
d
,
an
d
if
i
f
ye
s
on
wh
a
t
te
r
m
s
?
n
C
i
t
y
an
d
Sc
h
o
o
l
fi
n
a
n
c
e
s
ha
v
e
ch
a
n
g
e
d
s
i
n
c
e
or
i
g
i
n
a
l
le
a
s
e
/
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
.
n
N
e
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
sh
a
r
e
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
co
s
t
s
.
n
N
e
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
co
s
t
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
fr
o
m
re
n
t
a
l
s
.
Sh
o
u
l
d
re
n
t
a
l
r
a
t
e
s
be
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
?
n
H
o
w
ca
n
/
s
h
o
u
l
d
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
re
n
t
a
l
sp
a
c
e
b
e
re
p
l
a
c
e
d
?
n
Th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
va
l
u
e
s
th
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
pr
o
-
v
i
d
e
d
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
Th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
re
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
s
th
a
t
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
wi
l
l
li
k
e
l
y
no
t
be
re
a
d
y
to
pla
n
a
s
c
h
o
o
l
at
th
i
s
po
i
n
t
,
bu
t
th
i
s
wi
l
l
no
t
s
t
o
p
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
fo
r
tr
a
f
f
i
c
an
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
an
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
at
le
a
s
t
so
m
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
to
me
e
t
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
ne
e
d
s
.
n
A
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
w
o
u
l
d
be
ne
e
d
e
d
to
ex
t
e
n
d
th
e
lif
e
of
t
h
e
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
ar
e
an
in
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
us
e
of
t
h
e
si
t
e
.
n
U
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
i
e
s
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
PA
U
S
D
f
u
t
u
r
e
us
e
cr
e
a
t
e
a ba
r
r
i
e
r
to
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
in
ne
w
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
.
n
T
o
wh
a
t
de
g
r
e
e
ca
n
th
e
sit
e
be
us
e
d
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
to
me
e
t
bo
t
h
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
sc
h
o
o
l
ne
e
d
s
du
r
i
n
g
th
i
s
pe
r
i
o
d
?
n
If
th
e
si
t
e
is
no
t
ne
e
d
e
d
fo
r
a mi
d
d
l
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
du
r
i
n
g
th
i
s
pe
r
i
o
d
,
wh
a
t
le
a
s
e
ar
-
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
wo
u
l
d
be
mu
t
u
a
l
l
y
be
n
f
i
c
i
a
l
an
d
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
?
n
$
1
8
M
in
ca
p
i
t
a
l
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ne
e
d
e
d
f
o
r
th
e
si
t
e
.
Ho
w
co
u
l
d
th
i
s
be
fu
n
d
e
d
?
n
A
b
s
e
n
t
a be
t
t
e
r
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
of
fu
t
u
r
e
P
A
U
S
D
ne
e
d
s
,
wil
l
th
e
Cit
y
ne
e
d
to
in
-
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
l
y
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
th
e
fu
t
u
r
e
of
it
s
8
a
c
r
e
s
— wo
u
l
d
th
i
s
re
q
u
i
r
e
gi
v
i
n
g
up
on
i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
v
e
/
c
o
s
t
sa
v
i
n
g
id
e
a
s
fo
r
jo
i
n
t
us
e
?
n
H
o
w
ca
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
a co
n
-
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
pl
a
n
wi
t
h
o
u
t
cla
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
lo
n
g
te
r
m
ne
e
d
s
?
n
Ho
w
sh
o
u
l
d
Cit
y
’
s
8 ac
r
e
s
be
us
e
d
?
Th
e
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
si
t
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
a un
i
q
u
e
op
p
o
r
-
t
u
n
i
t
y
fo
r
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
an
d
PA
U
S
D
to
wo
r
k
t
o
wo
r
k
to
g
e
t
h
e
r
to
pl
a
n
a cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
co
-
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
an
d
sc
h
o
o
l
se
r
-
v
i
c
e
s
fo
r
hi
g
h
e
s
t
an
d
be
s
t
us
e
of
th
i
s
l
a
s
t
-
o
f
-
i
t
s
-
k
i
n
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
n
C
a
n
th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
— th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
P
A
U
S
D
— wo
r
k
to
g
e
t
h
e
r
an
d
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
-
a
t
e
to
ma
k
e
th
i
s
ha
p
p
e
n
?
n
Id
e
a
l
l
y
,
co
u
l
d
th
e
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
sit
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
mu
l
t
i
-
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
,
mu
l
t
i
-
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
,
mu
l
t
i
-
d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
a
r
y
pr
o
g
r
a
m
to
s
e
r
v
e
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
?
n
T
h
e
Cit
y
la
c
k
s
su
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
/ re
a
l
es
t
a
t
e
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
t
h
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
at
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
T
h
i
s
is
th
e
la
s
t
si
z
a
b
l
e
sp
a
c
e
in
th
e
Ci
t
y
p
r
o
p
e
r
fo
r
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
..
.
to
ma
x
i
-
m
i
z
e
fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
an
d
fo
r
fu
t
u
r
e
us
e
,
mu
l
t
i
-
s
t
o
r
y
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
be
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
.
n
A
fu
l
l
hi
g
h
sc
h
o
o
l
wo
u
l
d
co
n
f
l
i
c
t
wi
t
h
a
n
d
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
ke
y
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
us
e
s
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
pla
y
i
n
g
fi
e
l
d
s
an
d
th
e
gy
m
s
.
n
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
an
d
tr
a
n
s
i
t
su
p
p
o
r
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
o
u
l
d
als
o
be
im
p
a
c
t
e
d
an
d
re
q
u
i
r
e
c
a
r
e
f
u
l
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
.
n
T
h
e
PA
U
S
D
wa
n
t
s
th
e
fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
k
e
e
p
i
n
g
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
35
ac
r
e
s
un
e
n
c
u
m
-
b
e
r
e
d
fo
r
fu
t
u
r
e
sc
h
o
o
l
us
e
.
n
T
h
e
PA
U
S
D
is
un
w
i
l
l
i
n
g
to
gi
v
e
un
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
-
e
d
ri
g
h
t
s
to
ev
e
n
po
r
t
i
o
n
s
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
b
e
y
o
n
d
20
2
5
(o
r
at
mo
s
t
20
3
0
)
be
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
ne
e
d
fo
r
a fu
l
l
hi
g
h
sc
h
o
o
l
.
n
S
c
h
o
o
l
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
mu
s
t
me
e
t
hig
h
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
co
d
e
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
n
P
A
U
S
D
do
e
s
no
t
se
e
a ne
e
d
to
re
m
o
v
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
n
W
i
l
l
th
e
r
e
st
i
l
l
be
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
-
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
u
s
e
s
on
th
e
sit
e
?
n
H
o
w
wi
l
l
th
e
Cit
y
/ PA
U
S
D
fu
n
d
ne
e
d
e
d
n
e
w
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
an
d
/ or
re
m
o
d
e
l
i
n
g
—
a
n
d
on
-
g
o
i
n
g
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
?
n
T
o
us
e
all
35
ac
r
e
s
,
th
e
PA
U
S
D
mu
s
t
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
8 ac
r
e
s
.
n
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
ob
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
bo
n
d
s
wo
u
l
d
ge
n
e
r
-
a
l
l
y
ne
e
d
30
ye
a
r
am
o
r
t
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
—
th
u
s
,
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
us
e
s
wo
u
l
d
ha
v
e
to
be
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
fo
r
30
ye
a
r
s
.
YYears 15 - 30 Years 5 - 15 Years 0 - 5
CCAC Briefing Book
11/21/2012
Cubberley Community
Advisory Committee
Briefing Book
November 21, 2012
CCAC Briefing Book: Table of Contents
Revised November 28, 2012
General Documents
1. Cubberley Guiding Principles
2. CCAC Problem Statement Matrix
3. IBRC Final Report Working Paper on Cubberley Site
School Needs Subcommittee Documents
4. School Needs Subcommittee Problem Statement
5. PAUSD Property Summary
Community Needs Subcommittee Documents
6. What’s Special About the Cubberley Handout
7. Cubberley Facilities Available for Rent
8. Cubberley Rental Room Users
9. Who Provides What In Palo Alto Handout
10. Neighboring Community Centers Handout
11. Sunnyvale Senior Center Visit Notes
12. Impact of the Aging Baby Boom Population on Palo Alto’s Social and
Community Services
13. Selections from CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Minutes, October 24,
2012
Facilities Subcommittee Documents
14. Facilities Subcommittee Problem Statement
15. More Thoughts Regarding Cubberley Facilities Document
16. Cubberley Existing 35 Acres Land Use Chart
Finance Subcommittee Documents
17. Financial Analysis of City and School District Situation
18. Cubberley Lease Report
19. Funding Options
20. Research on Existing Joint Use Facilities in Other Communities for Lessons
Learned and Guidance
21. Joint Powers Authority
22. Financial Summary Spreadsheet
23. Comparison of General Obligation Bonds, Mello‐Roos and Parcel Taxes for
Cities
General
Documents
City of Palo Alto (ID # 2861)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/14/2012
Summary Title: Cubberley Guiding Principles
Title: Council Approval of Guiding Principles for the Cubberley Policy
Advisory Committee and the City Manager and Superintendent Community
Advisory Committee
From: City Manager
Lead Department: City Manager
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Guiding Principles for the Cubberley
Policy Advisory Committee and the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) appointed by
the City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent.
Background and Discussion
On May 8, 2012, the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) approved the draft
Guiding Principles without amendments. As Council is aware, the draft Guiding
Principles were revised and forwarded by Council to the Policy Advisory Committee
(PAC) composed of Council Members Yeh, Shepherd and Klein; and Board Members
Mitchell and Townsend. The PAC met on April 20, 2012 and prepared the draft
presented to the PAUSD School Board. The draft is now before the Council for final
approval and is as Attachment A.
The PAUSD School Board also suggested an additional member of the CAC in the “Other
Community Members” category. Brian Carilli was suggested to the City Manager and
Superintendent and has been added to the draft CAC list.
Timeline
Once Council approves the final Guiding Principles and all suggestions for the CAC
members have been made, Staff will poll the CAC for a convenient meeting time the 3rd
or 4th week of May.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Final Draft Cubberley PAC Guiding Principals (DOC)
Attachment B: PAUSD Board Packet 5.8.12 Action Item 9 (PDF)
Prepared By: Steve Emslie, Deputy City Manager
Department Head: James Keene, City Manager
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
Attachment A
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee
City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent Community Advisory Committee
Guiding Principles
Approved by the Board of Education Agenda May 8, 2012
Draft for the Palo Alto City Council May 14, 2012
The Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of two Palo Alto Unified School
District (PAUSD) Board members appointed by the School Board President and three
City Council members appointed by the Mayor. The PAC shall be the primary advisor to
the Council and the School Board on issues related to the lease and possible re-use or
joint use of the Cubberley campus.
The Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CAC) is jointly appointed by the City
Manager and Superintendent, and shall represent a cross section of Cubberley,
neighborhoods, schools and citywide representatives. The CAC shall review Cubberley
background and history and provide the PAC with community input including but not
limited to possible re-use scenarios, alternative lease arrangements, site plan
configurations, possible funding plans, identification of joint use opportunities and
compatible standards.
1. The City and PAUSD recognize that our citizens have substantial investments, both
emotional and financial in the Cubberley Campus, and shall work to reach
decisions for the benefit of our entire community.
2. The Committees shall maintain open and transparent processes at all times, and
members of the public shall be invited to all meetings. The CAC shall complete a
final report. PAC and CAC meetings shall be audio-recorded with minutes
completed for the PAC, and notes completed for the CAC. (Costs of minutes shall
be cost-shared by the City and PAUSD).
3. Documents, architectural drawings and other written communication provided to
the Committees shall be made available to the general public as soon as possible.
4. The City and PAUSD recognize that Cubberley is a major cultural, educational,
recreational and non-profit resource, very important to the community’s health
and vitality.
5. Acknowledging that each entity has different regulations and governing legislation,
the City and PAUSD shall seek to work cooperatively to explore all practical joint-
uses of the Cubberley campus for both educational and community services.
6. The City and PAUSD have ownership interests in portions of the campus: PAUSD
owns 27 acres and the City owns 8 acres. The parties may consider relocation of
Attachment A
their ownership interests within the site to facilitate optimal site layout and
efficiency.
7. The City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent shall jointly prepare a project
budget for 2012/13, with costs shared equally between the City and PAUSD.
8. While the Policy Advisory Committee planning shall occur as cooperatively as
possible, the City Council representatives and the PAUSD Board Members shall
retain independent recommending authority should consensus not be reached.
9. Maintaining the quality of PAUSD schools is a significant community value, and
planning for a growing population is essential to maintaining educational
excellence and the overall health and well-being of our community.
10. Cubberley programs enrich the community and criteria shall be developed to
prioritize and/or retain existing uses as well as assess prospective new uses.
11. The City and PAUSD recognize that joint-use could result in stronger educational
and cultural programs provided more efficiently.
12. The City Council and PAUSD representatives on the Policy Advisory Committee
shall report, not less often than every other month, to their respective bodies on
Cubberley planning activities.
13. The City and PAUSD shall work to continue community access to Cubberley to the
extent possible. Recreation facilities provided at the Cubberley campus produce
important services benefitting the community at large.
14. The residential neighborhoods surrounding Cubberley shall be considered in
determining the compatibility of possible changes on the Cubberley campus.
15. Transportation issues and access to and within Cubberley shall be considered in
determining possible options including improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
16. All recommendations shall be mindful of the dynamic short-, mid-, and long-term
forces impacting the PAUSD and City.
BOARD OF EDUCATION Attachment: Action 9
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Date: 05.08.12
TO: Board of Education
FROM: Kevin Skelly, Superintendent of Schools
SUBJECT: Cubberley Community Advisory Committee Composition and Cubberley Policy Advisory
Committee Guiding Principles
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE
Governance and Communication
BACKGROUND
A process for discussing the Cubberley site began in November of 2011. The plan is to achieve consensus
on a vision for the future of the Cubberley site one year prior to the City's current lease expiration in
December 2014. The process involves forming three groups: a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made
up of executive staff from PAUSD and the City; a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) to be appointed
by the City Manager (with recommendations from the School Superintendent); and a Policy Advisory
Committee (PAC) composed of three City Council members (Yeh, Shepherd and Klein) and two PAUSD
members (Mitchell and Townsend).
Note: At the last meeting, conceptual site plans were presented and discussed. This part of the
item from the last meeting has been removed
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAG)
The CAC is intended to represent a cross section of Cubberley, neighborhoods, schools and city-wide
representatives. The members are appointed by the City Manager, with input by the Superintendent of
Schools. They will provide the PAC with community input. A listing of the proposed membership as of May
3, 2012 is attached. The Board is asked to approve this list for consideration by City Council on May 14,
2012.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
A draft set of Guiding Principles (GPs) for use by the PAC and CAC has been developed. The GPs are
intended to reflect community values of transparency ensuring that the public is invited to meetings and
offered opportunities to interact with both groups. In addition, the Guiding Principles set up very broad
objectives to clarify that the process is intended to be collaboration between the City and the School district,
emphasizing joint use of the facilities where possible . A discussion regarding these GPs took place at the
PAC meeting on Friday, April 20, 2012 and the PAUSD Board meeting on April 24, 2012. Staff has
provided an updated version of the Guiding Principles based on Board input and recommends approval.
These Guiding Principles are scheduled for consideration by the City Council at its May 14, 2012 meeting.
PROCESS AND TIME LINE
The City's Cubberley lease expires in December 2014. At that time, the lease may be extended an
additional 5 years upon mutual consent of the City and the District. The City's schedule assumes providing
the District notice of its intentions regarding renewal of the lease at the end of 2013 to provide the District
with one year's notice prior to the lease expiration. The first meeting of the CAC was anticipated to be in
early May and there will be approximately 12 months of meetings. As mentioned, the PAC had their first
meeting on Friday, April 20.
As discussed above, the CAC and PAC are scheduled to meet over the course of 2012 concluding their
recommendations in 2013. This timeline allows the Council to engage in lease negotiations with the School
District two years prior to the expiration of the lease in 2014. The timeline anticipates a decision on the
lease by the end of 2013, providing a one-year notice period if either party decides to not exercise the
5 year option to extend the lease.
RECOMMENDATION
The Guiding Principles and Citizen's Advisory Committee composition, as attached, are recommended for
approval.
Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee
City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent Community Advisory Committee
Guiding Principles
Draft for Board of Education Agenda May 8, 2012
The Cubberley Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of two Palo Alto Unified School
District (PAUSD) Board members appointed by the School Board President and three
City Council members appointed by the Mayor. The PAC shall be the primary advisor to
the Council and the School Board on issues related to the lease and possible re-use or
joint use of the Cubberley campus.
The Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CAC) is jointly appointed by the City
Manager and Superintendent, and shall represent a cross section of Cubberley,
neighborhoods, schools and citywide representatives. The CAC shall review Cubberley
background and history and provide the PAC with community input including but not
limited to possible re-use scenarios, alternative lease arrangements, site plan
configurations, possible funding plans, identification of joint use opportunities and
compatible standards.
1. The City and PAUSD recognize that our citizens have substantial investments, both
emotional and financial in the Cubberley Campus, and shall work to reach
decisions for the benefit of our entire community.
2. The Committees shall maintain open and transparent processes at all times, and
members of the public shall be invited to all meetings. The CAC shall complete a
final report. PAC and CAC meetings shall be audio-recorded with minutes
completed for the PAC, and notes completed for the CAe. (Costs of minutes shall
be cost-shared by the City and PAUSD).
3. Documents, architectural drawings and other written communication provided to
the Committees shall be made available to the general public as soon as possible.
4. The City and PAUSD recognize that Cubberley is a major cultural, educational,
recreational and non-profit resource, very important to the community's health
and vitality.
5. Acknowledging that each entity has different regulations and governing legislation,
the City and PAUSD shall seek to work cooperatively to explore all practical joint-
uses of the Cubberley campus for both educational and community services.
6. The City and PAUSD have ownership interests in portions of the campus: PAUSD
owns 27 acres and the City owns 8 acres. The parties may consider relocation of
their ownership interests within the site to facilitate optimal site layout and
efficiency.
7. The City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent shall jointly prepare a project
budget for 2012/13, with costs shared equally between the City and PAUSD.
8. While the Policy Advisory Committee planning shall occur as cooperatively as
possible, the City Council representatives and the PAUSD Board Members shall
retain independent recommending authority should consensus not be reached.
9. Maintaining the quality of PAUSD schools is a significant community value, and
planning for a growing population is essential to maintaining educational
excellence and the overall health and well-being of our community.
10. Cubberley programs enrich the community and criteria shall be developed to
prioritize and/or retain existing uses as well as assess prospective new uses.
11. The City and PAUSD recognize that joint-use could result in stronger educational
and cultural programs provided more efficiently.
12. The City Council and PAUSD representatives on the Policy Advisory Committee
shall report, not less often than every other month, to their respective bodies on
Cubberley planning activities.
13. The City and PAUSD shall work to continue community access to Cubberley to the
extent possible. Recreation facilities provided at the Cubberley campus produce
important services benefitting the community at large.
14. The residential neighborhoods surrounding Cubberley shall be considered in
determining the compatibility of possible changes on the Cubberley campus.
15. Transportation issues and access to and within Cubberley shall be considered in
determining possible options including improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
16. All recommendations shall be mindful of the dynamic short-, mid-, and long-term
forces impacting the PAUSD and City.
Cubberley Community Advisory Panel
Group First Name Last Name
Neighborhoods
Fair Meadow Tom Vician
Walnut Grove Tom Crystal
Green Meadow Lanie Wheeler
Greendell Michael Bein
Charleston Gardens Jean Wilcox
Midtown Sheri Furman
PAN Ken Allen
Commeroial Retail
Charleston Plaza Tenant
Village Properties Damian Cono
PTA's
Fairmeadow Elementary Claire Kirner
JLS Middle School John Markevitch
Gunn High School Tracy Stevens
Palo Alto High School Susan Bailey
Cubberley Tenants
Child Care Rachel Samoff
Artist Lessa Bouchard
Non Profit -Cardiac Therapy Jerry August
FOPAL Jim Schmidt
Community/Arts & Services Susie Thom
Park and Rec Commission
PT&C Greg Tanaka
Other Community Members Diane Reklis
Mandy Lowell
Brian Corilli
Acterra Michael Closson
PABAC William Robinson
City School Traffic Safety Penny Elison
Recreation and Sports League
Soft Ball Mike Cobb
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
A
D
V
I
S
O
R
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
—
P
R
O
B
L
E
M
S
T
A
T
E
M
E
N
T
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
s
n
Ne
e
d
to
wo
r
k
in
a wi
l
l
i
n
g
pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
to
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
th
e
be
s
t
us
e
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
’
s
35
a
c
r
e
s
to
se
r
v
e
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
.
n
Ho
w
sh
o
u
l
d
Ci
t
y
’
s
ac
r
e
s
be
us
e
d
?
A 5
y
e
a
r
le
a
s
e
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
mu
s
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
pl
a
n
s
f
o
r
sh
o
r
t
/
m
e
d
i
u
m
te
r
m
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
a co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
to
pl
a
n
lo
n
g
e
r
te
r
m
.
n
Wh
i
c
h
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
ho
u
s
e
d
at
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
sh
o
u
l
d
be
re
t
a
i
n
e
d
?
Wh
i
c
h
s
h
o
u
l
d
re
m
a
i
n
th
e
r
e
an
d
wh
i
c
h
wi
l
l
ne
e
d
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
e
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
?
n
Th
e
r
e
is
a sig
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
gr
o
w
i
n
g
li
s
t
of
d
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
ne
e
d
s
.
n
Ho
w
ca
n
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
of
ne
w
le
a
s
e
/
c
o
v
-
e
n
a
n
t
te
r
m
s
mit
i
g
a
t
e
co
s
t
s
to
PA
an
d
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
s
to
cu
r
r
e
n
t
a
n
d
me
d
i
u
m
,
te
r
m
up
k
e
e
p
an
d
fu
t
u
r
e
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
?
n
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
jo
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
/
S
c
h
o
o
l
us
e
an
d
ho
w
ca
n
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
/
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
be
t
w
e
e
n
PA
an
d
PA
U
S
D
b
e
fo
s
t
e
r
e
d
in
th
e
sh
o
r
t
te
r
m
to
se
c
u
r
e
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
lo
n
g
te
r
m
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
/
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
?
n
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
im
p
a
c
t
of
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
fo
r
sc
h
o
o
l
us
e
s
?
n
Ne
e
d
to
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
th
e
re
v
e
n
u
e
st
r
e
a
m
f
r
o
m
th
e
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
le
a
s
e
by
co
n
t
i
n
u
i
n
g
t
h
e
le
a
s
e
fo
r
5 ye
a
r
s
.
n
Ne
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
a si
t
e
fo
r
a ne
w
m
i
d
d
l
e
sc
h
o
o
l
..
.
if
on
e
is
no
t
to
be
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
,
th
e
le
a
s
e
co
u
l
d
b
e
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
fo
r
10
ye
a
r
s
.
n
S
h
o
u
l
d
th
e
le
a
s
e
be
re
n
e
w
e
d
,
an
d
if
i
f
ye
s
on
wh
a
t
te
r
m
s
?
n
C
i
t
y
an
d
Sc
h
o
o
l
fi
n
a
n
c
e
s
ha
v
e
ch
a
n
g
e
d
s
i
n
c
e
or
i
g
i
n
a
l
le
a
s
e
/
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
.
n
N
e
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
sh
a
r
e
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
co
s
t
s
.
n
N
e
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
co
s
t
r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
fr
o
m
re
n
t
a
l
s
.
Sh
o
u
l
d
re
n
t
a
l
r
a
t
e
s
be
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
?
n
H
o
w
ca
n
/
s
h
o
u
l
d
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
re
n
t
a
l
sp
a
c
e
b
e
re
p
l
a
c
e
d
?
n
Th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
va
l
u
e
s
th
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
pr
o
-
v
i
d
e
d
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
Th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
re
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
s
th
a
t
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
wi
l
l
li
k
e
l
y
no
t
be
re
a
d
y
to
pla
n
a
s
c
h
o
o
l
at
th
i
s
po
i
n
t
,
bu
t
th
i
s
wi
l
l
no
t
s
t
o
p
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
fo
r
tr
a
f
f
i
c
an
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
an
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
at
le
a
s
t
so
m
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
to
me
e
t
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
ne
e
d
s
.
n
A
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
w
o
u
l
d
be
ne
e
d
e
d
to
ex
t
e
n
d
th
e
lif
e
of
t
h
e
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
at
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
ar
e
an
in
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
us
e
of
t
h
e
si
t
e
.
n
U
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
i
e
s
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
PA
U
S
D
f
u
t
u
r
e
us
e
cr
e
a
t
e
a ba
r
r
i
e
r
to
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
in
ne
w
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
.
n
T
o
wh
a
t
de
g
r
e
e
ca
n
th
e
sit
e
be
us
e
d
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
to
me
e
t
bo
t
h
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
sc
h
o
o
l
ne
e
d
s
du
r
i
n
g
th
i
s
pe
r
i
o
d
?
n
If
th
e
si
t
e
is
no
t
ne
e
d
e
d
fo
r
a mi
d
d
l
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
du
r
i
n
g
th
i
s
pe
r
i
o
d
,
wh
a
t
le
a
s
e
ar
-
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
wo
u
l
d
be
mu
t
u
a
l
l
y
be
n
f
i
c
i
a
l
an
d
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
?
n
$
1
8
M
in
ca
p
i
t
a
l
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ne
e
d
e
d
f
o
r
th
e
si
t
e
.
Ho
w
co
u
l
d
th
i
s
be
fu
n
d
e
d
?
n
A
b
s
e
n
t
a be
t
t
e
r
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
of
fu
t
u
r
e
P
A
U
S
D
ne
e
d
s
,
wil
l
th
e
Cit
y
ne
e
d
to
in
-
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
l
y
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
th
e
fu
t
u
r
e
of
it
s
8
a
c
r
e
s
— wo
u
l
d
th
i
s
re
q
u
i
r
e
gi
v
i
n
g
up
on
i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
v
e
/
c
o
s
t
sa
v
i
n
g
id
e
a
s
fo
r
jo
i
n
t
us
e
?
n
H
o
w
ca
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
a co
n
-
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
pl
a
n
wi
t
h
o
u
t
cla
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
P
A
U
S
D
lo
n
g
te
r
m
ne
e
d
s
?
n
Ho
w
sh
o
u
l
d
Cit
y
’
s
8 ac
r
e
s
be
us
e
d
?
Th
e
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
si
t
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
a un
i
q
u
e
op
p
o
r
-
t
u
n
i
t
y
fo
r
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
an
d
PA
U
S
D
to
wo
r
k
t
o
wo
r
k
to
g
e
t
h
e
r
to
pl
a
n
a cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
co
-
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
an
d
sc
h
o
o
l
se
r
-
v
i
c
e
s
fo
r
hi
g
h
e
s
t
an
d
be
s
t
us
e
of
th
i
s
l
a
s
t
-
o
f
-
i
t
s
-
k
i
n
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
n
C
a
n
th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
— th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
P
A
U
S
D
— wo
r
k
to
g
e
t
h
e
r
an
d
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
-
a
t
e
to
ma
k
e
th
i
s
ha
p
p
e
n
?
n
Id
e
a
l
l
y
,
co
u
l
d
th
e
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
sit
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
mu
l
t
i
-
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
,
mu
l
t
i
-
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
,
mu
l
t
i
-
d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
a
r
y
pr
o
g
r
a
m
to
s
e
r
v
e
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
?
n
T
h
e
Cit
y
la
c
k
s
su
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
/ re
a
l
es
t
a
t
e
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
t
h
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
at
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
.
n
T
h
i
s
is
th
e
la
s
t
si
z
a
b
l
e
sp
a
c
e
in
th
e
Ci
t
y
p
r
o
p
e
r
fo
r
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
..
.
to
ma
x
i
-
m
i
z
e
fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
an
d
fo
r
fu
t
u
r
e
us
e
,
mu
l
t
i
-
s
t
o
r
y
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
be
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
.
n
A
fu
l
l
hi
g
h
sc
h
o
o
l
wo
u
l
d
co
n
f
l
i
c
t
wi
t
h
a
n
d
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
ke
y
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
us
e
s
,
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
pla
y
i
n
g
fi
e
l
d
s
an
d
th
e
gy
m
s
.
n
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
an
d
tr
a
n
s
i
t
su
p
p
o
r
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
o
u
l
d
als
o
be
im
p
a
c
t
e
d
an
d
re
q
u
i
r
e
c
a
r
e
f
u
l
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
.
n
T
h
e
PA
U
S
D
wa
n
t
s
th
e
fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
k
e
e
p
i
n
g
th
e
en
t
i
r
e
35
ac
r
e
s
un
e
n
c
u
m
-
b
e
r
e
d
fo
r
fu
t
u
r
e
sc
h
o
o
l
us
e
.
n
T
h
e
PA
U
S
D
is
un
w
i
l
l
i
n
g
to
gi
v
e
un
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
-
e
d
ri
g
h
t
s
to
ev
e
n
po
r
t
i
o
n
s
of
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
b
e
y
o
n
d
20
2
5
(o
r
at
mo
s
t
20
3
0
)
be
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
ne
e
d
fo
r
a fu
l
l
hi
g
h
sc
h
o
o
l
.
n
S
c
h
o
o
l
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
mu
s
t
me
e
t
hig
h
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
co
d
e
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
n
P
A
U
S
D
do
e
s
no
t
se
e
a ne
e
d
to
re
m
o
v
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
n
W
i
l
l
th
e
r
e
st
i
l
l
be
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
-
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
u
s
e
s
on
th
e
sit
e
?
n
H
o
w
wi
l
l
th
e
Cit
y
/ PA
U
S
D
fu
n
d
ne
e
d
e
d
n
e
w
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
an
d
/ or
re
m
o
d
e
l
i
n
g
—
a
n
d
on
-
g
o
i
n
g
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
?
n
T
o
us
e
all
35
ac
r
e
s
,
th
e
PA
U
S
D
mu
s
t
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
8 ac
r
e
s
.
n
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
ob
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
bo
n
d
s
wo
u
l
d
ge
n
e
r
-
a
l
l
y
ne
e
d
30
ye
a
r
am
o
r
t
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
—
th
u
s
,
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
us
e
s
wo
u
l
d
ha
v
e
to
be
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
fo
r
30
ye
a
r
s
.
YYears 15 - 30 Years 5 - 15 Years 0 - 5
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
142
Appendix
H
-‐
Working
Paper
on
Cubberley
Site
Why
This
Document?
Throughout the life of the Commission, Cubberley has stood out as the “elephant in
the room.” Until very recently, we have been ambivalent about whether to expend
any time and energy on a very complex and politically charged issue, other than
gathering infrastructure needs related to the site. We were also unsure whether the
Council even wanted any advice from us on the matter.
However, recent events have changed that dynamic. On June 27, the Council
indicated its intent to explore selling the City’s 8 acres at Cubberley to the Foothill-
DeAnza Community College District, and later reversed that decision when the
Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) board formally indicated its intent to
reuse the site for a school. At the Commission’s July 18 workshop with the City
Council, several Council Members asked questions directly related to Cubberley.
Since the Council and the PAUSD are unlikely to come to any decisions on
Cubberley prior to our final report, and since decisions related to Cubberley could
have a significant impact on infrastructure plans and financing, a number of us felt
it was too important to address in a limited manner. Mark Harris, Jim Olstad, and
Ray Bacchetti agreed to put together an issue paper covering the key elements of
the Cubberley situation as a means to facilitate a discussion by the Commission
regarding Cubberley. Even if the Commission ultimately decides not to make any
recommendations regarding Cubberley, at least 17 city residents will be well versed
on the Cubberley situation and could individually provide input to the Council at
the appropriate time as he or she desired.
Background
and
Context
of
the
Cubberley
Situation
Substantial budget pressures were being experienced by the PAUSD due to a
variety of circumstances starting in the late 1970s and early 80s, including
passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.
declining PAUSD enrollment and revenue during the post–Baby Boom era.
In response to that stressed financial situation, the PAUSD closed several schools
and sold some existing school sites in order to help sustain its educational programs
at the level the community expected. This included the closure of Cubberley in
1979 and the City’s acquisition of Terman in 1981, among the sale and/or closure
of other sites.
The City realized that the PAUSD was one of the City’s major assets and its
decline would have severely negative impacts on the City as a whole, not the least
of which would have been a decrease in general property values. The City and the
PAUSD also recognized that sites once sold would never again be available for
school use should the trends reverse in the future.
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
143
In 1987, the City put Measure B on the ballot with the intent to create a 5 percent
utility users tax (UUT) that would be used primarily to fund lease payments by the
City to the PAUSD for unused school sites (Cubberley being the premier site) of
about $4.0 million annually, with $2.7 million applicable to Cubberley. In 1989, the
City and PAUSD entered into what is known as the Lease and Covenant Not to
Develop Agreement (Cubberley Lease), which covers a variety of complex clauses
including lease arrangements at Cubberley and other sites.
At the time the original lease negotiations were taking place, the City was in a
relatively good position in terms of financial capacity as compared to the PAUSD’s
circumstances. The Lease and Covenant Not to Develop arrangement had the
benefit of providing a major injection of operating budget money to the school
district, while providing corollary benefits to the City such as preserving open
space and playing fields, providing childcare sites and protection from liability for
new infrastructure requirements (how ironic!) had these sites then been sold and
developed.
Flash forward nearly 25 years and the respective financial situations and site needs
have changed dramatically.
Here are a few of the key developments that make the situation very different
today:
The PAUSD is now a Basic Aid District, which essentially means that local
property tax revenue far exceeds the amount of revenue the State is required to
provide the district in excess of “basic aid” – a very small amount per student.
Although property tax revenue has been somewhat affected by the recent
financial crisis, PAUSD has not seen the reductions that many other California
school districts have encountered and is likely poised to see property tax
increases in excess of inflation for the foreseeable future. Property taxes are
budgeted to provide about 73 percent of the PAUSD’s general fund revenue in
2011–12, or about $114 million out of a $159 million budget. The remainder is
accounted for as follows:
Federal funds: 3 percent
Local income: 5 percent
Lease revenue: 6 percent
Parcel tax: 7 percent
State income: 6 percent
The district has received approval from the voters for more than $500 million
(Measure B in 1995 and Measure A in 2008) and a $600 parcel tax (Measure A
in 2010) generating about $11–12 million annually, or about 7 percent of its
annual operating budget. In addition, parents provide gifts in excess of $2
million annually through the foundation Palo Alto Partners in Education (PiE).
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
144
Enrollment has recovered dramatically since its low in about 1990, to the point
that the district is now reopening sites: most recently, Garland is slated to
reopen in several years, and the Board recently expressed an intent to reuse the
Cubberley site in the near future for a secondary school (which halted the
Council’s efforts to negotiate an offer to sell the City-owned 8 acres at
Cubberley to Foothill-DeAnza College).
Thus, the current respective financial and enrollment conditions related to the
Cubberley Lease are substantially different than they were 22 years ago when the
City and the PAUSD entered into it. Financially, the City has been grappling
annually with the issue of balancing the General Fund operating budget as well as
meeting the ongoing capital assets/infrastructure needs of the community (pressures
which were the impetus for the formation of our Commission).
The City’s current option on the Cubberley Lease expires by its stated terms at the
end of 2014, and the City must notify the PAUSD by December 31, 2013, if it
intends to renew the lease for another five years.
Now is the time for the Commission to provide input regarding the lease agreement
as it relates to infrastructure.
Key
Elements
of
the
Cubberley
Lease
as
They
Relate
to
Infrastructure
and
Infrastructure
Financing
Cubberley Lease Payment. In the current 2011–12 operating budget, the City is
obligated to pay $4.60 million in lease payments for Cubberley (section 2.1 of the
lease). Those payments are escalated each year at an agreed upon inflation factor
currently estimated at 3 percent. This payment covers the 27 acres leased from the
district, not the 8 acres the City now owns as a renegotiated consequence of the
swap for the Terman site approved in 2002.
Childcare Sites. The Lease Agreement also includes City payments to the PAUSD
for onsite childcare at 12 elementary school sites. In 2011–12, the City will pay
$0.675 million for the combined 12 sites including utilities costs. The City
contracts with Palo Alto Community Childcare (PACC), a nonprofit provider
independent from the City, to operate the 12 sites. PACC pays the City
approximately $100,000 in rental payments and utilities reimbursement. The
childcare lease also runs concurrent with the lease term and will end if the lease is
not extended by mutual consent of the City and the PAUSD in 2014. Without any
information to the contrary, we assume that this arrangement will be renewed even
if the current Lease Agreement is not. If this were not the case, the City would have
an additional net slightly in excess of $0.5 million dollars annually to use for other
purposes.
Covenant Not to Develop. An additional $1.78 million expense is budgeted for
2011–12 with a similar 3 percent inflation factor for succeeding years. In reading
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
145
the Cubberley Lease agreement, it is a section (2.2) that is separate from the
Cubberley payments but clearly under the grand lease arrangement. The sites
included in the original covenant are Ohlone, Jordan, Jane Lathrop Stanford,
Garland, and Greendell. The Lease agreement allows for sites to reopen without
reducing the covenant payment as long as new elementary schools are substituted,
which has happened over the lease term as PAUSD reopened schools due to
increased enrollment. Section 4.1 indicates that the purpose of the covenant is “to
prevent further burden on the City’s infrastructure and in order to preserve a
substantial amount of the City’s remaining open space.” If the lease is not renewed,
the covenant payments expire as well.
This clause now appears to be obsolete given the district’s recently expressed intent
to reopen existing sites. Further, there is no current plan for any sites to be sold for
development, and the district has just recently purchased additional property at 525
San Antonio Road. Ironically, the $1.78 million annual covenant payment (from
the City to the PAUSD) directly or indirectly puts a burden on the City’s
infrastructure budgeting because these funds are not available to support
infrastructure needs including Cubberley maintenance.
These “reversed financial circumstances” clearly need to be addressed during the
Cubberley Lease option considerations/negotiations process.
Key
Elements
Regarding
Cubberley
Not
Embedded
in
the
Lease
City Ownership of 8 Acres. Through a separate but related agreement, in 2002
the City obtained title ownership of 8 acres of the Cubberley site in a swap
exchange for the Terman site, which the City had previously acquired through a
lease/purchase arrangement it created in 1981. These 8 acres were the focus of
recent Council actions related to Foothill-DeAnza’s offer to purchase the site.
Although the City has the right to develop the 8 acres, as it deems appropriate, until
September 1, 2022, the school district has the right-of-first-refusal on the sale by
the City of these 8 acres to another party. After that the City has an unencumbered
right to sell the 8 acres, if it decides to do so. Of course, the City and the district
can renegotiate a sale back to the district at any time.
Given recent actions by both governing bodies, it is unclear as to what the next-or-
ultimate disposition of the property will be. The City could retain it and develop it
for its own purposes, or sell it at market value estimated at between $15 and $28
million. The recent purchase of the 2.6 acres at 525 San Antonio by the school
district for $8.5 million would indicate a current market value of approximately $26
million.
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
146
Revenues and Expenses at Cubberley Outside the Lease Obligations. Current
revenue at Cubberley is $2.54 million annually composed of the following
elements:
Foothill-DeAnza lease $0.93 million
Property rental (artists, nonprofits, etc) 0.52
Hourly rental (events, use of theater, etc.) 1.02
City office rental 0.07
Annual expenses total $2.21 million including routine annual maintenance costs of
about $330,000. Thus, the Cubberley complex is showing a net positive cash flow
of about $300,000 (excluding the lease-and-covenant payments expense).
Tenants at Cubberley are being heavily subsidized in their rental payments. When
considering the annual lease payments, the City is paying the school district
approximately $4 per square foot for the building space it leases. However, it is
generating less than $1 per square foot in rental income.
Planned CIP and Deferred Maintenance. As discovered through our
Commission’s infrastructure investigations, this maintenance liability – not
included in the above figures – cumulatively totals about $18.8 million through
2036, with $10.2 million scheduled between now and 2016. Public works indicates
that optimal maintenance expenditures should be about $800,000 versus the
$330,000 currently expended. This projected aggregate maintenance liability has
several implications.
First, the revenue and expense statement as typically presented to the Council –
most recently in the slide presentation at the June 27, 2011, meeting – is incomplete
in that it does not include these ongoing maintenance expenses. These real
maintenance costs should be acknowledged and represented in future reports.
Secondly, the City should neither continue nor consider expending this level of
maintenance money into the facility until the long-term use or disposition of
Cubberley is resolved. The City should spend only what is needed to keep the
facilities operational and safe.
Conclusions
The conditions that created the original need for the Cubberley Lease agreement
have changed dramatically and are no longer in play today. With our City struggling
to meet the financial requirements of the General Fund, let alone catching-up and
keeping-up with the maintenance of the City’s overall infrastructure demands, now
is the appropriate time for the school district to re-establish its management and
financial responsibilities of and for the Cubberley site.
The Cubberley Lease agreement, with its associated amendments, has
accomplished what it set out to achieve more than 20 years ago. It has preserved
valuable public space and kept it maintained and available for public use and
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
147
enjoyment. In addition, it has provided the PAUSD with more than $125 million in
operating cash to date, and will provide approximately $150 million in total cash
infusion by the end of the current lease arrangement in 2014, if it is not terminated
or amended prior to this date. Finally, it has preserved these sites for the district for
its future use as and when necessary (which is apparently the case now).
As we indicated earlier, the PAUSD’s financial situation has improved dramatically
over the past 20 years: with the passage of major bond issues for reconstruction and
improvements to school facilities, generous community support through
contributions to Palo Alto PiE, passage of a sizable parcel tax, and the
attainment/surpassing of Basic Aid status. The district is in a strong financial
position to finance its operations without all of the subsidies provided by the City
through the Cubberley Lease Agreement.
The residents and businesses, through the City government, have contributed
significantly to the restoration and financial strength of the district. With strong
reserve balances and more than three years of payments left on the current lease
option, the district should have sufficient time and financial resources to plan for a
smooth transition to clear ownership.
Recommendations
The City should, at a minimum, decline to renew the Cubberley and non-development
portions of the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop agreement in order to free $6.1
million (net of rental revenue) annually (in current dollars) and avoid a substantial
portion of the upkeep expenditures of $18.8 million (in current dollars) through 2036.
Indeed, it would be mutually beneficial for the City and the school district to begin
discussions now on any potential new lease agreements related to childcare facilities
or other noneducational uses, the transition of the 27 acres back to school district
management, and clarification on the final disposition of the City’s 8 acres.
The $6.1 million operating expense savings represents potential annual cash
availability to the City that could be reassigned to several infrastructure problem-
solving applications. Example 1: If these funds were committed to a new issue of
certificates of participation, it could finance a 30-year, $100 million debt obligation,
sufficient to finance a new Public Safety Building and replace two fire houses.
Example 2: If the funds were used to rebuild an Infrastructure Reserve, it could
enable forward funding of new or renovated City assets, accommodating unexpected
infrastructure costs without disturbing the ability of the City to keep up routine
infrastructure maintenance needs, enable the raising of existing infrastructure quality
(e.g., condition of streets, parks, and sidewalks), or any number of other real
property redevelopment initiatives (including repurposing other existing
infrastructure assets).
Regarding the 8 acres of Cubberley that the City owns, it is important to evaluate the
best use of the parcel in relation to the future needs of the community. Historically,
APPENDIX
H:
CUBBERLEY
IBRC
FINAL
REPORT
148
there has been a secondary school campus on these 8 acres and the adjoining 27
acres owned by the school district. This may not be the same use going forward.
Indeed, the school district should have considerable flexibility in the design of a
middle school and/or high school campus on its 27 acres, together with the school
district’s adjacent property at the former Greendell school site and the property
recently purchased at 525 San Antonio.
Therefore, we encourage the City to evaluate potential alternatives for the highest
and best use of its 8 acres on Middlefield Road, including the possibility of
developing a variety of “community center” resources that could provide services to
residents. In the event this process does not result in an approved plan for new City
infrastructure on its 8 acres, then it may be preferable for the City to pursue sale of
the land, either to the school district or to another purchaser. The City is presently
bound by the school district’s right-of-first-refusal until September 1, 2022. In any
event, the City should request a clear indication from the school district concerning
its interest in the 8 acres.
Until the final disposition of the Cubberley site is determined, the City should spend
only the minimum amount of funds necessary to keep the site safe and operational
for the tenants occupying it. Major expenditures in facilities upgrades will be wasted
if a major portion of the site is later razed to construct a new educational facility at
Cubberley.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Harris
Ray Bacchetti
Jim Olstad
November 30, 2011
References
1. Lease and Covenant Not to Develop Between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Unified
School District dated September 1, 1989
2. Amendment #1 to the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop dated July 21, 1999
3. Amendment #2 to the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop dated August 13, 2002
4. Background on the Utility Users Tax prepared by Lanie Wheeler dated May 2010
5. City Manager’s Report #1866 (Direction on the Submission of Letter of Interest to Foothill
College Regarding new Educational Center at Cubberley Community Center) and associated
Power Point Presentation prepared by Deputy City Manager Steve Emslie for the Council
Meeting of June 27, 2011
6. Various conversations and e-mail correspondence with City senior staff members Steve
Emslie, Lalo Perez, Phil Bobel, and Joe Saccio regarding the Lease and Covenant Not to
Develop from July through October 2011
7. Accuracy of the working paper information verified by City senior staff members Steve
Emslie, Lalo Perez, and Phil Bobel
School
Needs
Subcommittee
Documents
PROBLEM
STATEMENT
11/6/2012
School
Needs
Subcommittee
1. PAUSD
desires
a
5
year
lease
-‐
2015-‐2019
2. If
an
alternative
non-‐Cubberley
middle
school
location
is
found,
the
Subcommittee
believes
PAUSD
could
accept
a
10
year
lease
extending
to
2025.
3. PAUSD
is
unable
to
give
unrestricted
rights
to
all
or
even
portions
of
Cubberley
beyond
2025
(2030
at
most)
because
of
the
potential
need
for
a
new
high
school
4. PAUSD
highly
values
the
flexibility
of
keeping
the
entire
35
acres
unencumbered
for
ultimate
academic
use.
The
Subcommittee
believes
the
district
would
object
to
the
city
constructing
facilities
on
the
8
acres
it
nominally
owns
that
could
not
be
used
for
future
academic
purposes.
Demographics
Palo
Alto
demographic
projections
over
the
coming
30
year
(2015-‐2045)
are
highly
uncertain.
Major
demographic
influences
include:
California
economy;
Silicon
Valley
expansion/recession;
ABAG
housing
requirements
and
City's
response;
PAUSD
reputation
attracting
new
students.
Because
these
influences
cannot
be
reliably
projected
beyond
even
3-‐5
years,
only
the
most
general
projections
can
be
used
beyond
that.
PAUSD's
policy
is
to
use
a
2%
long-‐term
growth
rate.
Regardless
whether
that
rate
is
most
appropriate,
the
Subcommittee
believes
it
is
not
realistic
to
expect
PAUSD
to
use
any
other
rate
for
its
decision
making.
High
School
A
2%
long
term
growth
rate,
along
with
existing
policy
for
maximum
high
school
size,
implies
a
new
high
school
likely
will
be
needed
between
2030
and
2040.
Also
under
existing
policies,
a
comprehensive
high
school
likely
would
require
the
full
35
acres
of
Cubberley.
Gunn
and
Paly
have
50
and
44
acres
respectively.
While
a
high
school
designed
in
2035
is
unlikely
to
be
identical
to
existing
PAUSD
high
schools,
it
is
not
possible
today
to
confirm
that
space
needs
would
be
significantly
less
nor
to
begin
designing
that
future
high
school.
Middle
School
In
the
shorter
run,
PAUSD
anticipates
needing
to
begin
work
on
a
new
middle
school
as
early
as
2020.
PAUSD
is
looking
for
a
location
other
than
Cubberley
for
a
new
middle
school
but
unless
and
until
one
is
found,
the
district
must
preserve
the
flexibility
to
use
Cubberley.
Jordan
and
JLS
middle
schools
have
19
and
26
acres
respectively.
The
location
of
the
new
middle
school
is
expected
to
be
confirmed
by
the
end
of
the
2012-‐13
school
year.
Elementary
School
PAUSD
is
planning
for
a
13th
elementary
school
by
2017.
Current
options
being
considered
are
Garland
and
Greendell/525
San
Antonio
with
no
expected
impact
of
the
38
acre
Cubberley
site.
Plans
will
be
firmed
up
during
the
2012-‐13
school
year.
Future
Cubberley
building
density
Some
new
PAUSD
facilities
are
2
story
structures.
However,
if
and
when
PAUSD
takes
over
the
current
Cubberley
site,
there
is
expected
to
be
a
strong
economic
incentive
to
retain
much
of
the
existing
single
story
structures
and
layout
rather
than
scraping
the
site
and
designing
a
new
layout
from
scratch.
Joint
use
community
facilities
PAUSD's
2008
Measure
A
funds
an
extensive
list
of
district
facility
needs.
As
of
September,
2012,
the
district
has
committed
52%
of
the
bond's
$358M.
Overall,
Measure
A
funds
the
district's
construction
needs
through
approximately
2020.
PAUSD
would
entertain
Cubberley
joint
use
concepts
from
the
city
but
does
not
have
"needs"
that
it
would
currently
place
on
the
table.
Facilities
Maintenance
PAUSD
administration
believes
the
existing
Cubberley
structures
are
generally
suitable
for
PAUSD
use
in
their
current
form
and
desires
them
not
to
significantly
deteriorate
prior
to
the
site
being
turned
over
to
the
district
in
the
future.
The
Subcommittee
believes
the
substantial
uncertainty
in
turnover
date
(2030-‐
2040?)
and
uncertainty
in
whether/how
the
facilities
would
actually
be
reused
will
make
it
difficult
for
the
district
to
justify
jointly
funding
maintenance.
DR
A
F
T
7/
2
0
/
1
2
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
U
n
i
f
i
e
d
S
c
h
o
o
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
20
1
1
-
‐
2
0
1
2
Si
t
e
St
r
e
e
t
A
d
d
r
e
s
s
Ci
t
y
,
S
t
a
t
e
,
Z
i
p
Ac
r
e
s
Gr
a
d
e
L
e
v
e
l
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
Ad
d
i
s
o
n
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
65
0
A
d
d
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
1
4.
6
K-
‐
5
47
2
10
3
Ba
r
r
o
n
P
a
r
k
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
80
0
B
a
r
r
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
7.
0
K-
‐
5
33
6
48
Br
i
o
n
e
s
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
41
0
0
O
r
m
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
6.
5
K-
‐
5
41
5
64
Du
v
e
n
e
c
k
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
70
5
A
l
e
s
t
e
r
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
6.
5
K-
‐
5
50
1
77
El
C
a
r
m
e
l
o
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
30
2
4
B
r
y
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
4.
0
K-
‐
5
41
4
10
4
Es
c
o
n
d
i
d
o
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
89
0
E
s
c
o
n
d
i
d
o
R
o
a
d
St
a
n
f
o
r
d
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
5
7.
9
K-
‐
5
57
4
73
Fa
i
r
m
e
a
d
o
w
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
50
0
E
.
M
e
a
d
o
w
D
r
i
v
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
4.
9
K-
‐
5
50
4
10
3
Wa
l
t
e
r
H
a
y
s
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
15
2
5
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
1
7.
2
K-
‐
5
53
6
74
Ho
o
v
e
r
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
44
5
E
.
C
h
a
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
5.
6
K-
‐
5
41
6
74
Ni
x
o
n
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
17
1
1
S
t
a
n
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
St
a
n
f
o
r
d
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
5
10
.
7
K-
‐
5
48
1
45
Oh
l
o
n
e
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
95
0
A
m
a
r
i
l
l
o
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
7.
2
K-
‐
5
58
3
81
Pa
l
o
V
e
r
d
e
E
l
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
34
5
0
L
o
u
i
s
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
5.
0
K-
‐
5
41
7
83
Gr
e
e
n
d
e
l
l
S
i
t
e
41
2
0
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
5.
0
K,
A
d
u
l
t
,
O
t
h
e
r
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
82
.
1
56
4
9
Av
e
r
a
g
e
7
47
1
73
Jo
r
d
a
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
75
0
N
.
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
19
.
0
6-
‐
8
1,
0
1
5
53
JL
S
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
48
0
E
.
M
e
a
d
o
w
D
r
i
v
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
26
.
2
6-
‐
8
1,
0
0
1
38
Te
r
m
a
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
65
5
A
r
a
s
t
r
a
d
e
r
o
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
6.
6
6-
‐
8
66
3
10
0
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
51
.
8
26
7
9
52
Gu
n
n
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
78
0
A
r
a
s
t
r
a
d
e
r
o
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
49
.
7
9-
‐
1
2
1,
8
6
4
38
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
50
E
m
b
a
r
c
a
d
e
r
o
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
1
44
.
2
9-
‐
1
2
1,
8
8
5
43
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
93
.
9
37
4
9
40
Fr
e
m
o
n
t
H
i
l
l
s
S
i
t
e
26
8
0
0
F
r
e
m
o
n
t
R
o
a
d
Lo
s
A
l
t
o
s
H
i
l
l
s
,
9
4
0
2
2
7.
0
Le
a
s
e
d
t
o
P
i
n
e
w
o
o
d
S
c
h
o
o
l
@
$
1
0
5
,
2
3
1
/
m
o
n
t
h
,
ex
p
i
r
a
X
o
n
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
3
3
,
o
p
X
o
n
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
3
Ga
r
l
a
n
d
S
i
t
e
87
0
N
.
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
5.
0
Le
a
s
e
d
a
t
$
5
9
,
5
6
3
/
m
o
n
t
h
,
ex
p
i
r
a
X
o
n
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
4
52
5
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
52
5
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
2.
6
Le
a
s
e
d
t
o
A
t
h
e
n
a
A
c
a
d
e
m
y
@
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
/
m
o
n
t
h
ex
p
i
r
a
X
o
n
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
4
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
S
i
t
e
Mi
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
3
28
.
0
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
l
e
a
s
e
/
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
/
c
h
i
l
d
c
a
r
e
i
s
$
5
8
1
,
5
3
3
/
m
o
n
t
h
Ve
n
t
u
r
a
S
i
t
e
R
i
g
h
t
t
o
P
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
39
9
0
V
e
n
t
u
r
a
C
o
u
r
t
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
,
C
A
9
4
3
0
6
4.
6
Ri
g
h
t
t
o
r
e
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
2
.
4
a
c
r
e
s
@
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
v
a
l
u
e
(p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
l
y
c
o
n
v
e
y
e
d
t
o
C
P
A
)
2.
2
a
c
r
e
s
@
7
5
%
o
f
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
m
a
r
k
e
t
v
a
l
u
e
To
t
a
l
27
5
.
0
St
u
d
e
n
t
s
pe
r
A
c
r
e
Community
Needs
Subcommittee
Documents
** Prepared by the CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee – November 8, 2012 **
What’s Special About the Cubberley Community Center?
Cubberley provides an irreplaceable public, comprehensive community facility
that reflects our community values.
1. Cubberley is our last large (35 acres), undeveloped (non-parkland), publicly owned space.
2. Palo Alto has wisely chosen to disperse our public buildings to make offerings walkable,
bikeable, and transit-oriented, a City of Palo Alto Land Use & Community Services policy
as laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. Cubberley in the south and Lucie Stern in the north
offer many classes and programs meeting this goal; youth and teen programs at Ventura
and Mitchell Park add even more balance for many non-drivers. (Note that the new
Mitchell Park community center simply replaces its original community spaces).
3. The Cubberley site provides a unique opportunity for PAUSD and the City to plan a creative
co-location of community services and school(s) that could work together to make this
valuable public property a treasured part of our community for all ages.
4. It is essential to appreciate what is provided now at Cubberley in order to judge what can
best be offered going forward. Staff has recently surveyed current tenants, and the
Community Needs Subcommittee has interviewed many of the following significant
Cubberley groups.
• The Arts: 22 Artists in Residence currently have studios. Co-location yields benefits to
community and to artists; this model is being copied in locations around the world.
Three Resident Dance Programs have studios plus several small companies share
spaces, providing a complementary community and a variety of classes for all ages and
abilities. Music groups include Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra, Peninsula Women’s
Chorus, Peninsula Piano School, Palo Alto Philharmonic, and El Camino Youth
Symphony. Theater programs and camps round out the Cubberley arts programs.
• Sports & Recreation: Outdoor Sports – Four softball fields and four soccer fields allow
spring, summer, and fall youth leagues to practice and play Monday - Saturday. Adults
use the fields heavily on Sundays. Tennis courts are used heavily at all hours. The
football field and track are used regularly for soccer, football and jogging. Indoor Sports
and Fitness – Foothill and the City offer a wide array of sports and fitness classes for all
ages and abilities. Foothill is not building a new gymnasium at its new location and
would like to maintain a presence at Cubberley after moving to its new site.
• Senior Programs: Avenidas is interested in increasing opportunities for seniors and
combining Senior Wellness programs with the existing Stroke and Cardiovascular
programs as well as Senior Friendship Day and other senior social activities.
• Education: Preschools and after-school care – Such care provides for early learning
and enables parents to work, confident that their children are thriving. Private schools,
tutoring and continuing education -- Foothill College, the City, and the School District all
offer classes, many of which are adult education classes.
• Community Organizations: Friends of Palo Alto Library, Wildlife Rescue, spiritual
groups and others. Rooms can be rented for meetings, retreats, and special occasions.
CUBBERLEY FACILITIES AVAILABLE FOR RENT
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/30337
Regular Weekly Infrequent
Space Size Capac. Non-Profit Basic Non-Profit Basic
Auditorium with Kitchen NA NA NA NA
G-6 Dance Studio 1600 30 32 37 40 47
G-4 Gym Activity Room 1645 50 24 29 29 35
Gym A 5500 345 49 75 61 92
Gym B 7200 450 55 82 72 110
Pavilion – Double Gym 11,700 1600 84 107 110 134
A-2 Meeting Room 700 36 23 29 28 35
A-3 Meeting Room 700 36 23 29 28 359
A-6 Meeting Room 700 36 23 29 28 35
A-7 Meeting Room 700 36 23 29 28 35
FH Classroom 754 36 23 29 28 35
D-1 400 18 23 29 28 35
H-1 Lecture Room 1900 125 38 48 47 60
H-6 Activity Room 1400 100 29 35 38 45
L-6 Dance Studio 1650 35 32 37 40 47
Space Size Capac. Non-Profit Basic
Theatre 1000 317 varies varies
M-2 Music Rehearsal Room 1400 100 21 25
M-3 Dressing Room 700 40 18 22
M-4 Activity Room 1900 125 21 25
LUCIE STERN COMMUNITY CENTER
Space Resident Non-resident
Stern Ballroom 70 x 40 feet 300 for assemblies / 200 for dining 152 228
Community Room 45 xy 25 feet 125 for assemblies / 75 for dining 110 165
Fireside Room 25 x 26 feet 50 for assemblies / 35 for dining 88 132
Outdoor Patio 70 x 90 feet 250 / for assemblies / 150 for dining 90 35
Kitchen 32 48
NEW MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY & COMMUNITY CENTER
Community Center Portion
Space Resident Non-resident
Tech Lab 104 156
Matadero Room (Office Classroom) 82 123
Oak Room (CBO Classroom)
Adobe Room (Art/ECR Classroom) 82 123
El Palo Alto Room (Multipurpose room) 208 312
"The Drop" (Teen Center/Game Room)
Library Portion
Midtown Room (Program room)
Ventura Room (Computer room)
Barron Park Room (Group study room)
Palo Verde Room (Group study room)
Fairmeadow Room (Group study room)
Greenmeadow Room (Group study room)
"Teen Zone"
VENTURA COMMUNITY CENTER
Multi-purpose event room, with kitchen, suitable for rental
ART CENTER
Space Resident Non-resident
Auditorium 119 179
Courtyard 77 116
Green Room ..50 75
Kitchen ..34 51
Meeting Room ..77 116
Sculpture Garden 102 153
Lobby 77 116
Cubberley Master Plan 1991 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/30937
Palo Alto Community Centers
Cubberley Community Center
4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto. Operated by the City of Palo Alto since 1990, the center includes space for
community meetings, seminars, social events, dances, theater performances, music rehearsals and athletic
events. Outdoor space includes tennis courts, soccer, softball and football fields.
E-mail: cubberlkey@cityofpaloalto.org.
Hours: Mon-Thu 8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m.; Fri 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
Lucie Stern Community Center
1305 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto. Designed by Birge Clark and built in 1934, this Spanish Mediterranean-style
complex is home to the City of Palo Alto's Recreation Department and two theaters. Rooms are available for
rent for meetings, weddings, receptions and parties.
Hours: Mon-Fri 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
Mitchell Park Community Center
3800 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto. Closed for construction through 2012.
Ventura Community Center
3990 Ventura Court, Palo Alto. Home to Palo Alto Community Child Care, as well as Sojourner Truth Infant-
Toddler Program and the Palo Alto Family YMCA's Ventura Activity Center (during school year) and Heffalump
and Country Day School.
Hours: Mon-Fri 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
Oshman Family JCC - Taube Koret Campus for Jewish Life
3921 Fabian Way, Palo Alto. The OFJCC is a multi-use facility with programs and services for all ages and for
singles and families. Fitness center, double-court gymnasium, indoor and outdoor pools, preschool, meeting
rooms and a Cultural Arts Hall.
Chinese Community Center of the Peninsula
470 Anton Court, Palo Alto. Activities located at Cubberley Community Center, 4000 Middlefield Road. A
service-oriented, nonprofit center that provides senior community-service work, family-oriented services, and
information and referral services since 1968. English and Cantonese.
Co-sponsors activities with City of Palo Alto Recreation Department.
E-mail: info@chinesecommunitycenter.com
Source:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/cgi/pao_search_fab.cgi?Section=resources&Category=community%20centers
Palo Alto Online Database last updated: Monday, August 20, 2012.
Additional Music & Art Resources
Art For Well Beings 2800 West Bayshore PA www.artforwellbeings.org
Art for Well Beings (AFWB) offers art classes especially welcoming people with special needs. AFWB is open to
the public. Drop-in or sessions are available. All materials provided. Please call to register or visit website for
more information.
Art with Emily 402 El Verano Ave. PA www.artwithemily.com
Emily Young teaches mixed-media, multi-cultural art lessons for children at her fully equipped studio in Palo
Alto. Individual lessons or small group classes available.
Art Works Studio 595 Lincoln Ave. PA www.artworkspaloalto.com
Art Works Studio offers a variety of fine-art classes for kids, as well as summer camps.
Children's Music Workshops P.O. Box 60756, PA www.Alisonsmusiclessons.com
Kids music classes and private lessons for guitar, piano and voice. Locations in Palo Alto and Mountain View.
Music for special-needs children too.
International School of the Peninsula (ISTP) 151 Laura Lane, PA www.istp.org
Join ISTP for after-school programs for preschool, elementary and middle-school students. Classes include
French cooking, Asian cooking, chess, science, robotics, Chinese dance, art and craft, gymnastics, soccer and
multi-sports. For a complete list of classes, visit the Website.
Midpeninsula Community Media Center 900 San Antonio, PA www.communitymediacenter.net
The Media Center offers classes every month in a wide range of media arts, including publishing media on the
Web, pod casting, digital editing, field production, TV studio production, Photoshop for photographers, citizen
journalism, and autobiographical digital stories. One-on-one tutoring is also available.
Music with Toby www.tobybranz.com
Toby Branz offers private voice and violin lessons in Palo Alto. She received her master's degree from the San
Francisco Conservatory of Music in 2010 and a postgraduate diploma in 2011.
New Mozart School of Music 305 N. California Ave., PA info@newmozartschool.com
New Mozart provides private lessons on all instruments for all ages and early-childhood music classes for
children 2-7 years of age.
Opus1 Music Studio 2800 W Bayshore Road, PA www.musicopus1.com
Opus1 Music Studio is offering private and group music lessons for all kinds of instruments to aged 2 and up.
Beginners to advanced level.
Pacific Art League 688 Ramona St., PA www.pacificartleague.org
Art classes and workshops by qualified, experienced instructors for students from beginners to advanced and
even non-artists. Classes in collage, oil painting, portraits and sketching, life drawing, acrylic or watercolor and
brush painting. Sculpture. Registration is ongoing.
Palo Alto Art Center 1313 Newell Road, PA www.cityofpaloalto.org/enjoy
Classes and workshops for children and adults in ceramics, painting, drawing, jewelry, book arts, printmaking,
collage and more. Register online or stop by the Art Center for a class brochure.
Cubberley Community Center
Rental Room Users
Tenants Room
Acme Education Center L1
Artists Studios (23) E,F,U
California Law Revision D2
Cardiac Therapy G8
Children’s Pre-School Center T1
Dance Connection L5
Dance Visions L3
Foothill College Administration I
Friends of the PA Library - FOPAL
Good Neighbor Montessori K3
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading H4
Mitchell Park Library (Temp) Aud
Office of Emergency Services D4
Wildlife Rescue V
Zohar School of Dance L4
Dance
Academy of Danse Libre G6
Belly Rumba with Sol G6
Congolese Dance with Regine G6
Friday Night Ballroom Dancers Pav
Red Thistle Dancers G6
Saturday Night Ballroom Dancers- Pav
Zumba G4
Shiva Murugan Temple Theatre
Shri Krupa Dance Company Theatre
Music
El Camino Youth Symphony M4
Foothill Jazz M2
Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra M1/Theatre
Palo Alto Philharmonic H1/Theare
Peninsula Women’s Chorus M2
Peninsula Piano School M7
Foothill Symphonic Wings Theatre
Heritage Music Festival Theatre
Exercise/Sports Room
AYSO Soccer A2
Bay Area 3 on 3 Basketball PAV
Basketball/Volleyball Camps Gyms
Keys School Gym
Palo Alto Table Tennis Club Gym
Senior Table Tennis
Palo Alto Tennis Club Courts
SVK Self Defense G4
Taijiquan Tutelage M4
Traditional Wushu Association Aud
YMCA Basketball League Gyms
Special Olympics Gyms
National Junior Basketball Gyms
Palo Alto Midnight Gyms
Performance Science Training Institute G4
Palo Alto Elite Volleyball Club Gyms
Educational
Bay Area Arabic School B2
Dutch School A3
Grossman Academy A2
Kumon Math and Reading A7
Museo Italo Americano A3,6
PAUSD Adult School A2
PAUSD Post Graduate program A2
PA Art Center H6
Other
BA Amphibian/Reptile Society H6
Bay Area TheaterSports H1, H6
Christ Temple Church H1
Liga Hispanoamericana de Futbol A2
National Traffic Safety Institute B3
Palo Alto Mediation Any
Senior Friendship Day M4
Vineyard Christian Fellowship Theatre, A & M rooms
Commonwealth Club Theatre
WH
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
W
H
A
T
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
I
N
P
A
L
O
A
L
T
O
DR
A
F
T
10
-03
-12
AC
T
V
I
T
Y
AR
T
CE
N
T
E
R
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
LU
C
I
E
ST
E
R
N
VE
N
T
U
R
A
AV
E
N
I
D
A
S
PA
U
S
D
AD
U
L
T
E
D
MI
T
C
H
E
L
L
PA
R
K
JC
C
YM
C
A
OT
H
E
R
/
PR
I
V
A
T
E
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
R
e
n
t
La
r
g
e
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
s
X
X
X
X
Sm
a
l
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
s
X
X
X
Ki
t
c
h
e
n
X
X
Th
e
a
t
e
r
X
X
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
h
i
l
d
C
a
r
e
X
X
In
f
a
n
t
/
T
o
d
d
l
e
r
C
a
r
e
X
X
Gr
e
e
n
d
e
l
l
X
Pr
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
X
X
Gr
e
e
n
d
e
l
l
X
X
Af
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
X
PA
U
S
D
Ki
d
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
X
X
Te
e
n
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
ie
s
X
X
X
Se
n
i
o
r
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
X
Gr
e
e
n
.
+
C
u
b
b
X
Da
n
c
e
X
X
X
Pa
l
y
X
X
X
Mu
s
i
c
L
e
s
s
o
n
s
X
X
Pa
l
y
+
G
u
n
n
X
Ph
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
X
Pa
l
y
Co
o
k
i
n
g
Pa
l
y
X
Su
r
l
a
T
a
b
l
e
Pa
i
n
t
i
n
g
/
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
X
X
X
X
Ce
r
a
m
i
c
s
/
C
r
a
f
t
s
X
Pa
l
y
+
G
r
e
e
n
.
Je
w
e
l
r
y
M
a
k
i
n
g
X
X
Th
e
a
t
e
r
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
X
X
Co
m
p
u
t
e
r
S
k
i
l
l
s
/
L
a
b
X
Vi
a
A
d
u
l
t
E
d
Pa
l
y
+
Av
e
n
i
d
a
X
La
n
g
u
a
g
e
C
l
a
s
s
e
s
X
Pa
l
y
ES
L
Pa
l
y
+
G
r
e
e
n
.
He
a
l
t
h
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
X
X
Ph
y
s
i
c
a
l
T
h
e
r
a
p
y
X
X
X
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
CP
R
/
F
ir
s
t
A
i
d
X
Re
d
C
r
o
s
s
AC
T
V
I
T
Y
AR
T
CE
N
T
E
R
CU
B
B
E
R
L
E
Y
LU
C
I
E
ST
E
R
N
VE
N
T
U
R
A
AV
E
N
I
D
A
S
PA
U
S
D
AD
U
L
T
E
D
MI
T
C
H
E
L
L
PA
R
K
JC
C
YM
C
A
OT
H
E
R
/
PR
I
V
A
T
E
Te
n
n
i
s
X
X
So
c
c
e
r
X
X
So
f
t
b
a
l
l
X
Fo
o
t
b
a
l
l
Ba
s
k
e
t
b
a
l
l
X
X
X
Vo
l
l
e
y
b
a
l
l
X
X
Sw
i
m
m
i
n
g
**
X
X
Pa
l
y
+
G
u
n
n
We
i
g
h
t
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
X
X
Fi
t
n
e
s
s
/
E
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
C
l
a
s
s
e
s
X
X
X
Pa
l
y
X
X
X
Ta
b
l
e
T
e
n
n
i
s
X
X
Ma
r
t
i
a
l
A
r
t
s
X
X
X
Yo
g
a
/
M
e
d
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
X
X
X
Ba
r
r
P
r
k
E
l
e
m
X
X
X
**
Ri
n
c
o
n
a
da
P
o
o
l
YM
C
A
:
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
F
a
m
i
l
y
Y
M
C
A
,
3
4
1
2
R
o
s
s
;
Pa
g
e
M
i
l
l
Y
M
C
A
,
7
5
5
P
a
g
e
M
i
l
l
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
y
m
c
a
s
v
.
o
r
g
/
Os
h
m
a
n
F
a
m
i
l
y
J
C
C
- T
a
u
b
e
K
o
r
e
t
C
a
m
p
u
s
f
o
r
J
e
w
i
s
h
L
i
f
e
,
3
9
2
1
F
a
b
i
a
n
W
a
y
ww
w
.
p
a
l
o
a
l
t
o
jc
c
.o
r
g
/
Li
c
e
n
s
e
d
C
h
i
l
d
C
a
r
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
s
&
F
a
m
i
l
y
H
o
m
e
s
i
n
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
– 2
0
1
1
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
c
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
l
o
a
l
t
o
.
o
r
g
/
c
i
v
i
c
a
x
/
f
i
l
e
b
a
n
k
/
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
/
2
9
3
4
3
/
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
Mu
s
i
c
&
A
r
t
Cl
a
s
s
e
s
Ar
t
F
o
r
W
e
l
l
B
e
i
n
g
s
28
0
0
W
e
s
t
B
a
y
s
h
o
r
e
R
o
a
d
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ar
t
f
o
r
w
e
l
l
b
e
i
n
g
s
.
o
r
g
Off
e
r
s
a
r
t
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y
w
e
l
c
o
m
i
n
g
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
i
t
h
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
n
e
e
d
s
.
A
F
W
B
i
s
o
p
e
n
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
.
Ar
t
w
i
t
h
E
m
i
l
y
40
2
E
l
V
e
r
a
n
o
A
v
e
.
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
a
r
t
w
i
t
h
e
m
i
l
y
.
c
o
m
Mix
e
d
-me
d
i
a
,
m
u
l
t
i
-cu
l
t
u
r
a
l
a
r
t
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
. I
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
o
r
s
m
a
l
l
g
r
o
u
p
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
.
Ar
t
W
o
r
k
s
S
t
u
d
i
o
59
5
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
A
v
e
.
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
a
r
t
w
o
r
k
s
p
a
l
o
a
l
t
o
.
c
o
m
Off
e
r
s
a
v
a
r
i
e
t
y
o
f
f
i
n
e
-ar
t
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
o
r
k
i
d
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
s
u
m
m
e
r
c
a
m
p
s
.
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
'
s
M
u
s
i
c
W
or
k
s
h
o
p
s
P.
O
.
B
o
x
6
0
7
5
6
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
A
l
i
s
o
n
s
m
u
s
i
c
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
.
c
o
m
Ki
d
s
m
u
s
i
c
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
g
u
i
t
a
r
,
p
i
a
n
o
a
n
d
v
o
i
c
e
.
M
u
s
i
c
f
o
r
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
-ne
e
d
s
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
t
o
o
.
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
o
f
M
u
s
i
c
a
n
d
A
r
t
s
a
t
F
i
n
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
23
0
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
C
i
r
c
l
e
,
Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
ww
w
.
a
r
t
s
4
a
l
l
.
o
r
g
Cla
s
s
e
s
y
e
a
r
-ro
u
n
d
i
n
m
u
s
i
c
,
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
n
d
d
i
g
i
t
a
l
a
r
t
s
f
o
r
a
g
e
s
1
4
m
o
n
t
h
s
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
.
V
a
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
s
u
m
m
e
r
c
a
m
p
s
,
o
n
e
- a
n
d
t
w
o
-da
y
a
r
t
s
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
o
f
f
e
r
e
d
th
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
y
e
a
r
.
P
r
i
v
a
t
e
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
a
l
s
o
o
f
f
e
r
e
d
.
In
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
S
c
h
o
o
l
o
f
t
h
e
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
(
I
S
T
P
)
15
1
L
a
u
r
a
L
a
n
e
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
i
s
t
p
.
o
r
g
Aaf
t
e
r
-sc
h
o
o
l
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
f
o
r
p
r
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
,
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
a
n
d
m
i
d
d
l
e
-sc
h
o
o
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.
C
l
a
s
s
e
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
F
r
e
n
c
h
c
o
o
k
i
n
g
,
A
s
i
a
n
c
o
o
k
i
n
g
,
c
h
e
s
s
,
s
c
i
e
n
c
e
,
r
o
b
o
t
i
c
s
,
Ch
i
n
e
s
e
d
a
n
c
e
,
a
r
t
a
n
d
c
r
a
f
t
,
g
y
m
n
a
s
t
i
c
s
,
s
o
c
c
e
r
a
n
d
m
u
l
t
i
-sp
o
r
t
s
.
Ki
n
d
e
r
m
u
s
i
k
w
i
t
h
W
e
n
d
y
Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
ww
w
.
k
i
n
d
e
r
m
u
s
i
k
.
c
o
m
Gr
o
u
p
m
u
s
i
c
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
o
r
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
a
g
e
s
b
i
r
t
h
t
o
7
a
n
d
t
h
e
i
r
c
a
r
e
g
i
v
e
r
s
.
A
l
l
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
i
n
g
i
n
g
,
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
y
,
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
,
m
u
s
i
c
a
l
g
a
m
e
s
,
a
n
d
h
o
m
e
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
,
a
n
d
a
i
m
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e
w
h
o
l
e
c
h
i
l
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
m
u
s
i
c
Li
n
g
l
i
n
g
Y
a
n
g
V
i
o
l
i
n
S
t
u
d
i
o
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
li
n
g
l
i
n
g
v
i
o
l
i
n
.
b
l
o
g
s
p
o
t
.
c
o
m
Pri
v
a
t
e
v
i
o
l
i
n
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
7
a
n
d
u
p
a
n
d
a
d
u
l
t
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
l
e
v
e
l
s
.
Ma
n
z
a
n
a
M
u
s
i
c
S
c
h
o
o
l
Ba
r
r
o
n
Pa
r
k
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
,
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
h
o
m
e
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
m
a
n
z
a
n
a
m
u
s
i
c
s
c
h
o
o
l.
c
o
m
/
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
a
n
d
g
r
o
u
p
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
a
n
d
a
d
u
l
t
s
o
n
g
u
i
t
a
r
,
v
i
o
l
i
n
,
b
a
n
j
o
,
m
a
n
d
o
l
i
n
,
f
i
d
d
l
e
,
v
o
c
a
l
,
a
r
r
a
n
g
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
m
u
s
i
c
t
h
e
o
r
y
.
Mi
d
p
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
M
e
d
i
a
C
e
n
t
e
r
90
0
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
o
a
d
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
m
e
d
i
a
c
e
n
t
e
r
.
n
e
t
Cla
s
s
e
s
e
v
e
r
y
m
o
n
t
h
i
n
a
w
i
d
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
m
e
d
i
a
a
r
t
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g
m
e
d
i
a
o
n
t
h
e
W
e
b
,
p
o
d
c
a
s
t
i
n
g
,
d
i
g
i
t
a
l
e
d
i
t
i
n
g
,
f
i
e
l
d
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
T
V
s
t
u
d
i
o
pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
P
h
o
t
o
s
h
o
p
f
o
r
p
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
e
r
s
,
c
i
t
i
z
e
n
j
o
u
r
n
a
l
i
s
m
,
a
n
d
a
u
t
o
b
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
d
i
g
i
t
a
l
s
t
o
r
i
e
s
.
Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
-Lo
s
A
l
t
o
s
A
d
u
l
t
S
ch
o
o
l
33
3
M
o
f
f
e
t
t
B
l
v
d
.
,
Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
ww
w
.
m
v
l
a
a
e
.
n
e
t
Of
f
e
r
i
n
g
:
B
e
a
d
i
n
g
,
c
e
r
a
m
i
c
s
,
c
h
o
r
u
s
,
d
i
g
i
t
a
l
p
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
,
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
,
g
u
i
t
a
r
,
I
k
e
b
a
n
a
,
o
r
c
h
e
s
t
r
a
a
n
d
p
a
i
n
t
i
n
g
.
Mu
s
i
c
w
i
t
h
T
o
b
y
ww
w
.
t
o
b
y
b
r
a
n
z
.
c
o
m
Pri
v
a
t
e
v
o
i
c
e
a
n
d
v
i
o
l
i
n
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
i
n
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
.
Mu
s
i
c
W
i
t
h
i
n
U
s
24
8
3
O
l
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
W
a
y
,
S
u
i
t
e
1
5
0
,
Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
ww
w
.
t
h
e
m
u
s
i
c
w
i
t
h
i
n
u
s
.
c
o
m
Cla
s
s
e
s
,
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
,
a
n
d
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
u
s
i
n
g
t
e
c
h
n
i
q
u
e
s
d
r
a
w
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
i
e
l
d
s
o
f
l
i
f
e
c
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
,
m
i
n
d
f
u
l
n
e
s
s
-ba
s
e
d
m
e
d
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
y
o
g
a
,
d
e
l
i
b
e
r
a
t
e
pr
a
c
t
i
c
e
,
g
r
o
u
p
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
s
o
u
n
d
h
e
a
l
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
u
s
i
c
i
m
p
r
o
v
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ne
w
M
o
z
a
r
t
S
c
h
o
o
l
o
f
M
u
s
i
c
30
5
N
.
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
v
e
.
,
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
n
e
w
m
o
z
a
r
t
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
c
o
m
/
Pri
v
a
t
e
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
o
n
a
l
l
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
a
g
e
s
a
n
d
e
a
r
l
y
-ch
i
l
d
h
o
o
d
m
u
s
i
c
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
o
r
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
2
-7
y
e
a
r
s
o
f
a
g
e
.
Op
u
s
1
M
u
s
i
c
S
t
u
d
io
28
0
0
W
B
a
y
s
h
o
r
e
R
o
a
d
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
mu
s
i
c
o
p
u
s
1
.
c
o
m
Ppr
i
v
a
t
e
a
n
d
g
r
o
u
p
m
u
s
i
c
l
e
s
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
k
i
n
d
s
o
f
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
a
g
e
d
2
a
n
d
u
p
.
B
e
g
i
n
n
e
r
s
t
o
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
l
e
v
e
l
.
Pa
c
i
f
i
c
A
r
t
L
e
a
g
u
e
68
8
R
a
m
o
n
a
S
t
.
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
p
a
c
i
f
i
c
a
r
t
l
e
a
g
u
e
.
o
r
g
Cl
a
s
s
e
s
i
n
c
o
l
l
a
g
e
,
o
il
p
a
i
n
t
i
n
g
,
p
o
r
t
r
a
i
t
s
a
n
d
s
k
e
t
c
h
i
n
g
,
l
i
f
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
,
a
c
r
y
l
i
c
o
r
wa
t
e
r
c
o
l
o
r
&
b
r
u
s
h
p
a
i
n
t
i
n
g
,
s
cu
l
p
t
u
r
e
.
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
D
a
n
c
e
C
l
a
s
s
e
s
Ba
y
e
r
B
a
l
l
e
t
A
c
a
d
e
m
y
20
2
8
O
l
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
W
a
y
,Mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
ww
w
.
b
a
y
e
r
b
a
l
l
e
t
a
c
a
d
e
m
y
.
c
o
m
Cl
a
s
s
i
c
a
l
R
u
s
s
i
a
n
b
a
l
l
e
t
.
Be
a
u
d
o
i
n
'
s
S
c
h
o
o
l
o
f
D
a
n
c
e
46
4
C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o
A
v
e
.
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
B
e
a
u
d
o
i
n
s
-St
u
d
i
o
.
c
o
m
Ta
p
,
b
a
l
l
e
t
,
b
a
l
l
r
o
o
m
a
n
d
j
a
z
z
d
a
n
c
e
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
a
n
d
a
d
u
l
t
s
.
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
o
r
b
o
y
s
,
s
e
n
i
o
r
s
.
Br
a
z
i
l
i
a
n
D
a
n
c
e
Lu
c
i
e
S
t
e
r
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
e
n
t
e
r
B
a
l
l
r
o
o
m
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
c
i
t
y
o
f
p
al
o
a
l
t
o
.
o
r
g
/
e
n
j
o
y
Br
a
z
i
l
i
a
n
d
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
a
g
e
s
1
6
-99
Ce
n
t
e
r
f
o
r
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
ww
w
.
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
-ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
o
r
g
CM
E
R
o
f
f
e
r
s
b
o
t
h
i
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
o
r
y
o
n
e
-da
y
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
t
o
e
x
p
l
o
r
e
w
h
a
t
d
a
n
c
e
/
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
r
a
p
y
i
s
a
b
o
u
t
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
a
s
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
e
Ro
u
te
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
C
o
u
r
s
e
s
f
o
r
p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
i
n
b
e
c
o
m
i
n
g
a
d
a
n
c
e
/
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
e
r
a
p
i
s
t
.
Da
n
c
e
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
40
0
0
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
,
L
-5,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
(
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
)
ww
w
.
d
a
n
c
e
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
p
a
l
o
a
l
t
o
.
c
o
m
Gra
d
e
d
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
o
r
p
r
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
w
i
t
h
a
v
a
r
i
e
t
y
o
f
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
t
o
me
e
t
e
v
e
r
y
d
a
n
c
e
r
'
s
n
e
e
d
s
.
B
a
l
l
e
t
,
j
a
z
z
,
t
a
p
,
h
i
p
h
o
p
,
b
o
y
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
l
y
r
i
c
a
l
,
P
i
l
a
t
e
s
an
d
c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
a
r
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
b
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
t
o
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
l
e
v
e
l
s
.
Da
n
c
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
s
40
0
0
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
,
L
-3,
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
(
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
)
ww
w
.
d
a
n
c
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
.
o
r
g
Non
p
r
o
f
i
t
c
o
m
m
un
i
t
y
d
a
n
c
e
c
e
n
t
e
r
,
o
f
f
e
r
s
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
f
r
o
m
a
g
e
3
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
.
C
l
a
s
s
e
s
r
a
n
g
e
f
r
o
m
m
o
d
e
r
n
t
o
h
i
p
h
o
p
,
l
y
r
i
c
a
l
,
P
i
l
a
t
e
s
,
j
a
z
z
,
b
a
l
l
e
t
,
a
n
d
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
im
p
r
o
v
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
s
h
o
w
c
a
s
e
.
Uf
o
r
i
a
S
t
u
d
i
o
s
81
9
R
a
m
o
n
a
S
t
.
,
Pa
l
o
A
l
t
o
ww
w
.
u
f
o
r
i
a
s
t
u
d
i
o
s
.c
o
m
Spe
c
i
a
l
i
z
e
s
i
n
d
a
n
c
e
(
Z
u
m
b
a
,
H
i
p
H
o
p
,
B
o
l
l
y
w
o
o
d
,
H
u
l
a
H
o
o
p
i
n
g
)
.
Zo
h
a
r
D
a
n
c
e
C
o
m
p
a
n
y
40
0
0
M
i
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
,
L
-4,
Pa
l
o
Al
t
o
(
C
u
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
)
ww
w
.
z
o
h
a
r
d
a
n
c
e
.
o
r
g
Off
e
r
s
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
i
n
j
a
z
z
,
b
a
l
l
e
t
a
n
d
m
o
d
e
r
n
d
a
n
c
e
.
Neighboring Community Centers
Sunnyvale Community Centers
http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityServices/CommunityCenters.aspx
Community Center, located at 550 East Remington Drive
The Sunnyvale Community Center is a unique recreation complex which includes a Creative Arts Center,
Performing Arts Center, Indoor Sports Center, general Recreation Center and an Arboretum Complex
Use of the Sunnyvale Community Center is for City-sponsored community recreation activities in which anyone
may participate. However, there are also accommodations to fit almost every need by private groups from small
meeting rooms that can be used by as few as 15 people, to state-of-the-art, Internet-ready conference rooms
that can seat 300 guests or clients. A large meeting could be held in the 200-seat theatre, a team building
session in the Indoor Sports Center or a wedding reception in one of the fully equipped banquet facilities.
The Sunnyvale Community Center boasts a 200-seat theater, which has a fully rigged and lighted stage that can
accommodate plays, recitals and concerts. The theatre hosts two resident theatre companies: California Theatre
Center (adult professional theatre company), and Sunnyvale Community Players (volunteer community theater
organization).
Programs and Activities
Senior Center
The Community Center campus also includes the brand-new Sunnyvale Senior Center, which hosts
educational, recreational and cultural activities for adults 50 years and older. The Senior Center also includes
several rooms, including a large ballroom and a professional kitchen that can be rented for large events.
After School Recreation Programs
The majority of after-school programs are conducted at elementary and middle school sites in Sunnyvale or at
the Sunnyvale Community Center.
Summer Recreation Programs
The City of Sunnyvale also offers a wide variety of recreation, sports, arts and enrichment activities and camps
for children and teens during the summer months. For middle school and high school-age teens, there is a
summer recreation volunteer program designed to provide young people with the opportunity to develop
leadership and job skills. Swim classes and drop-in swim at local pools are available for children and adults.
Activities for Adults
Year-round programs for adults range from adult sports leagues and drop-in gym programs to pottery and other
visual and performing arts classes.
Therapeutic Recreation Program
The Therapeutic Recreation Program promotes the development of new leisure skills, increases self-esteem
and social skills. The program provides information and referral services and participates in cooperative
recreational programs with other cities for special events. We provide social recreation programs for individuals
with all types of disabilities and all levels of functioning.
Greenbelt Stroll
Hike, swim, play tennis, picnic in the park -- enjoy 2.7 mile-long stretch of the John W. Christian Greenbelt.
Columbia Neighborhood Center at 785 Morse Avenue 3.5 miles from the main Community Center
The Columbia Neighborhood Center (CNC) is located at 785 Morse Avenue in Sunnyvale (not far from Fair
Oaks exit from 101) 3.5 miles away from the main Sunnyvale Community Center. It was developed to provide
social, recreational and educational services for north Sunnyvale residents. This collaborative project between
the City of Sunnyvale, Sunnyvale Elementary School District, Advanced Micro Devices, Sunnyvale residents,
and numerous community agencies was formed in the fall of 1994, concurrent with the opening of Columbia
Middle School. The CNC, located on a 25-acre site, includes the AMD Sports and Service Center building,
Columbia Middle School, and the Sunnyvale Preschool Center. The CNC is open to all community residents and
provides a variety of services and activities year round, seven days a week, including evenings.
Cupertino
http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=178
Quinlan Community Center located at 10185 Stelling Road, .3 miles from the Sports Center
Built in 1989 and opened to the public in 1990, this 27,000 square foot facility has won numerous awards for its
innovative design. It is centrally located on Stelling Road near Stevens Creek Boulevard and enjoys views of the
Cupertino foothills and beautiful Memorial Park right out its back door.
The Quinlan Community Center is home to the City of Cupertino's Parks & Recreation Department, the
Cupertino Historical Museum, as well as serving as a sub-station for the Sheriff's Department. The art of the
Cupertino Fine Arts League lines the walls throughout the building.
The Quinlan Community Center is a multi-use building, offering classrooms for Parks & Recreation classes, as
well as a variety of other rooms available to rent for your business or personal needs. The Cupertino Room
features a full caterer's kitchen and can accommodate up to 275 people in a banquet format, or up to 300
people for an event with theater-style seating, making it an ideal spot for weddings, receptions, corporate
seminars or meetings. The Social Room can accommodate up to 80 people, ideal for smaller gatherings like
birthday parties, baby showers or even an employee retreat. The attached patio provides a quiet spot to relax
and enjoy a bit of fresh air or to slip out for a stroll around the park.
Community Hall located at 10350 Torre Avenue 1.2 miles from the Sports Center
Community Hall will wow you and your clients with its beautiful cherrywood paneling, stylish seating, and
theatrical lighting. Elegant, ascending windows stretch toward the ceiling and fill the facility with light. Double
glass doors on the north and south sides of the building open onto stately brick patio spaces.
The facility also offers state of the art audio/visual equipment for all your technological needs. Two six-foot by
eight-foot mounted screens present the opportunity for dynamic presentations, certain to make an impression.
Laptop connections are available throughout. A plasma flat screen in the elegant reception lobby adds
ambiance to your event while keeping patrons informed. Worried about technology set-up and operation? Our
staff assistants are present throughout your event to help.
Community Hall can also be transformed into an elegant banquet facility for wedding receptions or parties.
Tables and chairs can be arranged in a variety of ways, one of which is sure to be perfect for your event.
Cupertino Sports Center located at 21111 Stevens Creek Blvd
The Cupertino Sports Center features 17 tennis courts, a fitness center with LifeFitness and Star Trac strength
training equipment, LifeFitness and Hoist free weights, LifeFitness and Star Trac bikes and treadmills,
LifeFitness ellipticals, Techno Gym Waves, Precor AMT's, 2 racquetball courts, complete locker room and child
watch facilities. The resident tennis professional offers private and group lessons, pro shop and Friday Night
social drop-in tennis programs.
Cupertino Senior Center located at 21251 Stevens Creek Blvd 1 block from Sports Center
The Cupertino Senior Center is the perfect place to meet people and enrich your life. We are Cupertino’s hub for
activities, information and services that are specifically geared toward active adults 50 years and older.
Cupertino Teen Center located at 21111 Stevens Creek Blvd
The Teen Center is a new facility with all of the latest gaming equipment and cool features that teens enjoy.
Take your pick from a game of pool, foosball, air hockey, pin ball, Xbox 360, Wii, PSII, five computers, board
games, two big screen TV’s, movies, and more! The Teen Center also has a kitchenette which includes:
refrigerator/freezer, microwave, toaster oven, two (2) large tables, and fifteen (15) chairs. It can be rented for
parties or special occasions for $200 / 3 hours.
Saratoga
http://www.saratoga.ca.us/cityhall/rec/facility_and_park_reservations/facilities/cscenter.asp
Joan Pisani Community Center located at 19655 Allendale Ave
The perfect location for your next gathering at affordable prices. We can accommodate 15 to 300 guests for
your wedding, reception, party or meeting. Garden patio, large multipurpose rooms and kitchen facilities are
available one year in advance. Non profit groups receive 50% discount, Residents of Saratoga receive a 10%
discount.
Preschool, Youth Art & Enrichment
• Saratoga Community Preschool, My First Art Class
• Youth Oil Painting; Public Speaking, Pre-public Speaking
• Music Together, Vocal Performance, Magic, Clay, Piano Games, Beginning Guitar
Youth & Teen Health & Fitness
• Archery, Jr. Rock Climbing, Fencing, Squash, Shotokan Karate, Gymnastics, Just 4 Kicks Soccer, Lil’ Sluggers,
Deep Cliff Golf, Atherton Lacrosse, Ice Skating, Hockey, Tennis
• Dance Force, April Paye
• Karate, Fun Fun Fundamentals
• Saratoga School of Dance: Ballet, Tiny Tots Dance, Ballet/Tap, Boys Tap Dance, Tap
Teen & Community Programs
• Driver’s Ed, CPR, Youth Oil Painting, Beg. Guitar
Adult Health & Fitness
• Jacki Sorensen Aerobics, Hula Hoop, Jazzercise, Baby Boomers Fitness, Ergo Fitness Workshop
• Deep Cliff Golf classes, Adult Tennis
• Cook Your Buns, Eating for Vibrant Health
• Saratoga School of Dance: Tap, Latinizmo, Folk Dancing, Zumba
• Lunchtime Yoga, Vinyasa Yoga, Beg. & Adv. Yoga, Rosen Method Movement, Beg. Tai Chi
• Ballroom, African Dance, Belly Dancing, Ladies Latin
Adult Arts & Enrichment
• Ikebana, Adult Oil Painting, Beading
• Landscaping Design, Chocolate Truffles, Free Your Voice, Take a Tour of Italy, Chinese Painting
Saratoga Senior Center, adjacent to the Saratoga Community Center.
The Senior Center serves as a vital resource for seniors and older adults in the Saratoga community, offering
over 35 activities and classes, as well as other services, trips, and special events, programs and activities,
Wellness screenings, Speakers, the Opportunity to build friendships, as well as a caregivers' support group
Warner Hutton House, located at 13777-A Fruitvale Ave, around the corner from Community Center
This charming & romantic 1896 Queen Anne house includes a garden patio with an inviting gazebo. It is the
ultimate setting for your small, intimate garden wedding, and is perfect for small parties, elegant socials or
business retreats. The house and garden have a 30 to 80 person capacity. Includes full service kitchen.
Saratoga Prospect Center, located at 19848 Prospect Road, 3.1 miles from Community Center
The Saratoga Prospect Center (formerly the North Campus) offers an attractive site for business meetings,
wedding receptions, parties, and seminars. Facility Rental Discounts (one discount allowed per rental): Non
profit groups receive 50% discount.
Grace Building Main Room Grace Building Conf/Meeting Room Friendship Hall
• 2200 square feet
• 30-75 person capacity
• $115 per hour
• Includes kitchenette facility
• 500 square feet
• 10-25 person capacity
• $55 per hour
• 2264 square feet
• 150 person capacity
• $165 per hour
• Full service catering kitchen
• Hardwood dance floor
Mountain View
Community Center located at 201 S Rengstorff Ave in Rengstorff Park
http://www.ci.mtnview.ca.us/city_hall/comm_services/recreation_programs_and_services/facilities_and_reservations/reserva
tions.asp
When the Community Center is not being used for Recreation classes* and City events, it is available for private
rental. Our building is the perfect location and facility for that special party or meeting.
Located in Rengstorff Park, the Center provides a relaxing setting along with professional, friendly service.
Trees, turf and beautiful plants abound in the park and facilities. You will find a skate park, pool, BBQ areas,
tennis courts, playgrounds, and a natural grass play area in this beautiful park.
• Rooms for rent include the Auditorium (capacity 200), Lower Social Hall (capacity 100), Rooms 2 and 3
(capacities 40and 60)
• Preschool programs
• Classes are for Tot & Preschool, Youth & Teen, Adults & Seniors
Gym Rentals – shared facilities with open middle schools
The City of Mountain View has two great gymnasium facilities that are available for rent Monday-Friday, 5:30 pm
to 10:00 pm and 8:30 am to 4:00 pm on weekends. Both gymnasiums are divided into two sides/courts (half
gym) for $50R/$63NR an hour, or one full gym for $111R/$139NR an hour and are ideal for activities such as
basketball or volleyball. The auxiliary rooms are great for many activities including dance and exercise classes.
The auxiliary room is available for $121R/$126 an hour.
• Mountain View Sports Pavilion at 1185 Castro St, 1.9 miles from Community Center
• Whisman Sports Center at1500 Middlefield Rd, 1.4 miles from Community Center
Senior Center located at 266 Escuela Avenue, .7 miles from Community Center
Game Room -- Billiards tables, table tennis, puzzles and more!
Classes & Workshops -- Classes include exercise, arts & crafts, dance, music and enrichment! Also, sign up for
free workshops on various topics.
Special Events -- Special events year-round for all to enjoy including a Summer Picnic and Holiday Gala!
Exercise Room -- Equipped with treadmills, elliptical trainers, free weights, stationary bikes and more!
Social Services -- Blood pressure and Alzheimer's screenings, legal assistance and health insurance counseling
are offered.
Travel Program -- Expand horizons with trips both locally and further afield.
Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, 500 Castro Street 1.9 miles from the Community Center
http://www.ci.mtnview.ca.us/mvcpa/mvcpa.html
Intelligently designed with state-of-the-art technology, the Center is perfectly suited for its stated goal--to host a
comprehensive performing arts program for a culturally diverse community.
Historic Adobe Building, located at 157 Moffett Boulevard 1.5 miles from Community Center
The restored Adobe Building, located at 157 Moffett Boulevard, maintains its rustic charm while offering modern
conveniences to make any event one to remember. It is available for a variety of events ranging from weddings
to corporate meetings and boasts the following amenities.
The Rengstorff House and gardens in Shoreline Park are available for rental daily except during our public
hours, (Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m). Included in the rental fee is the use of the entire
first floor of this historic Victorian home. The maximum capacity of the house using only the indoor areas is 49
people. Using both the indoor and outdoor areas, the house and grounds can accommodate up to 150 guests
and is wheelchair-accessible. The gracious dining room and three lovely parlors, all decorated with classic
period décor, open up to brick patios surrounded by manicured lawns, blooming flowers and natural areas.
Menlo Park
http://www.menlopark.org/departments/dep_comservices.html
Burgess Park, 700 Alma St
Originally a part of the Dibble Hospital Facilities and purchased in 1948, Burgess Park is one of the first City-
owned recreation areas in Menlo Park.
Arrillaga Family Recreation Center adjacent to Burgess Park
The picturesque Arrillaga Recreation Center offers room rentals for both residents and non-residents. This
center, complete with full kitchen and ample parking, presents a relaxing setting and is surrounded by a park.
Arrillaga Family Recreation Center offers seven rooms for rent of various sizes (680 square feet to 2,378 square
feet) including 2 dance studios to accommodate a variety of activities from weddings to birthdays and even
corporate events)=Resident, (NR)=Non-Resident
Arrillaga Family Gymnasium adjacent to Burgess Park
Facilities include basketball, volleyball, and badminton courts for drop-in, youth, and adult leagues. The gym is
rented 6 mornings per week for health and fitness classes.
Arrillaga Family Gymnastics Center, 501 Laurel Street adjacent to Burgess Park
10,000 sq ft gymnastics room, multipurpose room and exercise room. Menlo Park Gymnastics currently has a
girl’s competitive team, which has been very successful in competition. The new facility has the space and
equipment to develop a boy’s competitive program and gives the City the ability to host competitions and
demonstrations. Future program plans include classes in Rhythmic Gymnastics, Circus skills and cheerleading.
In addition to the developmental gymnastics equipment, the new gym has an 1800 sq ft pre-school area with an
adjacent toddler restroom.
Onetta Harris Community Center, 100 Terminal Ave by the Belle Haven Pool, 3.6 miles from Burgess Park
The OHCC offers rentals for Menlo Park residents and non-residents. The center features a multi-purpose room,
kitchen, gymnasium, computer lab, fitness center, conference room, pre-school room, and two classrooms.
Additionally, the OHCC is home to various City of Menlo Park programs and special events which have
included, Multi-Cultural Days, Teen Dances, Camp OHCC, Game Nights, Career Fairs, Holiday Celebrations,
Community Classes, and Meetings.
Senior Center
The Menlo Park Senior Center located at 100 Terminal Ave, Menlo Park, CA 94025 next to the Belle Haven
Pool, Onetta Harris Community Center, Beechwood School, and the newly renovated Kelly Park. The Senior
Center offers rentals for Menlo Park residents and non-residents. The center features a Lobby, Ballroom,
Community Room, Imagination Room, Computer Lab, and Poolside Patio. Additionally, the Senior Center is
home to various programs and special events which have included Luncheons, Receptions, BBQs, Picnics, and
Fiestas.
Teen Services
Menlo Park Community Services Department has programs geared for teens. All programs are set up so teens
will be with others of the same age and same grade. We offer a series of programs focusing on everything from
sports and adventure, to education and career development.
Sunnyvale Senior Center Visit Notes
Shari Furman set up a very informative visit to the Sunnyvale Senior Center, which is a stand-alone building but
part of a larger community center complex. Lead by Gerard, who had also worked in San Jose and San Carlos.
Open to 50 and older. 20-25% of users are nonresidents. The building is a Senior Center 8-6 M-F and 10-2 on
weekends, but multi-use on evenings and weekends. For example yoga classes may be held there in evening.
23000 sq feet, one story
A main theme is that the nature of senior services has shifted, with the trend for more exercise/wellness classes.
On space, preference is for flexible rooms that can have different purposes
2800 paid members. Annual membership fees: Basic is $25, Premium (access to fitness equipment room and
offsite table tennis) $29. Daily use fee is $5. Non resident fees are $39/$45. Members receive a $5 discount on
classes. Note fees last year were $15 and $19; though considerable complaint about raising fees, no fall off in
membership occurred after the increases. 1200 unduplicated users of fitness facility per year. Center now
attempts full cost recovery-- have lost much in City funding, so attempting to be cost neutral to city. Try to
balance free and fee-based activities. Lectures are generally free; most classes are fee-based. Fees earn about
$80k, classes earn about $40k.
Partners as much as possible with other service providers. Some of their Art programs are done by Adult Ed,
which is eligible for County/State subsidies. Foothill/deAnza does adaptive exercise class, with similar subsidy.
(Some seniior services provided at Columbia Neighborhood center are for lower socio-economic seniors, and
are part of a facility that seeks to serve families in the neighborhood. Those classes have lower fees, a attract a
lower socioeconomic group. ) To avoid confusion in registration, those classes do not appear in the City’s
brochure; Adult Ed and Foothill/DeAnza market and register for their classes. Some exercise classes are held
in nearby buildings, part of the same complex. Fee for 1 per week 9 week Zumba class is, for example, $34.
Library visits 2x per month; El Camino Hosp. comes 1x per week; Pamf sends speakers; El Camino Health
Library provides resources.
Variety of services- lectures, classes, lunch available, lounge, fitness equipment room, computer room, billiard
room, art room, art boutique, chatting room, small rooms for privacy
Food- Cafe serves a lunch M-F; $5.50 member/$8.50 non-member. Current deal with food provider is that
provider gets an office, a full service kitchen for use in catering; first 30 meals are provided free to SC and cost
$4 each above 30. Had lost City subsidy of $30,000 which changed price structure; still this year lunch is cost
neutral. Four applicants qualified for the RFP; 3 submitted application. New RFP every 3 years.
Fitness Room- Cardio and weight resistance equipment. Had been about 60 per day, now 100 visitors per day.
Small room- 900 sq. ft. Formerly had a part time staff, then volunteers now none. Many of the volunteers were
themselves working out when supposed to be volunteering; all (except 1 or 2 who still come) “walked out” when
told they could not use equipment during volunteer time. There was an insurance/workers comp issue involved.
Currently, per insurance requirements, the room is locked and members allowed entrance to use only after:
some training on equipment, watching a DVD that demonstrates how to use equipment. To allow many
members to use and because 20 min is sufficient to maintain cardio fitness, each piece of equipment has a 20
minute limit; self policed; users put name on list for equipment to establish time and wait list.
Computer Room- Small with 8 computers. Group had originally wanted 30 computers in larger room, but when it
was explained that having a dedicated use would make the large room unable to be used for other functions,
and at various times of day, the supporters understood. The room is open 5 hours per day, and well used. There
is not a need for waitlists for computer use. In past year have seen a surge in skype use. Some instruction is
given for those who want to learn how to use email. Retired engineers help with hardware and software issues.
Members can bring in laptops or desktops for free help.
AV room- Used for films on Friday nights and for lectures. Film screenings were much more popular 5 years
ago; Now attendance may go as low as 5-10. Not likely to be there in a few years
Consulting Rooms- One of their more more unique features. 4 rooms used for a variety of services where more
privacy is need. Blood pressure clinic 2 per week; health insurance counseling; 20 minute free meetings with
lawyers who provide this service pro bono; etc.
Large Room- Divisible into 3 rooms by partitions.Some part used for classes, lunch served in one part. Special
Events-hold 10 per year. Room is often rented on weekends for weddings/events; reg hourly rate is $175 but
premium rate for weekends is $300 per hour. Total room size 4300 sq feet
Boutique- at front entrance; most centers have discontinued boutique, but it seems to work at this center; artists
receive space and utilities; MOU with City that 10% of revenue goes to City.
Art room- Have art classes and areas to work. When he arrived, art was 70% of classes and exercise 30% but
surveys and subsequent usage have reversed those proportions. Art classes are also offered in other parts of
Community Center, but at different level. There is now more demand for health maintenance than for art.
Chat room- This is a use that is likely on way out over time. It was requested by the former center’s most
frequent users, a small room where they socialize with some greater degree of privacy. Users are small group of
women > 85 who do not want to be home alone.
Lounge- Open area with sofas and chairs, where can get cup of coffee or tea, and read paper, play cards, or
talk. Pretty well used.
Billards- They do have a room with several billards tables, which is not something he would install, and is
somewhat of a luxury in that the space can only be used for billiards. Limits space to one service.
Games- Do not offer Bingo (despite some requests) -- a church down the street does that; chess and cards are
pretty flat line; Ma Jong is increasing
Travel- Separate handling of travel which is full cost recovery. They have several day trips each month (sample
fees $59-117) by bus that leave from SC, and an “extended trips” abroad arranged differently.
Users- Sunnyvale population is 144,000, of which SC has eligible population of 30,000 people (>50 years) and
currently serves 3000. Most are older than 50, but some people in 50’s may come to a lecture on how to care for
more elderly parents. Users must be able to use facility “independently” or bring assistance. Wheelchairs, and
walkers are fine, but where they have had problems is mental issues, ability to engage. Not able to handle
Alzheimer's patients. If a person is unable to communicate well or to keep up with a card game, for example,
then the other participants will tell staff. All rooms are equipped with “T Loop” a system that facilitates
appropriate automatic tuning of hearing aids.
Out-of-town users- during the summer, SC sees 50-150 seniors, mostly, East Indian, in who are visiting local
family and prefer to have some activity during day when family may be busy.
Transit- They do not have shuttles to bring users to SC. Some senior residences bring users in vans. Local
nonprofits and volunteers also provide transit- Road Runners, Heart of Valley, etc. No VTA routes were created
for the center, but it is just off El Camino, and is therefore well served by VTA. Maybe 3 bikers a day.
Homeless- is a major challenge. Not aware of all details, but know that sleeping in vehicles is a problem. Some
people sneak in to use SC restrooms for a shower-- SC restrooms do not have showers. Other building, Indoor
Sports Facility does, has had some unhoused population issues.
Pool is offsite.
Success- Lots of planning and listening to users and potential users. Had focus groups and other meetings.
Recommend having separate meetings for public-at-large and shareholders, otherwise, the stakeholders tend to
drown out the public-at-large. Recommend having stakeholder gathering in one large room with groups of tables
so that stakeholders get to give input and listen to input of other stakeholders. Gathered comparisons of what
other cities are doing, and what is available nearby (YMCA, private providers like gyms and cardio circuit
facilities in strip malls, nonprofits) He will sent us matrix with analyses. Lots of input gathered, but staff made
final decisions. The analysis of other services available is ongoing, not just for original design of space.
Tips - Gets lots of input. Have space flexible to use for variety of services and be able to change as demand
changes. Monitor demand. Seniors want to maintain mental and physical health. Look at Santa Clara, newer
facility, beautiful, two stories so have more space; warm pool on site.
Staffing- 4 full time staff; one part time 30hrs wk; one part time care manager- 20 hr per wk; 220 + volunteers
Youth involvement/ interaction- Youth who volunteer are generally in summer; do work in kitchen or assist with
computer, or perhaps entertainment, such as group of youth who play violins. (Also mentioned re youth that the
most successful collaborative educational programs with elderly and youth are at more jr college level, or SF
State where have some voc ed for nursing; and further noted that Palo Alto person recruits some SC members
to be literacy coaches).
History- Center was approved by Council in summer 1998,in response to group campaign for center. Senior
services previously had 7000 sq feet, at a 25000 sq ft multipurpose community center at former school site that
was being vacated when school district raised rent. Advocacy group had wanted only senior uses in the
building, but compromised with council vote to allow rental and use of facility nights and weekends.
Users generally report that while they want wellness, they did not want SC to be like a membership gym, where
someone would tell them to work out; did not want a 24 hour feeling. Like having lounge.
Impact of the
Aging Baby Boom
Population
on Palo Alto’s
Social and Community
Services
White Paper for Discussion
November 2006
Introduction
This study endeavors to assist Palo Alto’s City government, local nonprofit
agencies, and the community at large in understanding some of the impending
impacts of a rapidly changing demographic environment driven by the aging of
the Baby Boom Generation. These evolving trends will result in dramatic
differences in the characteristics and needs of our residents, and these changes
will undoubtedly have an impact on policies, programs, services and practices
within our community.
This analysis was initiated by the Community Services Department of the City of
Palo Alto and was undertaken by a Task Force of community leaders and service
provider agencies. The study does not claim to be scientific or scholarly. Instead
it is a surface exploration of the issues and a call to action proclaiming that now
is the time to understand and plan for the inevitable.
The White Paper purposely focused on lifestyle issues including education,
recreation, health, fitness, leisure and social services. It does not attempt to delve
into medical, emergency preparedness, safety and consumer services. These are
concerns that demand their own stage.
Need for the Study
There are many reasons why it’s important to understand the future lifestyle and
social service needs of this burgeoning population including financial,
community planning, transportation and social service implications. It is
imperative that we begin planning for these now, before they overwhelm the
resources of many of our public and non-profit service providers.
Palo Alto’s population profile has already begun to transform due to significant
demographic and social trends:
• The aging of our population with the impending passage of the massive
Baby Boom generation into the elder cohort, and
• The increasing longevity of the population due to medical advancement
and healthier lifestyles.
Given these facts, one of many reasons for initiating a planning strategy is
articulated in research conducted by the National Research Center Inc. (NRC) of
2
Boulder, Colorado. The NRC analyzed data from 9000 surveys of older adults.
The study made a direct correlation between the number of community
“strengths”, defined as physical health, outlook on life, and social and family
connections, with the number of hospitalizations, institutionalizations and
accidents. In short, the study determined that if a community can provide its
people the opportunity to “age well” it can save untold hardship and millions of
dollars in unnecessary costs.
A second key reason for the study is to begin to identify the resources and
opportunities that will come with our aging population. By anticipating the
future needs of employers and public agencies, and through appropriate
recruitment and training techniques, a new workforce may be discovered,
bringing with it wisdom and experience not previously seen in previous
generations of elders.
The goal of this paper is to attempt to describe some very real social issues and
opportunities, identify some of their impacts and begin a dialogue on how best
to find appropriate solutions.
3
Executive Summary
It’s no secret that America is graying. Newspaper, television, magazines,
government and scholarly reports tell us that the first wave of the Baby Boom
generation is now entering into their retirement years and that we are on the
threshold of a major shift in demographic characteristics. In the next thirty years
our nation’s “senior” population will double due to the shear size of the Boomer
generation and, thanks to medical and health advancements, will live longer
than any previous generation.
But what about Palo Alto? What will the impacts be to our community and
social service delivery systems? Do we need to prepare for these impacts, and if
so, what do we need to prepare for? Can we be a community that is “elder
friendly”? These are just some of the questions that prompted a nine month
examination of this issue by a Task Force of City and nonprofit community and
social service providers.
What was discovered in many ways mirrors the national landscape. Boomers
will live longer, be more active, have more money to spend, and hold great
political clout. Our future population will not only be older – but they will also
think differently than past generations. If anything, they will be more socially
and culturally engaged, healthier, have increased mobility and be more
independent.
How will Palo Alto be impacted? From input provided through a community
visioning meeting and a community-wide survey, the thoughts and concerns of
some 400 Palo Alto Boomers can be summarized as follows:
• Boomers want to live independently as they age and the concept of a
“senior friendly” environment, especially with regards to mobility, is
especially important.
• There is a deep desire to be engaged in community and social activities
and have a variety of learning opportunities.
• Palo Alto Boomers want to stay involved, for either lifestyle or financial
reasons, through volunteerism or continued part or full-time
employment.
4
• Our Boomers want to remain physically and mentally active and
healthy, well into their elder years.
Also, a key finding that could greatly impact the Palo Alto community is that
80% of our Boomers say they are planning to stay in Palo Alto as they age. If
true, in the next twenty years, and given the fact the Palo Alto is generally
considered residentially built-out, the percentage of our older population will
outpace all other demographic segments, creating a scenario where upwards of
40 percent of our total population will be 55 years of age or older. Consequently,
the service delivery implications may be challenging, especially when you
consider the fastest growing population segment will be those age 85 and older.
This group will require an unequaled level of support services, placing great
demand on public and private support agencies.
Another key factor is whether our Palo Alto based agencies are prepared to meet
the service delivery impacts brought on by the aging of the Boomer generation.
Palo Alto is currently blessed with outstanding services for older adults
including those provided by Avenidas, La Comida, Palo Alto Family YMCA, and
the Albert J. Schultz Jewish Community Center (JCC). But are these institutes
prepared to meet the challenges of the future? Avenidas, Palo Alto’s largest, full
service provider for older adults, has already found its assets strained by the
needs of the changing population. Both the JCC and YMCA have unused
capacity (the JCC will expand services when it moves to a new campus in 2009),
but both organizations indicate the need is increasing. The La Comida
nutritional program is at capacity and already requires more space and staffing
resources. And, although providing a full spectrum of adult lifestyle activities,
the City of Palo Alto devotes a very small percentage of its community services
budget to older adult programs.
Of course, with change comes opportunity. Our Boomers will possess the
highest educational level of any past generation, and as revealed through our
survey, they have a desire to continue to work and volunteer in the community.
With appropriate training and through creation of policies and education to end
“age discrimination”, the harnessing of this intellectual and skilled labor force
could truly be beneficial for the entire community.
This White Paper suggests strategies to meet the projected impacts and make the
best of the opportunities that are before us. Where we go from here is up to our
community, and over the next few years our government, nonprofit and business
sectors will need to better understand the unique needs of this burgeoning
generation and answer the questions:
5
• Given a strained financial environment, is there a way to better distribute
our public resources to meet the needs of our Community?
• What changes do we need to make in the City’s physical attributes that
will allow people to age well and safely?
• What planning must happen now to meet the anticipated social and
community service needs 10, 20 and 30 years from now?
• How can we best use the human resources that come with the numbers,
experience and education of the Boomer population?
This study calls for the development of a strategic plan to address these
questions and to determine the opportunities inherent with the aging of the
largest generation in America’s history. We, as a community, must begin to find
answers to these questions now because these inevitable and dramatic
demographic changes are happening - now
* * * * * * * * *
Current Population Trends
The Boomers Are Coming!
The 76 million ‘Baby Boomers’ born between 1946 and 1964 represent the largest
birth cohort ever in the United States. The first of the Boomers turned 60 this
year and by 2030 all surviving Baby Boomers will be between the age of 66 and
84 and will represent one of every five Americans1. America’s Boomers make up
27.5% of the population, have an estimated annual spending power of $2.1
trillion, and comprise 45.8 million households with average spending of $46,000
per household.
1 Excerpt from the State of California “SB 910 Strategic Plan for an Aging California Population”, 2003
6
Palo Alto is already experiencing the profound impact of this “graying of
America” trend. Between 1990 and 2000, as a result of the out migration of young
adults and the aging of Boomers, the Palo Alto population of 45-60 year-olds
increased from 17.5% to 22% of the total population.2 Indeed, the middle age
and senior populations are the only segments in our community that have grown
significantly over the past thirty years.
Palo Alto Population by Age: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Pre-school (Under 5)School Age (5-17)Child Bearing (18-44)Middle Age (45-64)Senior (65 and over)
Age Group
Pop
u
l
ati
on 1970
1980
1990
2000
Only the senior population has experienced
consistent growth over the last thirty years.
The recent spike in the middle age population
will cause the senior population to grow
dramatically in the years to come.
As the Boomers continue to age, they will cause the senior percentage of the
population to grow even more dramatically. Between 2000 and 2030, Palo Alto’s
population of older adults (age 55 and above) could more than double to over
36,000. Because the total population of the City is unlikely to double over this
timeframe, we can expect a significantly higher percentage of older adults in our
community.
These projections assume no out migration, as no statistics are available.
However, in our survey of 323 local Boomers, 80% reported that they intend to
stay in Palo Alto when they retire. If this percentage is anywhere close to reality,
we could expect the senior population of Palo Alto to be approximately 36,200 by
2030, which represents a 113% increase.
2 Excerpt from “City of Palo Alto Community Profile”, July 2005
7
Projected Growth in Palo Alto's
Older Adult Population (age 55+)
16,959
24,956
31,838
36,200 35,292
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
The next senior population will be more ethnically diverse as well. At present,
about 80% of the Palo Alto senior population is Caucasian and 11% Asian. Over
the next thirty years, an increasing percentage of this population will be Asian
and, to a lesser extent, Hispanic. (Note: Projections extrapolated from U.S.
Census data) Our community must adapt its services to appeal to the different
needs and interests of these groups.
Ethnicity of Senior Population
2000-2030
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
2000 2010 2020 2030
African American
Other
Hispanic
Asian
Caucasian
8
Differences Between Generations
Within the older adult population, it is important to distinguish between the
“young-old” (those less than 75 years of age), the “old” (75 to 84 years of age),
and the “old-old” (85 years of age and older) and to plan for a more ethnically
diverse older population.
The California Policy Research Center at the University of California expects the
average life expectancy to be 81 years of age by 2020. In 1980 the mortality rate
was 73 years. Because of this increased longevity, the greatest growth will be
among the oldest Palo Altans, the “old-old” seniors. By 2040, this group will
represent more than one quarter of the city’s older residents, up from one in ten
in 2000. The “old-old” population will outnumber the “young-old”. Old-old
seniors will need the most supportive services and practical help and is likely to
have the lowest incomes, placing great demand on the city and those
organizations that provide services to them.
Palo Alto's Older Adult Population
from 2000 to 2040
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Age 55-64
Age 65-74
Age 75-84
Age 85+
Within the “young-old” group, the very definition of “old” is likely to change in
coming years. This group will be more mobile and healthier. Its changing
expectations, discussed below, will alter our thinking about what is meant to be
“old” or a “senior”. Chronological age will become less of a determining factor
in what one considers “old”. Instead, functional ability is likely to become more
of a determinant, and may become a more relevant criterion for eligibility for
public benefits and demand for services. In this way, older adults will be less
likely to seek out services and activities designed for others of the same age, and
9
more likely to participate in activities with people – of all ages - who are similarly
mobile and healthy.
The cultural differences between those born in the period 1911 to 1945, and the
Baby Boomers born after 1945, are striking, and help us predict how the interests,
expectations, and desire for services will change as Palo Alto’s Baby Boomers
age.
Many of those currently over the age of 60 served in World War II, may have
witnessed the Great Depression, and through their labors created the booming
economy of the 1950’s and the rise of the middle class. Their experiences taught
them the value of hard work, self-sacrifice, discipline and team spirit. This
generation learned to rely on the government and has an expectation that the
government will take care of them. Indeed, Social Security gave this generation
unprecedented economic security, and they were the first to experience mass
retirement and transition to a period of life dominated by leisure. This
generation is conservative, risk-averse and conformist.
The Baby Boomer generation, on the other hand, grew up in a period of
unprecedented prosperity and unlimited horizons. They disdain authority and
traditional values, and prize their individuality. Boomers want to have it their
way, have it now, and enjoy the experience. William Novelli, Executive Director
of AARP describes them this way:
“Basically, boomers like to have fun…They are looking for the new experience.
They want to create their own experiences, because in this “been there, done
that” world of today, they are often bored, and searching for novelty.”3
Boomers do not associate age with disease and disability; indeed, they have
every reason to expect to live longer and healthier than their parents. But they
do not take their health for granted and, for them, wellness is very important.
This generation wants fitness activities, recreational resources, nutrition, and
information about preventative health care and healthy living. But for this very
same reason, Boomers tend to be in denial about - and generally are not planning
for – the reality that in their latter years they may well experience disability and
chronic disease. Undoubtedly, an increasing number of the “old-old” will need
supportive services such as in-home care and adult day care to remain in their
homes.
3 From “How Aging Boomers Will Impact American Business”, a speech to The Harvard Club by William Novelli,
Executive Director and CEO, AARP, February 21, 2002.
10
The needs and expectations of Boomers will be diverse, and they will demand
choices. This is not likely to be a generation that seeks out – at least in the short
run - the institutions and services that have served their parents so well. Terms
like “senior centers” and “old age homes” are quickly becoming obsolete and are
being replaced with terms like intergenerational centers and asset-based aging.
There are other differences between Boomers and their parents. They “see
retirement as a transition; not a termination.”4 AARP research has shown that 8
in 10 Baby Boomers plan to work at least part-time. Of that percentage, 35% of
them will work mainly for interest and enjoyment, and another 17% would like
to start their own business. Given the very high cost of living in this area, many
local Boomers will be motivated to work to augment their income to make it
possible to remain in the area. Boomers expect to need more money during
retirement, and plan to spend it to enhance their lifestyles.
There are also indications that as Boomers seek to remain productive in their
retirement years they will turn to volunteering and civic engagement in large
numbers. Our survey of Palo Alto Boomers confirms this national trend. In
answer to the question “When you have more free time, what do you want to do with
it?” 42% of the respondents answered that they want to volunteer in the
community.
It will be a challenge to the service sector to offer volunteer work that gives
Boomers new experiences, the opportunity to work independently and, above
all, many choices. If local institutions are successful in engaging Boomers in
community work, they will be greatly rewarded as Boomers direct their
considerable talents and energies to addressing some of the community’s
problems.
* * * * * * * * *
4 From “How Aging Boomers Will Impact American Business”, a speech to The Harvard Club by William Novelli,
Executive Director and CEO, AARP, February 21, 2002.
11
Local Survey
Palo Alto’s Boomer Landscape
Although there has been much information disseminated on the demographics
and characteristics of Boomers on a national and state scale, there is relatively
little information describing the characteristics of Palo Alto’s aging Boomers. In
order to understand what these Boomer’s needs and concerns are, three methods
of obtaining information were used by the study Task Force; a community input
event, a written questionnaire, and a survey instrument.
Community Input Event
The Task Force hosted a “Community Visioning Meeting” where residents of
Boomer age were asked to participate in a two-hour discussion led by noted
facilitator, Diana Schlott. The public meeting was designed to give participants
an opportunity to share their perspectives in an open and engaging environment.
The meeting was held on May 11, 2006 at the Art Center Auditorium and 48 Palo
Alto residents participated.
Following an introduction as to why the meeting was being hosted, and a brief
presentation on the history of 20th century generations, the participants were
divided into small discussion groups. Each group was given two questions to
discuss and report out on. Groups were then asked to develop consensus on the
top five answers for each question. The questions asked were:
A. What are the services and programs that you’re presently using that you’ll
need more of in the future?
B. What new services may be required in order to allow you to age well?
Due to time limitations, participants were also requested to complete a written
questionnaire that asked:
1. Are you planning to stay in or near Palo Alto when you retire?
2. If you’re planning on moving to another location in your next phase of
life, what would make you stay in Palo Alto?
3. When you have more free time, what do you want to do with it?
4. If you knew you’d live to be 100 years old, what would you do differently?
12
Our Community Talks: Concerns and Desires
Group discussions were lively and a great many ideas and themes emerged. The
following summarizes the most prevalent themes that surfaced from the
dialogue:
¾ When asked to identify the services and programs that Boomers are
presently using that they will need more in the future, a variety of
services and programs were identified. The five major themes, in
order of priority, that dominated the discussion where:
1) Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Examples cited most frequently were travel; activities at night for adults/seniors;
activities for widows/widowers; creative arts classes; book clubs; Stanford
Lively Arts; inter-generational interaction; dance groups; poetry nights; art and
theater events; open microphone; and increased social gathering points.
2) Parks and Recreational Services and Facilities
Within this theme the most mentioned uses were activities that draw people to
parks; lawn bowling; Tai Chi; playgrounds for seniors; senior and community
centers; a golf club for Boomers; and sports leagues for seniors.
3) Senior Designed Community/Social Services
Examples cited included buddy systems for walking, hiking and exercise; quality
Police, Fire and EMT services; food closets; outreach for shut-ins; social services
targeted at aging; walk-able neighborhood shops and services; universal housing
concepts5; and vibrant downtown neighborhoods.
4) Education and Library Services
Some of the specific services and programs identified as important were readings
clubs; technical classes; quality library facilities and programs; Palo Alto Adult
School; City-sponsored special interest classes; Stanford continuing studies; and
Foothill College.
5) Information and Referral Services
Examples for information and referral programs included continued
communication about programs for adults; easy, single point access to
information on caregivers; technology services; Medicare advice; tax preparation
5 A set of accessibility features such as zero-step entrances, wide interior doors, and accessible bathrooms.
13
assistance; and the need for a Palo Alto-based website for volunteer
opportunities and services.
Other themes included health care/in home services, and health and fitness
programs.
¾ The next question asked participants to think about their future.
When asked to identify “What new services may be required in order
to age well” the themes that gathered the most responses were:
1) Transportation
By far, a transportation and mobility theme resonated the most with the group.
Examples cited included a “safe ride” program; bike sharing; more bike paths;
car sharing; mass transit that gets “closer to home;” opportunities for electric
wheelchairs to use bike lanes; more public transportation; increased frequency of
the City and Stanford University shuttle; transportation to distant parks; a cross-
town trolley on Middlefield Road; and the need for volunteer drivers in lieu of
para-transit services. Much discussion was devoted to keeping ones’
independence, whether or not an automobile was available.
2) Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Also ranking very high in interest was social, recreational and leisure activities
including references to intergenerational activities, connectivity, social support
groups, interest-based activities vs. age-based activities, more daytime activities,
senior related activities, and social integration. Participants abhorred the idea of
isolation and loneliness, and in general, wanted to be active and share life
experiences with others.
3) Parks/Recreational Facilities and Programs
Examples cited for new services for parks and recreation facilities included
“younger” senior centers (a blending of adults and elders); more locations for
Avenidas; libraries as combined community centers; multi-generational
community centers; senior-friendly camping sites; additional off-leash dog areas
and trails; more recreational services like the YMCA; and recreational
membership fees reduced for those 50 plus.
4) Senior Designed Communities/Social Services
Within this theme some of the ideas that emerged were identifying homebound
individuals in case of emergencies; “assisted living without walls”, farmer’s
markets in additional areas of town; more home care services, meal delivery
services; programs to address loneliness and isolation; transitional services;
14
neighborhood access to shopping and services; and centers for basic services
located throughout town.
5) Education and Libraries
Some of the examples characterizing this theme included learning new
languages, educational programs about health and welfare, life-long learning
classes, providing a “living history” with Boomers presenting their histories in
schools, teaching, mentoring and training opportunities for older adults, the
provision of larger print books at well-designed libraries facilities.
Outside of the five themes noted above, housing, assistive living and health and
fitness programs were also concepts that emerged during discussion.
Participants were also asked to complete a written questionnaire:
1. When asked the question, “Are you planning to stay in or near Palo Alto
when you retire?” 76% of participants said they planned to stay in their present
home.
2. When asked “If you’re planning on moving to another location in your next
phase of life, what would make you stay in Palo Alto?” the two factors most
frequently cited were affordability and better public transportation.
3. For the question “When you have more free time, what do you want to do with
it?” the focus was on travel, volunteering, lifelong educational opportunities,
spending time with friends and family and staying mentally and physically fit.
4. When views on the question “If you knew you’d live to be 100 years old, what
would you do differently?” were solicited, the major themes that emerged were
keeping in better mental and physical health, and saving more money for
retirement.
It’s noteworthy that throughout most of the discussion, Boomers wanted us to
know that they did not want to be “pigeon holed” when it came to the provision
of services. In other words, Boomers want choices and the opportunities to
participate in most activities according to interests, not age.
15
A Community Survey
The method used to collect quantitative data was through the use of a survey
instrument. Due to funding limitations, the survey was not of scientific design,
but was meant to build upon and test the information gathered at the community
visioning meeting. The survey was made available in hard copy and through the
Internet using the Web tool, Web Surveyor. The survey was advertised through
newspapers, email “blasts,” and through newsletters to the constituents of our
participating Task Force organizations.
323 surveys were received over a six-week period from Palo Alto resident
“Boomers.” To ease the completion of the survey, participants were asked to
prioritize specified service themes, which included:
• Career/Volunteer Opportunities: full/part time jobs, job banks, career
placement, volunteer listings, etc.
• Civic Engagement Opportunities: including running for office, board and
commission work, advocacy, inter-generational exchanges, political
activism, etc.
• Education & Libraries: opportunities for advanced degrees, life-long
learning, classes and workshops, library facilities and services, collections,
reading clubs, lectures, book mobiles, etc.
• Housing & Assisted Living: affordable housing, more housing options,
assisted care facilities, in-home care services, day-care programs, home
repair services, etc.
• Financial Assistance & Planning: senior/low income discounts, financial
information & referral, financial planning services, financial counselors,
etc.
• Health & Fitness Opportunities: health clubs, yoga & other fitness classes,
nutritional programs, gyms, aquatics, par-courses, senior sports leagues,
in-home fitness services, etc.
16
• Information & Referral Services: health, social services, emergency
services information services, more information distribution points, one
stop shopping for information, life counselors, etc.
• Parks & Recreation Facilities: urban and open space parks, enhanced
community center facilities, senior centers, athletic fields & facilities, golf
course, meeting rooms, etc.
• Senior Designed Communities: walk-able neighborhoods, support
groups, neighborhood services, universal design concepts, etc.
• Social, Cultural & Leisure Activities: theatre, arts, special events, social
gatherings, travel, clubs, etc.
• Transportation: public transportation alternatives, safer roads and
pedestrian access, shared transportation, bike lanes, shuttle services, etc.
17
Key Finding From the Survey
When Were You Born?
42%
1946-55
58%1956-64
The 323 survey participants were fairly divided between older Boomers, born
between 1946 and 1955 (58%), and those born between 1956 and 1964 (42%). It
should be mentioned that this outcome was significantly different from the
participation at the community input meeting where 83% represented the first
decade of the Boomer generation.
18
Are You Planning to Stay in Palo Alto?
20.00%
Yes
80.00%
No
Survey data and community meeting input were quite similar when asked if
Boomers planned on staying in Palo Alto after retirement. Eight out of ten of
our Boomers said they planned to continue residing in Palo Alto, echoing data
from many previous surveys that predict “Aging in Place” will continue to be
the preferred choice of older adults. The data also suggests that housing
turnover will slow, making it more difficult for younger families to move into
an already built-out city. This phenomenon may also have serious impacts on
living arrangements, housing services, and result in an increased need for local
elder care, support services and assisted living.
19
Education and Libraries
Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Health and Fitness Opportunities
Parks and Recreational Facilities
Transportation
Career/Volunteer Opportunities
Information and Referral Services
Housing and Assisted Living
Financial Assistance and Planning
Senior Designed Community
Civic Engagement Opportunities
50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40
Percent of Responses
What Services Do You Currently Depend On?
When we asked Boomers to look at their lifestyle needs of today, and begin to
project their needs into the near-term future, four themes were clear priorities.
Data suggests that Boomers are presently engaged in and will continue to find
a priority in leisure activities; health and fitness; park and recreation facilities;
and life-long learning and library-based services. This does not come as a
surprise, as mentioned earlier, Boomers are individualistic, looking for new
experiences and wanting to be fit and healthy enough to experience them.
20
Transportation
Health and Fitness Opportunities
Education and Libraries
Housing and Assisted Living
Senior Designed Community
Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Parks and Recreational Facilities
Career/Volunteer Opportunities
Information and Referral Services
Financial Assistance and Planning
Civic Engagement Opportunities
30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25
Percent of Responses
What New Services Are Needed?
In this question we asked participants to look into the future. The mindset is
indeed different than the pronounced themes from the previous question. As
opposed to education and socializing being a top priority, when Boomers
contemplate the idea of “getting old” they are more interested in better forms
of transportation and staying healthy. Many consider the ability to drive as
the last vestige of independence and the survey confirms that Boomers want to
continue their independence, car or no car. The survey also implies that the
need for more health and fitness programs, continued opportunities for
socialization and education, and the ability to age in their own homes as
priorities for our aging populous.
21
Surprisingly, although transportation continues to rank relatively high, the
le and edu ation are seen as the most valuable of themes that make up lifesty c
services. Note that this outcome was expressed different at the community
input meeting where transportation was proposed as the highest priority,
followed closely by fitness, cultural and educational opportunities. This data
does confirm that the provision of a variety of educational, social and lifestyle
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percent of Responses
Financial Assistance
Information and Referral Services
Senior Designed Community
Parks and Recreational
Health and Fitness Opportunities
Social, Cultural and Leisure Activities
Education and Libraries
Of All Services, Which Are the Most
Valuable to You, Personally?
Transportation
Housing and Assisted Living
Career/Volunteer Opportunities
and Planning
Civic Engagement Opportunities
Facilities
22
programs and services are essential to how Boomer’s perceive the concept of
“Aging Well.”
The survey instru
you have more time
ment also asked for written comments for the question, “When
, what do you want to do with it?” Hundreds of comments
ere provided, and the predominant themes, prioritized by the number of times
o Reading
ing, golf, running, bicycling, etc.)
on
more time with family
nd learning about art and cultural activities and presentation
Ad for general comments. Although it’s impractical
to
e individual thoughts provided by our participants:
r,
ND young folks. If seniors want to be near
family but younger generations can’t afford to live in the Bay Area –
“Tran
my to
ed 75+). There doesn’t seem to be anything for active,
healthy, people in their 60’s and early 70’s.”
“Retir
projec er wages to offer their
expertise to the City. Perhaps you should maintain a registry of residents
w
each concept was mentioned, were:
o Volunteering
o Travel
o Fitness (swimm
o Educati
o Spending
o Enjoying the outdoors
o Attending a
ditionally, the survey asked
provide all of the comments offered, the following quotes represent some of
th
“Us Boomers will stay active and want places to go dancing, to dinne
theatre, at affordable prices.”
“… the cost of housing and living in this city are the most critical
variables for seniors A
we will have to leave!”
sportation for people who can no longer drive their own car would be
p priority.”
“Services for seniors in Palo Alto tend to be viewed as assistance for
the aged (ag
ed, or partially retired, PA residents could be hired for short term
ts. They might be willing to work for low
23
with expertise who would be available for City or nonprofit projects at
reduced rates?”
“I’d like to see a moratorium on new services so that new taxes and
fees can be avoided . . .so I can afford to continue living in Palo Alto
retirement.”
“Prov
charge
h prices to afford our homes. . . .We tend to have children later in
life . . . . We are going to be very strapped for cash and retiring before
“The
health
ow many current retirees take advantage of travel, cultural
and education services. Planning for the huge influx of Baby Boomers
* * * * * * * * *
in
ide exercise and recreational programs at reasonable rates or free of
.”
“Those of us that are at the end of the Baby Boom have paid extremely
hig
our kids graduate from college.”
three most important things to consider: public safety, education and
care.”
“I have been retired now for less than a year and have been surprised
to see h
who are retiring will be good for Palo Alto and its citizens.”
24
Inventory of Palo Alto Service Assets
Palo Alto is fortunate to have a wide variety of civic and nonprofit agencies
providing programs and services to meet the needs of older adults. These
agencies provide a wide range of services from recreational opportunities to
social services. The following summarizes the programs and services of each
agency and tries to provide some perspective as to the present and future
capacities each program in terms of staffing and facility levels.
Avenidas
Services: Avenidas is a full-service older adult center. It offers a wide range of
programming including classes in creative arts, personal interest, and health and
fitness. Its service range also includes special events, personal health services,
counseling and support, case management, adult day health care, transportation
services, volunteer care giving outreach, social clubs, handyman service and
volunteer placement.
Budget: Avenidas’ total budget committed to older adults is $3.7 million funded
in part with $420,000 from the City.
Capacity: On average Avenidas’ staffing capacity6 ranges between 75 to 100%
depending on the program while its space capacity is similar. In almost all of its
program areas, Avenidas is seeing increased participation and is over capacity in
case management and transportation services. There is little doubt that the
program continues to grow and to meet the demand it will require more facility
space in the not-so-distant future.
Albert L. Schultz Jewish Community Center
Services: This center, presently located on the Cubberley Community Center
campus, focuses on classes, clubs, health and fitness activities and special events
for older adults. The agency also offers information and referral services to its
members.
Budget: Total current annual budget dedicated to older adult services is $80,000.
Capacity: The program does have space capacity for increased participation with
programs utilizing 25% to 75% of the available space; however staffing is at 100%
capacity for almost all services. Note that in 2009 the JCC will have a new
6 Staffing and facility capacity have been evaluated by each agency in terms of their ability to meet the perceived
needs of their clients for various services. 100% staffing capacity, for example, means that the agency is currently
using all of the staff resources it has available for the service or program. 25% space capacity would mean that the
program has the facility capacity to increase programming by 75%.
25
location in south-east Palo Alto and with it increased capacity for both staffing
and program.
City of Palo Alto
Services: The City of Palo Alto offers few programs focused at older adults. It
runs a golf course with “senior” reduced fees, a senior softball league, and the
Senior New Year’s Eve Day Bash. Of course, the City also offers a very rich
scope of activities and services for adults of all ages including thousands of acres
of parks and trails, branch and full service libraries, theaters, community and
interpretive centers, aquatic facilities and a full range of art and recreational
classes and special events. Palo Alto also provides a shuttle service that offers
no-cost transportation on specified routes. Palo Alto does grant, through its
Human Services Resource Allocation Program, approximately $500,000 to
nonprofit agencies providing older adult services, with Avenidas receiving the
largest share.
Budget: Funds committed by the City for senior programming is approximately
$550,000.
Capacity: Use and staffing capacities range between 50% and 100% depending
on the program, with library services are running at full capacity in both staffing
and facility levels.
Community Association for Rehabilitation (CAR)
Services: Located in South Palo Alto, CAR is one of the few local providers of
aquatic therapy for older adults.
Budget: The total budget dedicated to older adults is $414,000.
Capacity: Space and staffing are not at capacity, but the program continues to
grow.
La Comida De California, Inc.
Services: La Comida serves over 130 noon time meals to seniors on a daily basis.
Budget: Total budget is $235,000.
Capacity: Capacity for space and staffing is maxed out, but the need is
increasing.
Palo Alto Adult School
Services: The Adult School offers a mix of classes of adults ranging from creative
arts, languages, computer instruction, and health and fitness. It does offer older
adults exercise classes in assisted living situations.
Budget: The total budget for older adult programming is $67,000.
26
Capacity: The program is at capacity for staffing level, but has a small amount of
space capacity within its personal interest classes.
Palo Alto Family YMCA
Services: While not offering personal interest classes, the program does offer
health and fitness activities, personal health services, special events, lectures,
food and nutrition programs, social clubs and a therapeutic exercise program.
Budget: Both space and staffing capacity is about 50% and participation is
increasing in all programs.
Capacity: Total budget dedicated for older adults is $1.8 million.
* * * * * * * * *
27
Meeting Future Needs
Defining the Challenge
The conclusions found in this paper are not solutions, but suggestions on how to
move forward and perhaps build upon our existing strengths to provide an
environment that will meet the concerns and allow all Palo Altans the
opportunity to “Age Well”.
The prominent findings of this study are as follows:
Most Boomers want to live independently as they age and the
concept of a “senior friendly” environment, especially with
regards to mobility, is very important.
Fortunately, some areas of Palo Alto have neighborhoods that are relatively
“walk-able”, but to be truly “senior-friendly”, public and private sectors should
explore alternative methods for transportation that allow independence without
the use of automobiles. Improved, more flexible and more convenient public
transit should be developed to give older drivers viable alternatives to their own
car – and to reduce the number of cars on the roads.
Some suggested strategies to help prepare for this scenario:
- Actively promote alternative means of transportation including
wider City and Stanford University shuttle routes; volunteer drivers;
and shared transportation resources.
- Design infrastructure improvements that support safe use of
alternative modes of transportation including pedestrian, bicycle,
electric carts, and shuttles. Some examples include replacing old
street signs with new, larger signs with larger fonts, widening
sidewalks, more defined lane dividers, and creating well-marked
pedestrian crossings.
- Provide a network of transportation services that meet older adult
needs, such as linking the City’s shuttle service to current and future
forms of transit.
- Encourage the location of essential services such as grocery stores
and pharmacies in neighborhoods, within walking distance.
28
A desire to be engaged in community and social activities and
have a variety of learning opportunities are strong factors in the
way our Boomers want to live out their lives.
The need for continuing educational and cultural activities will increase over
time. In the next 5-10 years, the greatest demand will be for “lifestyle” activities
and services: educational programs; fitness activities; and leisure and travel
programs. Many local organizations that offer these programs exist now and
have the capacity for some growth. But it will take a concerted community effort
to meet the increased demand at affordable cost.
Some suggested strategies to help prepare for this scenario:
- Assemble a task force to assess the need for new and augmented
facilities to meet future programming needs.
- Provide information that’s easily found about City and community
life-long learning resources.
- Encourage a variety of affordable, culturally appropriate and
language diverse learning opportunities.
- Co-mingle public facilities with commercial locations to provide
easier access to services and products.
- Facilitate dialogue between all local public and non-profit entities to
provide programs for a variety of learning abilities and delivery
methods.
- Provide activities and facilities that foster contact with all segments
of the population like intergenerational centers or
library/community center combinations.
Palo Alto Boomers want to stay involved either through
volunteerism or continued part or full-time employment.
Boomers, either to stay socially connected and engaged or to augment retirement
funds, have clearly articulated the desire for volunteer and employment
opportunities. Some have implied that a new career is not out of the question,
and the idea of mixing work, leisure and education has been a prominent theme
emerging from our discussions and survey data. The importance of this resource
cannot be taken lightly. With change comes opportunity, and it will be
important to find ways to expand the contributions of older adults in later life.
29
This human resource is untapped and, if used correctly, it can be a force for
social good.
Some suggested strategies to help prepare for this scenario:
- Promote, through new policies and education, the elimination of age
discrimination in the workplace.
- Actively encourage older adult involvement in elected and
appointed office and in policy development and advocacy. For
example, use someone like former Mayor Jim Burch as an excellent
role model for community involvement during ones’ latter years.
- Create a job database and listing of employment and employment
training opportunities for older adults in city and community
publications.
- Develop employment policies designed to retain and recruit older
adults. These policies should recognize the flexibility and
independence Boomers are seeking in their lives.
- Provide incentives to businesses and organizations who promote
policies to hire and retain older workers and volunteers.
Most Palo Alto Boomers want to remain in Palo Alto for the
remaining years of their lives.
Boomers will live longer and remain in their homes longer, and as they approach
the “old-old” stage of life, the demand in programs will shift to supportive
services including in-home care, practical help, transportation alternatives, and
assisted living.
Some suggested strategies to help prepare for this scenario:
- Review of the Comprehensive Plan to identify possible solutions to
close the gap in housing supply and demand, including the type of
housing required, affordability of ownership and rentals, and
locations that could provide easily accessible services (within
walking distance).
- Provide funding mechanisms for affordable home renovation and
repair programs for low income senior households.
- Continue to provide training and technical assistance to City
building inspectors on accessibility requirements.
30
- Encourage the development of universal, accessible, user-friendly
housing.
Palo Alto Boomers want to remain physically and mentally
active well into their elder years.
The concept of being socially and physically active and involved in one’s
community can only work if the individual is healthy and fit enough to
participate. Medical costs continue to escalate, and it can only benefit our
community if older adults are proactive about their fitness and mental wellbeing.
Some suggested strategies to help prepare for this scenario:
- Provide expanded opportunities and facilities for recreation related
activities for all levels of fitness, age and disabilities.
- Increase the distribution points for fresh produce and wholesome
food products.
- Increase the capacity to support hunger and nutritional programs
for older adults.
Meeting the Challenge
The challenge before us is three-fold:
• How do we develop a plan that readies our community to support the
dramatic shift the number of older people, especially as Baby Boomers
enter into the latter phases of life?
• Can new resources be found or existing resources be redistributed to better
handle the anticipated impacts?
• How do we, as a community, make the best use of the intellectual and
labor resource that will come with the aging of Palo Alto?
It is this Task Force’s recommendation that our community undertake the
development of a strategic plan for aging in Palo Alto. The plan should focus on
achievable and meaningful near and long-term strategies to ease the impacts of
the population shift as well as discover ways to use the opportunities that come
with it.
31
Although City of Palo Alto staff, in partnership with the Task Force of service
providers, initiated this study, it will take a concerted effort from elected and
appointed officials, service providers, community leaders, the business
community and older adults themselves to find the solutions that work for the
entire community. Addressing these challenges will require leadership and
vision and it is the hope of the Task Force that this brief analysis will prompt our
community towards building its strengths thus providing an environment that
will allow all Palo Altans to “Age Well”.
* * * * * * * * *
32
Acknowledgements
The Task Force
This analysis was initiated by the Community Services Department of the City of
Palo Alto and was undertaken by a Task Force of community leaders and service
provider agencies.
Organizations:
Avenidas
Albert J. Schultz Jewish Community Center
City of Palo Alto
Community Services Department
Library Department
Community Association for Rehabilitation
Council On Aging Silicon Valley
Human Resources Commission
La Comida De California
Page Mill YMCA
Palo Alto Adult School
Palo Alto Family YMCA
Parks and Recreation Commission
Stevenson House
50 Plus Fitness Association
Many individuals gave their time and expertise to this study and it is with
great appreciation we acknowledge their participation:
Task Force Co-chairs and Co-Authors
Richard James, City of Palo Alto
Lisa Hendrickson, Avenidas
Task Force Members
Greg Betts, City of Palo Alto
Anne Cribbs, Parks and Recreation Commission and 50 plus
Paul Dias, City of Palo Alto
Don Douglas, La Comida
33
Kathy Espinoza-Howard, City of Palo Alto
Sam Gordon, 50 Plus
Jack Higgins, 50 Plus
Sudeep Johnson, Palo Alto Family YMCA
David Kabakov, La Comeda
Kathleen Palmer, Palo Alto Family YMCA
Megan Rafter, Page Mill YMCA
Kara Rosenberg, Palo Alto Adult School
Sue Skilina, YMCA of the Mid-Peninsula
Erin Solheim Perez, City of Palo Alto
Lynda Steele, Community Association for Rehabilitation
Heidi Stein, A.L.S. Jewish Community Center
Minka Van der Zwagg, City of Palo Alto
Design
Efrat Rafaeli, City of Palo Alto
Survey Support
Lam Do
Lisa Mainarick
Erin Solheim Perez
Devon Williamson
34
Resources
AARP, “How Aging Boomers Will Impact American Business”, a speech to The
Harvard Club by William Novelli, Executive Director and CEO, AARP, February
21, 2002.
AARP, “Reimagining America, How America Can Grow Older and Prosper”,
2005
Business Week, “Love Those Boomers”, by Louise Lee, October 24, 2005
California Policy Research Center, “Strategic Planning Framework for an Aging
Population, University of California, 2001
Center for Civic Partnerships, “Perspective on Aging Well”, 2006
City of Palo Alto, “City of Palo Alto Community Profile”, July 2005
County of Santa Clara, “Community for a Lifetime, Ten Year Strategic Plan” 2005
NC Center for Creative retirement Planning Committee, “NCCCR and The
Boomer Generation”, 2005
New York State Office on Aging, “Project 2015, State Agencies Prepare for the
Impact of an Aging new York”, 2003
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Residential remodeling
and urban design”, 1996.
State of California “SB 910 Strategic Plan for an Aging California Population”,
2003
35
Selected from CCAC Community Needs Subcommittee Minutes, October 24, 2012:
(slight revisions from Community Needs Subcommittee Report to CCAC, October 4, 2012)
Vision: How to Best Utilize the Cubberley Site and Honor the City’s Interests and the
District’s Interests Beyond 5 Years
The time frame and professional support allocated to the CCAC are inadequate to allow for the
comprehensive study needed for a detailed recommendation. However, the Community Needs
Subcommittee believes that we have enough information to work towards creation of a viable
plan over the next 5 years for the community interests on the Cubberley site while respecting the
needs for flexibility for the District to open and operate a comprehensive high school or other
schools as they are needed.
The Community Needs Subcommittee Believes:
1. The Community values the services and opportunities currently available at the
Cubberley Community Center.
2. The Community values the high quality schools in our District and wants to make them
even better.
3. It is possible and desirable to plan a Cubberley campus that would support an ongoing
Community Center and allow for the eventual design and construction of a school or
schools to meet PAUSD’s needs as they develop.
4. A more efficient use of the space in the future would allow more efficient use of the
space as both City and District needs grow. This is the last large under-developed
publicly owned space in town and it must be used wisely.
5. The redesigned Cubberley campus should be
Multi-generational with programs from preschool through seniors
Multi-cultural to reflect, meet the needs of, and provide a gathering place for our
growing and increasingly diverse population
Multi-disciplinary to support programs such as sports, health, music, art, dance,
science, and technology throughout our community
Lively and fun
Flexible for the changing needs of the City and the School District.
6. The creative and productive synergy provided by co-locating community and school
district use at Cubberley would more than make up for a smaller footprint for a school.
7. Short term savings cannot be allowed to prevent seeking the best long term solution for
this site.
8. This community has the imagination and drive to surmount the many hurdles ahead to
achieve this vision.
Additional points:
Potential New Services at Cubberley
Avenidas has proposed a potential Senior Wellness Program including new classes and
programs plus the current Stroke and Cardiovascular Programs. They also suggested a new
therapeutic pool to replace Abilities United’s aging facility.
Bathrooms adjacent to fields.
More services for seniors.
Multi-age eating area.
Reading room.
Display space for artists of all ages.
Farmers’ market including cooking demonstrations and cultural shows.
Wheelchair-accessible trail surrounding fields with occasional trees, benches, par course
items, or children’s play structures (similar to Greer Park). Eventually link to trails in
Mitchell Park.
Priorities for Selecting Future Tenants at Cubberley
Tenants should be selected depending on how well they fulfill our vision of a community
center that is multi-generational, multi-cultural, multi-disciplinary, lively and fun, and
flexible for changing needs
Decisions between similar users should be made with input from outside judges. The juried
selection process developed for selecting artists could be a good model.
Facilities
Subcommittee
Documents
Problem
Statement
Facilities
Subcommittee
Presented
10/3/12
Short
Term
1. PAUSD
needs
revenue
that
the
City
is
challenged
to
afford
under
current
budgetary
constraints.
2. Significant
infrastructure
costs
have
been
deferred
and
will
start
catching
up
with
us.
3. It
is
unclear
whether
we
can
fill
vacancies
left
by
Foothill
College
(3
years
out).
If
not,
red
flag
re:
lost
revenue
(~
$1
million).
4. The
City
needs
to
start
planning
in
the
short
term
for
continuation
of
services
with
likelihood
of
at
least
some
future
lost
space.
5. Negotiation
of
a
lease
and/or
covenant
in
the
short
term
should
reflect
commitments
to
current
and
medium
term
upkeep
and
future
cooperation.
Overarching
Medium
and
Long
Term
1. The
District
is
clear
about
its
desire
to
reclaim
some,
and
ultimately
all,
of
the
Cubberley
site
for
school
use,
while
the
City
lacks
sufficient
other
real
estate
to
accommodate
the
services
currently
provided
at
Cubberley.
2. The
current
architectural
use
of
the
site
is
extremely
inefficient.
The
ratio
of
usable
space
to
circulation
space
is
very
poor
and
to
maintain
these
buildings
in
the
current
configuration
for
whatever
use
is
a
great
waste
of
valuable
land.
3. Cubberley
offers
a
tremendous
opportunity
to
design
visionary
programming
and
facilities
that
can
bring
our
community
together,
serving
students,
families
and
neighbors
for
years
to
come.
Delaying
or
foregoing
plans
for
such
a
resource
carries
substantial
opportunity
costs
that
should
not
be
underestimated.
4. This
is
the
last
sizable
space
in
the
city
for
redevelopment
and
to
maximize
its
flexibility
and
use,
the
practicality
of
multi-‐story
facilities
should
be
considered.
5. District
uncertainty
about
the
type
of
facilities
needed,
(full
high
school
or
not,
middle
school
or
not,
elementary
school
or
not)
as
well
as
the
chance
they’ll
want
to
use
existing
structures,
creates
a
barrier
to
planning
for
investment
in
new
construction
at
Cubberley
for
either
community
or
shared
use.
• If
reuse
of
existing
facilities
is
a
realistic
option
for
the
PAUSD,
scraping
space
before
then
for
community
or
shared
use
could
severely
limit
District
flexibility
or
increase
costs
for
future
school
use.
6. Sharing
space
between
community
needs
and
school
use
offers
many
advantages
for
both
parties,
but
also
poses
some
significant
facilities
challenges,
including:
• Inconsistent
architectural
standards
• Incompatibilities
• Security
issues
• Scheduling
issues
• Parking
• Traffic
demand
management
(bus,
car,
bicycle
and
pedestrian)
7.
To
the
extent
community
services
are
displaced,
what
off-‐site
locations
can
be
repurposed
for
community
use?
Medium
Term
1. Significant
additional
infrastructure
investments
would
be
required
to
extend
the
life
of
current
buildings
(bare
minimum
requirements
have
been
identified
by
IBRC).
2. PAUSD
may
need
some
portion
of
the
site,
while
community
needs
persist.
Can
use
of
the
site
be
sufficiently
maximized
to
meet
both
needs?
3. Under
both
2
and
3,
above,
how
will
support
facility
needs
change
(e.g.,
safe
and
convenient
access
and
parking
for
all
modes
of
transportation:
automobile,
bicycle,
pedestrian
and
transit,
restrooms,
etc.)?
Long
Term
1. Even
with
significant
shared
use
of
current
facilities,
a
comprehensive
high
school
would
likely
conflict
with
community
use
of
the
site.
2. Field
and
gym
use
will
be
particularly
impacted,
even
with
new
construction
–
you
can’t
build
up
for
those
facilities.
3. Shared
use
with
a
high
school
of
any
size
will
dramatically
increase
the
need
for
support
facilities
(parking,
safe
automobile,
bicycle,
pedestrian
and
transit
access,
food
services,
etc.).
4. Given
fluctuations
in
enrollment
and
community
needs,
any
new
facilities
will
have
to
accommodate
flexible
programming/use.
5. Given
high
demand
on
the
site,
any
construction
will
require
careful
planning
of
transitions.
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 1 of 11 [Type text]
MORE
THOUGHTS
RE
CUBBERLEY
FACILITIES
General
Facilities
are
places
where
programs
and
services
occur.
The
program/service
needs
should
drive
the
requirement
for
facilities.
Facilities
may
be
specialized
-‐e.g.
a
swimming
pool,
or
general
purpose-‐-‐e.g.
a
multipurpose
room.
Facilities
often
serve
several
purposes
even
though
they
are
somewhat
specialized-‐-‐e.g.,
a
theater
may
be
suitable
for
music,
lectures,
drama,
but
not
ballroom
dancing
or
exercise.
A
multipurpose
room
with
a
simple
stage
may
serve
for
all
of
these
events
in
a
more
limited
way.
Facilities
require
financial
support
by
the
sponsoring
organization-‐-‐for
staff,
utilities,
operations,
and
maintenance,
as
well
as
for
original
construction
and
furnishing.
The
cost
elements
of
a
particular
program/service
at
a
multipurpose
facility
sometimes
are
buried
within
overall
facility
costs,
so
that
the
true
program/service
cost
is
not
readily
available.
The
overall
cost
of
a
program/service
at
a
specialized
facility
often
is
more
readily
discernable.
City
of
Palo
Alto
(CPA)
Comprehensive
Plan:
Community
Services
Element
Programs,
and
the
facilities
to
support
them,
should
conform
to
the
CPA
comprehensive
plan
when
possible.
Palo
Alto
policy
has
been
to
provide
geographical
diversity
of
services.
Currently
there
are
three
CPA
facilities
comprising
a
network
of
community
centers-‐-‐Lucie
Stern
in
northern
Palo
Alto,
a
small
community
center
adjacent
to
the
Mitchell
Park
Library
(center
and
library
currently
being
reconstructed,
center
size
about
15,000
sq.
ft.
including
courtyard),
and
a
much
larger
Cubberley
Community
Center
in
southern
Palo
Alto
(buildings
alone
about
176,000
ft.
sq.).
Chapter
6
of
the
CPA
Comprehensive
Plan
is
titled
Community
Services
and
Facilities.
A
background
report
[“Community
Services
Background
Report”,
dated
7/21/09]
was
intended
to
amend
that
portion
of
the
Comprehensive
Plan.
Following
issuance
of
the
background
report,
a
series
of
community
service
element
stakeholder
meetings
were
held.
Five
(5)
summaries
of
those
meetings
are
available
on
the
CPA
website.
As
a
result,
recent
changes
were
made
to
Chapter
6
[Reference:
CSE
Narratives,
Chapter.
6,
30
pages].
Chapter
6
covers
schools,
libraries,
parks,
community
facilities,
performing
and
cultural
centers,
as
well
as
police
and
fire
services
and
facilities.
Services/programs
for
all
include
recreation,
lifelong
learning,
and
arts.
Services
and
programs
for
specialized
populations-‐-‐children,
youth,
seniors,
and
disabled-‐-‐also
are
covered.
For
example,
in
the
prior
plan,
Policy
C-‐22
called
for
flexible
functions
at
community
facilities.
Policy
C-‐24
covered
reinvesting
in
aging
facilities
and
avoiding
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 2 of 11 [Type text]
deferred
maintenance.
Program
C-‐19,
in
support
of
C-‐24,
covered
improvement
plans
at
facilities,
including
a
Cubberley
Master
Plan.
The
new
version
of
Chapter
6
reorganizes
the
policies
and
programs,
but
covers
the
same
elements.
Page
16
of
the
7/21/09
Background
Report
notes
some
important
challenges
that
do
or
could
apply
to
the
Cubberley
site,
abstracted
below:
♦ The Cubberley Community Center is largely owned by the PAUSD and is
therefore dependent on PAUSD needs.
♦ The Parks and Recreation Department has identified a lack of sufficient playing
fields. The need for playing fields is highest on weekdays between 3pm and 6pm,
and on weekends.
♦ Gym space and daycare center capacity are inadequate to meet existing
demand.
♦ The Community Services Department needs to develop improved cost-
recovery strategies to reduce the draw on the general fund for programs and
services.
Note: Efforts have been made here in recent years to increase cost-recovery, including some policy
priorities, I think. Check with Rob deGeus for elaboration.
♦ The City will need to respond to the unique recreation needs of the aging Baby
Boomer Generation.
The needed facilities spelled out are: playing fields, gym space, and daycare center.
The recreation needs of the aging population are not spelled out--typically they might
include simple exercise classes and yoga, swimming, dancing, light recreational
activity like Ping-Pong, billiards, shuffleboards, bocce ball and horseshoe courts, etc.
Some of the aging population also needs mental stimulation--that can be provided by
lectures, films/broadcasts, computer classes, social network classes, and other adult
education. Some of these needs are currently supplied by Avenidas (partially
supported by CPA) at its center in downtown Palo Alto. Most of the aging
population recreation/stimulation needs could be provided in large or small
multipurpose rooms, gyms, classrooms, lecture halls, auditoriums, and well-equipped
audio-visual rooms. Services that include arts and crafts might require specialized
equipment in dedicated rooms--pottery making, kilns, machine and shop tools for
wood and metal sculpture, jewelry making, painting, such as at Little House in Menlo
Park, or as currently exist in some of the Cubberley individual art studios.
In
addition
to
the
needs
identified
in
the
Background
Report,
the
Cubberley
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 3 of 11 [Type text]
Community
Advisory
Committee
(CCAC)
recently
heard
directly
from
the
community
regarding
its
needs.
CCAC
held
a
public
forum
on
11/8/2012
to
provide
an
update
on
its
progress,
and
to
invite
community
responses.
The
facilities,
where
vocal
community
groups
reported
shortages,
were:
playing
fields,
gym
space,
and
childcare.
These
shortages
have
not
yet
been
analyzed
or
quantified
adequately
to
direct
program
planning.
Speakers
at
the
forum
also
supported
a
continuing
need
for
existing
art,
music,
and
dance
programs.
Again,
a
full
analysis
or
quantification
is
lacking.
One
non-‐resident
pointed
out
that
she,
and
other
non-‐residents
who
used
Cubberley
and
other
community
facilities,
supported
the
CPA
economy
via
dining
and
shopping
in
Palo
Alto.
CCAC
also
had
community
response
at
the
11/14/2012
CCAC
meeting.
Five
(5)
cooperating
community
groups
requested
a
wellness
center
that
would
house
and
integrate
their
separate
programs-‐-‐Cardiac
Therapy
Foundation
[medically
supervised
rehabilitation
and
information
programs,
Peninsula
Stroke
Association,
REACH
(Foothill
program
for
post-‐stroke
recovery),
Abilities
United
(formerly
CAR)
[aquatic
rehabilitation/therapy
at
the
Betty
Wright
Swim
Center],
and
Avenidas
(needs
more
space
for
health
and
wellness
programs
for
older
adults
and
seniors).
In
addition
to
Chapter
6
of
the
CPA
Comprehensive
Plan,
and
the
Background
Report
to
amend
it,
the
Land
Use
and
Transportation
Elements
of
the
Comprehensive
Plan
also
provide
some
policies
and
programs
that
relate
to
community
centers
and
services:
POLICY
L-‐61:
Promote
the
use
of
community
and
cultural
centers,
libraries,
local
schools,
parks,
and
other
community
facilities
as
gathering
places.
Ensure
that
they
are
inviting
and
safe
places
that
can
deliver
a
variety
of
community
services
during
both
daytime
and
evening
hours.
PROGRAM
L-‐68:
To
help
satisfy
present
and
future
community
use
needs,
coordinate
with
the
School
District
to
educate
the
public
about
and
to
plan
for
the
future
use
of
school
sites,
including
providing
space
for
public
gathering
places
for
neighborhoods
lacking
space.
POLICY
L-‐64:
Seek
potential
new
sites
for
art
and
cultural
facilities,
public
spaces,
open
space,
and
community
gardens
that
encourage
and
support
pedestrian
and
bicycle
travel
and
person-‐to-‐person
contact,
particularly
in
neighborhoods
that
lack
these
amenities.
POLICY
T-‐14:
Improve
pedestrian
and
bicycle
access
to
and
between
local
destinations,
including
public
facilities,
schools,
parks,
open
space,
employment
districts,
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 4 of 11 [Type text]
shopping
centers,
and
multi-‐modal
transit
stations.
Cubberley
Community
Center
Cubberley,
as
a
former
high
school
site
leased
and
owned
by
CPA,
was
not
designed
or
built
as
a
community
center.
Consequently
its
existing
facilities
do
not
ideally
conform
to,
or
readily
support,
community
services
desired
and
envisioned
in
CPA’s
comprehensive
plan
and
its
proposed
amendment.
Likewise,
some
existing
programs/services
at
Cubberley
may
not
conform
to
the
CPA
Comprehensive
Plan/Amendment,
but
merely
help
support
overall
costs
of
the
Cubberley
Community
Center.
For
example,
California
Law
Review
is
a
for-‐profit
tenant,
offering
specialized
classes
not
intended
for
the
general
community.
Additionally,
Cubberley
lacks
some
facilities
present
in
many
community
centers-‐-‐e.g.
a
pool,
a
café,
an
exterior
or
interior
courtyard
with
seating
-‐-‐that
limit
the
services/programs
that
could
be
offered.
A
Master
plan
for
a
Community
Center
at
the
Cubberley
site
(1/30/91)
was
developed.
It
covered
the
entire
site-‐-‐city
owned
as
well
as
spaces
and
facilities
leased
by
CPA.
It
utilized
neighborhoods
to
provide
services.
Neighborhoods
included
were:
athletics,
childcare,
dancers,
education,
hourly
meeting
facilities,
music
and
theater,
non-‐profit/community
organizations,
recreation
(expanded
MP,
distinct
from
Gyms
under
athletics),
visual
art,
and
administration
and
gallery/café.
Some
of
the
items
in
the
master
plan
were
not
implemented,
or
were
moved
to
spaces
other
than
originally
planned.
Most
of
the
buildings
and
other
facilities
(track,
fields,
etc.)
at
the
Cubberley
site
were
completed
by
1955.
Some
additional
buildings
(Pavilion,
Theater,
and
others)
were
added
in
the
early
1960s.
The
site
was
built
to
then-‐existing
school
standards.
In
general,
the
structures
have
stood
up
well
during
the
past
57
years,
by
replacing
and
repairing
roofs,
etc.,
although
it
becomes
increasingly
expensive
to
maintain
the
structures.
Modifications
of
structures
for
child-‐care
services
added
after
the
site
became
a
community
center
appear
to
have
been
built
to
lower,
more
temporary,
standards.
The
facilities,
while
usable
to
support
some
community
services
and
programs,
cannot
be
considered
modern.
For
example,
air
conditioning
is
generally
lacking
throughout
the
site.
Wired
internet
access
is
not
available
throughout
the
site.
Some
classrooms
and
lecture
halls
now
used
by
Foothill
College
have
been
upgraded
with
more
up-‐to-‐date
audio-‐visual
equipment
than
originally
existed,
but
such
improvements
are
inconsistent.
The
Cubberley
site
is
inefficiently
used
by
modern
standards.
Existing
buildings
are
mostly
single
story,
per
the
1950’s
model
of
Palo
Alto
school
architecture.
The
building
layout
results
in
long
distances
between
some
buildings,
and
is
inconvenient
for
a
Community
Center.
Some
very
long
covered
walkways
give
a
foreboding
tunnel
effect.
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 5 of 11 [Type text]
Figure
1
(Brian’s
pie
chart,
and
listing
of
square
footage
of
items)
shows
the
overall
space
utilization.
Existing
buildings
take
up
175,500
sq.
ft.
(4.0
acres)
of
space,
with
circulation
(covered
walkways)
taking
up
another
116,148
sq.
ft.,
(2.7
acres).
This
60/40
ratio
is
quite
inefficient.
Site
open
areas
(spaces
between
and
around
buildings,
amphitheater,
etc.)
take
up
426,897
sq.
ft.
(9.8
acres),
while
750
parking
spaces
take
up
239,755
sq.
ft.
(5.5
acres)
of
the
35
total
acres.
The
site
also
supports
a
football
field/track,
large
playing
fields
for
baseball,
soccer,
etc.
and
6
tennis
courts.
The
fields
take
up
566,280
sq.
ft.
(13.0
acres).
The
space
use
is
very
inefficient.
The
city
portion
of
the
site
(8
acres)
is
348,480
sq.
ft.
Note
that
if
all
the
building’s
footprint
areas
were
consolidated
into
one
area,
it
would
cover
only
50%
of
the
city
portion.
Even
if
the
building
areas
and
walkways
were
consolidated
into
one
area
(291,648
sq.
ft.),
it
would
only
cover
84%
of
the
city
portion.
Clearly,
CPA
could
build
a
2-‐story
(or
higher)
new
community
center
on
less
than
half
of
its
8
acres.
Likewise,
PAUSD
could
easily
fit
a
comprehensive
high
school
onto
the
remaining
27
acres,
by
more
efficient
use
of
the
site.
As
one
example,
the
parking
spaces
could
be
placed
under
the
playing
fields
and
tennis
courts,
freeing
up
5.5
acres,
effectively
increasing
the
site
to
32.5
acres,
even
while
continuing
to
use
inefficient
single
story
classroom
buildings.
PAUSD
asserts
that
for
its
anticipated
PAUSD
asserts
that
for
its
anticipated
future
needs
of
one
or
more
schools
at
Cubberley,
many
of
the
existing
buildings
and
other
facilities
could
be
directly
reused,
or
modified
for
reuse,
rather
than
scraped
to
the
ground
and
built
new.
This
view
is
not
widely
shared,
nor
consistent
with
technologically
facilitated
pedagogy.
Obviously,
room
equipment
such
as
smart
boards,
computers,
wired
or
wireless
internet
access,
etc.
would
need
to
be
added
for
any
future
use,
but
basic
building
shells
and
interior
structures
might
mostly
be
retained.
Services/Programs
at
Cubberley
Community
Center
The
neighborhoods/services
envisioned
in
the
Cubberley
Community
Center
Master
Plan
remain
a
good
starting
point
to
identify
facilities
for
a
Community
Center
in
the
near,
mid,
or
far
terms.
Likewise,
additional
services/programs
identified
by
the
Community
Needs
and
School
Needs
Subcommittees
can
help
identify
additional
facilities
that
ought
to
be
considered
for
the
overall
CPA/PAUSD
Cubberley
site.
All
the
facilities
on
the
overall
site
should
be
shared
to
the
maximum
extent
possible
consistent
with
the
separate
needs
of
CPA
for
a
community
center
and
PAUSD
for
one
or
more
schools.
Sharing
(new
construction,
operations,
and
maintenance)
will
result
in
the
lowest
overall
cost
to
the
residents
of
Palo
Alto
who
support
both
CPA
and
PAUSD
via
taxes
and
fees.
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 6 of 11 [Type text]
Community
and
school
services/programs
can
be
provided
in
proactive
or
reactive
modes.
In
proactive
modes,
most
services
are
well
defined,
with
identified
budgets
(or
shares
of
the
budget),
priorities,
locations,
and
responsibilities
for
execution.
In
reactive
modes,
many
services
are
provided
in
response
to
events
and
citizen
demands.
The
proactive
mode
tends
to
prevail
for
many
school
services/programs,
whereas
the
reactive
mode
tends
to
prevail
for
many
community
services
and
programs.
School
districts
necessarily
provide
a
well-‐established,
more
focused,
highly
structured,
and
usually
slowly
changing
set
of
educational
services.
Additionally
those
services
must
comply
with
state
regulations
and
restrictions,
and
the
accompanying
bureaucracies
and
inertia.
Community
services
are
generally
freer
of
state
regulation
and
communities
are
more
flexible
than
school
districts
in
providing
the
type,
quantity,
and
quality
of
services/programs.
An
advantage
of
the
reactive
mode
is
its
flexibility
and
quicker
adaptation
to
inevitable
changes
in
needs
and
demands
for
services.
A
disadvantage
of
the
reactive
mode
is
that
priorities
among
services
often
are
not
set.
Then,
when
resources
(funds,
personnel,
facilities)
are
reduced,
cut
entirely,
or
insufficient
for
competing
demands
among
services,
it
becomes
politically
difficult
to
reduce,
eliminate,
or
reallocate
services.
This
has
been
true
for
California
in
recent
years
(closing
parks,
cutting
school
budgets,
reducing
CHP
staff,
deferring
maintenance,
etc.),
as
well
as
for
CPA.
In
identifying
the
future
desired
services/programs
(and
therefore
the
supporting
facilities
needed)
at
Cubberley,
both
CPA
and
PAUSD
face
problems
of
uncertainty
and
prioritization,
in
different
ways.
They
also
face
funding
problems
for
ongoing
operations,
and
will
need
to
have
voters
pass
bonds
for
large-‐scale
improvements
at
Cubberley.
PAUSD
Challenges
PAUSD
faces
considerable
uncertainty
about
what
services/programs
a
high
school
of
the
future
(about
2030)
will
provide,
what
kinds
of
students
it
will
serve,
and
what
should
be
the
priorities.
Certainly
PAUSD
will
continue
to
offer
the
core
academic
subjects.
Certain
other
services
may
be
provided
as
well.
First,
there
may
be
increasing
demand
for
music,
dance,
performing
arts,
fine
arts,
and
crafts
often
encountered
in
economically
well-‐off,
highly
educated,
largely
professional
areas
like
Palo
Alto.
Second,
PAUSD
may
also
have
demand
from
Silicon
Valley
parents
involved
in
science,
engineering,
industry,
and
business,
for
modern
versions
of
vocationally
oriented
classes-‐-‐such
as
software
programming/web
site
design/blog
construction
rather
than
drafting;
material
sciences
laboratories/preparation
rather
than
casting/foundry/glassblowing;
and
electronic
design/assembly/testing
rather
than
machine-‐shop/woodshop/car
maintenance
and
repair.
There
may
be
demand
for
radio/television/web
broadcasting
design,
delivery,
and
operations
in
addition
to
school
newspaper
experience.
Third,
part
of
this
demand
will
be
driven
by
the
perceived
employment
opportunities
for
some
graduating
students
who
do
not
go
directly
to
college/university.
The
New
Technology
High
School
in
Napa
CA
is
a
role
model
for
the
vocational
types
of
services,
and
is
in
partnership
in
many
ways
with
the
surrounding
business
community.
Fourth,
PAUSD,
known
as
a
high-‐
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 7 of 11 [Type text]
performance
academic
district,
may
face
a
demand
for
less
stressful
academic
tracks
than
those
for
college-‐bound
students
enrolling
in
advanced-‐placement
courses.
PAUSD
is
already
trying
to
cope
with
stress-‐related
student
suicides
(CPA
participates
in
Project
Safety
Net
directed
at
teen
suicides).
Note
that
the
ABAG
projections
for
growth
of
Palo
Alto
do
not
imply
that
all
the
growth
will
be
for
high-‐
performing
students
from
high-‐income
parents.
Fifth,
especially
for
high
school
and
perhaps
even
for
junior
high
schools,
technology
advances
such
as
remote
computing,
simple
online
courses,
and
even
massive
open
online
courses
(MOOC)
likely
will
affect
schools
of
the
future.
The
advances
will
impact
the
size
and
quality
of
teacher
staff,
the
need
for
information
technology
support
staff
and
equipment,
very
likely
the
size
of
classrooms
and
their
technology,
etc.
It
is
possible
that
the
physical
space
needed
for
a
future
high
school
could
be
much
smaller
than
at
Palo
Alto
HS
or
Gunn
HS,
if
students
take
courses
at
home
or
in
other
remote
locations,
and
merely
show
up
for
in-‐class
tests
or
not
at
all.
Of
course,
even
for
the
possible
reduced
size
scenario,
there
will
remain
a
need
at
schools
for
space
for
the
non-‐academic
side
of
middle
and/or
high-‐school-‐-‐
socialization,
personal
interaction,
formation
and
interaction
with
small
and
large
groups,
etc.
This
cannot
readily
be
quantified
into
facilities
other
than
general
gathering
space
and
places
where
students
can
meet,
interact,
and
work
out
their
own
problems
and
concerns.
Spaces
such
as
patios,
courtyards,
and
hallways,
gymnasiums,
locker
rooms,
and
sports/recreation
areas
will
still
be
needed,
even
for
a
small
future
school.
As
a
result
of
these
uncertainties,
and
the
eventual
prioritization
needed
to
select
services/programs
while
meeting
budget
constraints,
PAUSD
may
want
a
different
type
of
high
school
(and/or
middle
school)
at
Cubberley
than
now
exists
elsewhere
in
Palo
Alto.
The
impact
of
this
uncertainty
on
shared
facilities
at
Cubberley
is
somewhat
clearer.
If
PAUSD
decides
to
provide
music,
etc.,
then
facilities
for
music,
dance,
performing
arts,
and
perhaps
fine
arts
and
crafts,
potentially
can
be
shared
during
non-‐school
hours.
Many
of
these
are
now
provided
at
the
Cubberley
Community
Center
(on
a
non-‐shared
basis).
Also,
if
CPA
supports
individual
musicians,
dance
teachers
and
troupes,
performing
artists,
fine
artists,
craftspeople
(weavers,
potters,
glass
artists,
etc.)
through
below-‐market
rentals
of
shared
space,
potentially
PAUSD
might
utilize
those
individuals
to
teach,
help
teach,
or
demonstrate,
those
skills
to
students,
supplementing
its
own
teaching
staff
in
an
economical
way.
If
PAUSD
decides
to
offer
more
vocationally
oriented
classes,
sharing
would
be
more
difficult,
but
not
impossible.
That
is
because
vocationally
oriented
classes
tend
to
require
specialized
facilities,
which
are
both
less
usable
by
the
general
community,
and
often
require
active
supervision
while
in
use.
This
implies
higher
user
fees,
and
limited
times
due
to
availability
of
qualified
supervisors.
However,
should
PAUSD
pursue
this
route,
it
might
well
be
able
to
partner
with
local
Silicon
Valley
firms
for
donated
equipment,
personnel
to
train
students
(and
teachers),
supervision,
etc.
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 8 of 11 [Type text]
Partnering
business
firms
would
benefit
from
tax
write-‐offs
for
donated
equipment,
direct
access
to
qualified
graduates,
and
good
public
relations.
Such
partnering
again
would
be
an
economical
way
to
supplement
teaching
staff.
Despite
those
challenges,
PAUSD
stands
to
benefit
from
financial
and
programmatic
efficiencies
by
planning
now
for
future
shared
use
of
the
Cubberley
site.
Acreage
is
more
than
adequate
to
accommodate
any
future
school
use
along
with
some
community
service
presence.
CPA
Challenges
In
addition
to
the
challenges
listed
earlier
(see
section
City
of
Palo
Alto
Services/Programs),
there
are
uncertain
demographic
factors.
ABAG
projections
show
CPA
should
expect
significant
population
growth.
PAUSD
is
estimating
a
2%
annual
growth
rate
in
student
population
out
to
2030.
The
implication
is
that
there
will
be
a
similar
growth
in
overall
population
in
CPA
of
43
%
by
then
(i.e.,
1.02^18.).
It
is
anticipated
there
will
be
a
proportional
growth
in
demand
for
services
and
programs
throughout
CPA.
However,
most
of
this
population
growth
is
expected
in
southern
Palo
Alto,
based
on
what
has
occurred
in
recent
years.
Therefore
the
demand
for
additional
services
at
a
local
community
center,
i.e.
Cubberley,
may
easily
exceed
50
%
by
2030.
Another
challenge
is
the
lack
of
available
land
for
more
community
services
and
programs.
Palo
Alto
is
largely
built
out,
with
little
land
available
to
CPA
(or
PAUSD)
short
of
eminent
domain
proceedings.
Indeed
most
of
the
recent
population
growth
in
Palo
Alto
has
been
in
high-‐density
residential
developments
(apartments,
condos).
A
recent
example
is
the
Echelon
development
in
the
Charleston
corridor.
The
8
acres
currently
owned
by
CPA
at
the
Cubberley
site
is
probably
the
last
large
parcel
of
real
estate
left
within
the
city
limits
for
community
services,
short
of
converting
existing
parks
and
municipal
facilities
to
that
purpose.
Another
challenge
is
revenue
to
support
services/programs.
CPA
is
already
struggling
to
meet
its
budget.
It
is
uncertain
whether
the
projected
growth
in
population
will
result
in
sufficient
revenue
growth
to
support
growth-‐related
expansion
of
existing
services/programs
at
their
present
quantity
and
quality
level,
much
less
support
additional
services
such
as
the
senior
recreation/stimulation
needs
or
a
wellness
center.
Another
challenge/uncertainty
lies
in
recently
proposed
major
development
plans
near
downtown
Palo
Alto
in
exchange
for
a
new
municipal
theater
or
possibly
a
municipal
services
center.
This
proposal
would
affect
the
need
for
a
full
theater
facility
at
Cubberley,
and/or
revenue
needed
to
pay
infrastructure
improvement
bonds.
Joint
Challenge
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 9 of 11 [Type text]
Both
CPA
and
PAUSD
will
need
to
issue
bonds
for
capital
construction
and
maintenance
of
future
facilities
at
Cubberley.
Voter
approval
is
far
more
likely
if
PAUSD
and
CPA
cooperate
and
share
the
Cubberley
site,
demonstrating
to
voters
that
strong
efforts
have
been
made
to
provide
the
needed
and
desired
services/
programs,
while
minimizing
overall
costs
for
construction,
maintenance,
and
operation.
Opportunities
The
challenges
provide
opportunities.
PAUSD
has
an
opportunity
to
build
a
modern
junior
and/or
high
school
on
the
Cubberley
site.
It
has
an
opportunity
to
partner
with
CPA
and
other
community
organizations
to
minimize
costs
and
improve
instruction,
as
well
as
to
be
seen
as
more
reactive
and
responsive
to
community
needs.
CPA
has
an
opportunity
to
build
a
modern
community
center
on
the
Cubberley
site,
while
being
more
involved
in
meeting
PAUSD
needs.
It
also
has
an
opportunity
to
be
more
proactive
in
identifying
its
policies
and
priorities
for
guiding
current
and
future
community
services
and
programs.
Other
opportunities
arise
for
both
PAUSD
and
CPA
for
more
involvement
with
Stanford
University.
Stanford
is
not
an
explicit
participant
in
considering
the
Cubberley
site,
but
it
certainly
is
an
implicit
one.
Many
of
the
PAUSD
students
come
via
Stanford
staff
and
married
students.
Although
Stanford
has
the
greatest
impact
on
nearby
schools,
such
as
Palo
Alto
H.S.,
its
staff
and
students
are
spread
all
over
Palo
Alto,
and
development
of
the
Cubberley
site
will
affect
them.
Stanford
can
certainly
inform
PAUSD
regarding
anticipated
technology
and
teaching
changes
that
will
affect
future
schools.
Likewise
recent
newly
constructed
facilities
at
Stanford
can
inform
the
process
of
designing,
constructing,
and
equipping
school
facilities
at
Cubberley,
once
the
needs
have
been
established.
PAUSD
already
deals
with
Stanford
regarding
school
sites
and
locations,
and
this
arrangement
could
be
expanded
to
help
inform
the
process
for
the
Cubberley
site.
Likewise,
CPA
can
utilize
the
anticipated
technology,
and
examples
of
facilities,
for
a
future
community
center
at
Cubberley,
as
well
as
for
some
currently
planned
infrastructure
improvements.
One
opportunity
for
Stanford
University
with
CPA
arises
from
Stanford
Hospital
being
a
premier
hospital
in
terms
of
medical
care.
However,
after
patients
are
discharged,
they
often
require
extended
rehabilitation
and
ongoing
wellness
services.
Many
of
those
patients
live
in
Palo
Alto
and
surrounding
areas.
Construction
of
a
Wellness
and
Health
Center
at
the
Cubberley
Community
Center
would
facilitate
patient
recovery,
while
permitting
Stanford
Hospital
and
Health
Services
to
readily
follow
up
on
long-‐term
benefits
of
the
treatments
received
by
local
patients.
The
new
Affordable
Health
Care
Act
(“Obama
Care”)
likely
will
push
all
medical
delivery
systems
in
this
direction.
Impact
on
Facilities
desired
at
Cubberley
site
It
is
clear
that
CPA
and
PAUSD
will
need
facilities
at
the
Cubberley
site
by
about
2030,
and
perhaps
sooner.
Each
entity
will
need
facilities
dedicated
to
its
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 10 of 11 [Type text]
own
use.
There
is
good
potential
for
shared
facilities
as
well,
that
could
result
in
reduced
operating
costs
and
need
for
construction
bonds
for
both
CPA
and
PAUSD.
The
sharing
may
be
done
by
time
separation
(TS-‐-‐e.g.
after
school
hours,
or
scheduled
public
use
during
school
hours),
or
may
be
simultaneous
(depending
on
PAUSD
security
needs
for
students).
Outlined
below
are
some
of
the
expected
shared
and
sole
use
facilities,
based
on
existing
services/programs
in
PAUSD
high
schools
and
at
Cubberley
Community
Center,
along
with
some
possible
future
services/programs
discussed
above.
The
internal
equipment
within
the
facility-‐-‐computers,
audio-‐visual
equipment,
smart
boards,
monitoring
and
surveillance
equipment,
etc.
is
not
listed.
It
is
anticipated
that
PAUSD
computer
systems,
files,
etc.
would
not
be
available
to
community
users
because
of
confidentiality
and
security
concerns.
However,
scoreboards,
timers
and
other
equipment
used
for
sports
might
be
shared.
In
addition
to
facilities,
costs
for
electrical
and
mechanical
infrastructure,
operation,
and
maintenance
also
could
be
shared.
Shared
Use
Parking
(preferably
underground)
Maintenance
yard
(joint
and
adjacent
sections)
Equipment
storage
and
Repair
(joint
and
adjacent
sections)
Supplies
delivery
area/dock/storage
area
(joint
and
adjacent
sections)
Electric
power,
natural
gas,
water,
fuel,
sewage
common
entry/exit
area
Emergency
electric
power
equipment
Offices
for
maintenance
and
repair
staff
Kitchen
Dining
area
(indoor
and
outdoor)
Outdoor
stadium
and
track
(TS)
Outdoor
playing
fields
(TS)
Tennis
courts
(TS)
Restrooms
for
track,
fields,
courts
(TS)
School
Gymnasiums
(TS)
Pool
and
aquatic
facility
(TS)
Auditorium
(TS)
Theater
(TS)
Theater
rehearsal/makeup/costume
rooms
(TS)
Theater
set
storage,
construction
rooms
(TS)
Music
Recital
Room
(TS)
Music
Practice
Room
(for
band,
orchestra)
TS
Dance
Studio,
if
implemented
(TS)
Fine
arts
and
craft
spaces,
if
implemented
TS
Radio
and
television
broadcast
studios,
if
implemented
(TS)
Lecture
rooms
(TS)
Language
learning
laboratories
(TS)
Some
classrooms
(TS)
G.
August,
11/2/12
CCAC
Facilities
Subcommittee
Revised
11/16/2012
per
Subcommittee
review
and
Comments
[Type text] Page 11 of 11 [Type text]
Some
audio-‐visual
Rooms
(TS)
In
addition
to
facilities,
it
is
anticipated
that
some
staff
could
be
shared
as
well,
reducing
overall
operational
costs
for
PAUSD
and
CPA.
Staff
that
might
be
shared
includes:
Custodial
Administrative
Grounds
and
Maintenance
Information
Technology
CPA
Use
Gymnasiums
(2
or
more)
Individual
Artist
studios
Dance
studio(s)
Pre-‐School
Child
Care
Multipurpose
rooms
Meeting
Rooms
Ballroom
Lecture
Hall
Auditorium
Some
classrooms
CPA
administration
Health
and
Wellness
Center
PAUSD
Use
PAUSD
administration
offices-‐-‐Principal,
vice
principal,
other
staff
Information
technology
center
and
offices
for
staff
Many
classrooms
Lecture
halls
Study
halls
Gymnasium
locker
rooms
Teacher’s
Offices
Nurse/medical
office
Science
Labs
School
Library
Cafeteria
Bicycle
storage
Student
Lockers
Student
and
Staff
Restrooms
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
e
y
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
35
Ac
r
e
a
La
n
d
Us
e
Fi
e
l
d
s
& Te
n
n
i
s
Co
u
r
t
s
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
*
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Ac
c
e
s
s
Ro
a
d
s
Si
t
e
**
*C
i
l
t
i
Cd
lk
d
ti
*C
i
rc
u
lati
on
:
Cov
e
r
e
d wa
lk
,c
o
v
e
r
e
d pa
ti
os
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
n
g
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
**
S
i
t
e
:
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
,
op
e
n
co
u
r
t
ya
r
d
s
,
am
p
i
t
h
e
a
t
e
t
e
r
,
ou
t
d
o
o
r
ma
i
n
sw
i
t
c
h
g
e
a
r
,
et
c
.
Finance
Subcommittee
Documents
CCAC Finance Subcommittee Deliverable #1
Financial analysis of City and School District situation, especially as it relates
to Cubberley revenues and expenses. Delivery date: October 1
Important Dates:
1955 – Cubberley is constructed
1979 – Cubberley closed as high school; PAUSD rents space to others
1987 – Utility User Tax is adopted by City voters
1989 – PAUSD leases the entire Cubberley facility to the City
2001 – City acquires ownership of 8 acres of Cubberley buildings in swap for
developed property at Terman
December 2013 – Date by which City is to give notice if it does not intend to
renew Cubberley lease for next 5 year option period (2014-2019)
August 2014 – Time at which City must submit to County Registrar of Voters
ballot measure(s) to finance infrastructure improvements to be voted on at
November General Election
The Lease and Covenant Not to Develop:
There are three components to the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop:
1. The lease of the Cubberley Facility – current cost in 2012-2013 = $4.6 million
2. The Covenant Not to Develop – current cost in 2012-2013 = $1.8 million
3. Payment for provision of space at each elementary school for child care –
current cost in 2012-2013 = $640 thousand; utilities for child care spaces –
current cost in 2012-2013 = $56 thousand
There is an annual CPI adjustment built into the document so that each
component increases each year.
Cubberley Finances:
Aside from the lease payments, Cubberley has expenses for:
General operating maintenance: $430,000
Operations, not including mtce: $1,325,000
Cubberley generates revenues of:
Tenant leases $1,620,000
Hourly rentals $823,000
Office space rental by City $73,000
There is a net revenue from all these sources of approximately $760,000.
According to figures in the IBRC report, the City pays the School District
$4/square foot in the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop and collects
approximately $1/square foot in rental revenue.
The City has identified a minimum of $3.3 million of capital improvement costs
over the next 5 year period:
1. $1.4 million in mechanical/electrical ($0 on City buildings)
2. $1.1 million in electrical upgrades ($750 thousand on City buildings)
3. $1.0 million in roofing projects ($375 on City buildings)
Long term, the City has identified $18.8 million in infrastructure improvements
that must be made at Cubberley. Of those, $8.4 million is on City Buildings and
$10.4 is on School District Buildings. This would cover infrastructure
improvements which would extend the life of the buildings for 25 years but most
would need to be accomplished within 10 years. These improvements have not
yet been funded.
Foothill College, the longest term and largest tenant, is scheduled to move to a
new Sunnyvale campus sometime within the term of the next lease option period.
Foothill represents a significant portion of the current tenant lease income.
General Financial Conditions of City and School District
The School District has an operating budget of $159 million. Of that, 6% or $9
million is from lease revenue, $7 million of which comes from the City. The
operating budget contains three reserve funds:
1. The state-mandated “rainy day” fund
2. The basic aid fund; and
3. The budget cuts fund
Given recent actions by the State, the District has been using the budget cuts fund
to balance its budgets. This fund is scheduled to be depleted in the 2013-2014
fiscal year. The School District is counting on robust increases in property tax
revenue and the renewal of the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop to balance
budgets for the 2014-2019 time frame.
The School District is anxious to hold onto the basic aid reserve because of
persistent threats that the State will cut off the small amount of per pupil
contribution that it sends to Palo Alto. This reserve would cover that gap for a
number of years.
The School District is also concerned about the outcome of the November 2012
statewide election. There are two ballot measures which could significantly
impact the finances of the District should either or both fail passage.
Major operating budget gaps are filled most often by school districts by going to
the voters for approval of a parcel tax. The PAUSD last did so in 2010. Voters
are currently paying approximately $613 per parcel per year. There is a cost of
living adjustment built into the current parcel tax so that it increases each year.
The current parcel tax will expire in 2016.
The School District has no permanent capital improvement budget. Instead when
it needs to make significant improvements to buildings or construct new
buildings, it must go to the voters to win approval to issue General Obligation
Bonds.
The current bond measure does not contain any funds that can be used to make
major improvements at Cubberley as all of the secondary school funds have been
expended or encumbered.
As for ongoing maintenance, the General Fund transfers 2.5% of its budget ($4.1
million this year) to the District’s routine maintenance fund. The District also has
a planned maintenance budget, coming from bond funds, in the amount of $2.1
million annually.
The City’s $152 million general fund budget currently and looking out to the
future has a structural deficit. The Council balanced the 2012-2013 operating
budget by instituting over $2 million in structural deficit reductions, over $3
million in one-time savings and by “borrowing” over $300 thousand from
reserves. Future projections do not paint a rosier picture. The property tax
increases that so heavily benefit the School District make up a small percentage of
the City’s tax revenue. The Utility Users Tax which currently raises just short of
$11 million annually is flattening as people shift from use of land line phones to
cell phones (on which no tax is currently collected). Sales tax revenue has
increased recently but is very dependent upon economic conditions.
In the Capital Improvement budget, the IBRC identified a backlog of deferred
maintenance projects on the order of $40 million. The Commission also
recommended that in order not to fall back into a backlog status, the City would
need to budget $32 million annually to keep current. The IBRC also identified
approximately $210 million in new infrastructure projects that need to be built.
Neither Cubberley nor several other items the Council has discussed in recent
times were included in this number.
Summary
There are potentially two remaining 5-year options on the Cubberley lease if
mutually agreed upon by the City and the District. The deteriorating condition of
some of the buildings and the need to invest in them are powerful factors in
forcing the governmental agencies to clarify their mutual goals and interests in the
property. The precarious nature of both agencies’ budgets requires that capital
investment in the Cubberley site be well-planned, deliberate and suited to a long-
term vision for the site.
Attachments:
1. Graph showing the trendline of Utility User Tax
2. Graph showing growth of Property Tax
3. Spreadsheet of current Cubberley revenues/expenses and projected capital
expenses
4. Spreadsheet of projected revenues and expenses for Cubberley
Rev. 10/1/2012
Version 1.1, 10/30/12
CCAC Finance Committee Deliverable #2
Cubberley Lease Report
I. Overview
This CCAC Finance Committee report reviews the existing agreement between the City of Palo Alto
(City) and Palo Alto Unified School District (District) referred to as the Lease and Covenant Not to
Develop (Cubberley Lease). Some background information and terms are reviewed followed by
recommendations and considerations for actions going forward.
II. Lease Overview
The existing arrangement between the City of Palo Alto (City) and Palo Alto Unified School District
(District) was put into place 1989 to address issues that were of concern to the Palo Alto community at
that time. During the 1980s the District was selling off its parcels of land to raise capital to meet financial
demands and the falling school enrollment seemed to support that trend. As land became more scarce, the
community sought to prevent further District land sales fearing that future growth in student population
would require additional schools and the increasing land scarcity would make that infeasible. The
community developed a solution to the land sales, obtaining the District's agreement not to sell additional
school properties and in turn the City would provide funds to aid in the District's financial problems. The
City obtained funds to pay for the Cubberley Lease as well as other city improvements through a levied
Utility Users Tax, to be collected by the City and paid to the District through the Lease and Covenant Not
To Develop (Cubberley Lease).
The City and District agreed to enter into an agreement that is now the Lease and Covenant Not To
Develop and contains the following major terms:
1) Cubberley Lease Payment: A City lease payment to the District for the use of the Cubberley
property.
2) Child Care Facility Lease Payment: A City lease payment to the District for use of eleven (11)
school facilities in order to provide child care services to the community.
3) Covenant Not to Develop: A City lease payment to the District in return for the District's
commitment to not sell additional District owned land (including Ohlone, Garland, Greendell, JLS,
and Jordan)
4) Lease payments are adjusted annually in line with Consumer Price Index changes.
5) The Lease and Covenant Not To Develop terms included one 15 year term (1/1/90-1/31/04), one City
optional extension of 10 years (1/1/05-12/31/14) and two mutual optional 5 year extensions (1/1/14-
12/31/18 and 1/1/19-12/31/23).
In 1998 the Cubberley Lease was amended to include an agreement to substitute two operating schools
for the opening of one "covenanted" site. The list of Covenanted Sites was modified to exclude Ohlone
and include Juana Briones and Walter Hays. The list of schools where child care was allowed by the City
was expanded to include Ohlone and allowed for future expansion.
In 2002 the Cubberley Lease was amended to account for the land swap where 8 acres of the Cubberley
site was deeded to the City in exchange for the District's reclamation of the Terman location and the
Cubberley Lease Payment was accordingly reduced by $23,490 per month. The list of Covenanted sites
Version 1.1, 10/30/12
was modified to exclude the Garland site and include Addison and El Carmelo sites. Also added at that
time was a District Option to open a compact high school at the Cubberley site if necessary, agreeing to
joint use of the gym, cafeteria, theatre, and fields with required 24 months notice.
At this time, the first of the two 5 year extensions is under consideration by both parties with a decision
required by December 31, 2013.
III. Problem Statement
The following issues are a concern at this time regarding the above summarized lease.
1) District Needs
The District has developed a dependency on the lease payment funds, comprising now approximately
4.4% of the District's annual budget as revenue. These funds also constitute approximately 4.6% of
the City's annual budget as an expense.
2) Covenant Not to Develop Now Obsolete
The lease includes a "Covenant Not To Develop" payment that was intended to safeguard District
owned properties from being sold. It is the City's promise to pay the District in return for the District
not selling its land. This is no longer an immediate issue as the school sites identified in the Covenant
are now all in use.
3) Utility Users Tax
During the campaign to pass the Utility Users Tax, it was advertised to the public as a District
financial benefit, creating a belief by the Palo Alto community that one of the major beneficiaries of
the tax funds collected is the District.
4) Lease Payments per Consumer Price Index vs. Utility Users Tax Revenue
The Cubberley Lease calculates annual lease payment adjustments using the Consumer Price Index
which has been steadily increasing over time. The Utility Users Tax revenue which depends on utility
revenues and is used by the City for lease payments, has been leveling off and/or decreasing in recent
years. This is an inconsistent correlation of income and expense for the City.
5) Future District Requirements are Vague
The District is vague on specific dates for future use although clear, using current projections, that at
some time in the 10-15 year time frame the site or a portion thereof may be necessary for school use.
6) Future City Requirements are Vague
The City has not articulated clearly the community services necessary to remain on the Cubberley site
and exactly how much of the site is required to support them.
Version 1.1, 10/30/12
IV. Lease Modification Options
The following recommendations for modifications to the lease are for the short term period, specifically
related to the upcoming renewal of 5 year term (Jan 1, 2014 - Dec. 31, 2018). Mid-term and long-term
recommendations are difficult to predict as they would pertain to the conditions and plans in place at that
time.
Consideration should be given to renew the lease for 5 years to give the City and District time to plan for
future renovations on the site. The following lease modifications may also be considered in the form of an
addendum to the existing lease:
1. Recalculate the annual lease payments to align with the Utility Users Tax revenue trend rather
than the Consumer Price Index.
2. Remove the Covenant Not To Develop payment as it is no longer pertinent to the current
situation.
3. Have the District pay for its share of the projected capital improvements.
4. Have the District contribute to ongoing maintenance and repairs.
5. Increase the amount of child care space leased to the city on elementary schools sites along with a
corresponding increase in child care facility lease payments.
1
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
CCAC
Finance
Committee
Deliverable
#3
Funding
Options
1.
Overview
This report summarizes funding options for the Palo Alto Unified School District (District) and the City of
Palo Alto (City). Funding mechanisms are reviewed that are commonly used by the City and District along
with a few others that might be potentials for future use. This is not a comprehensive review of all possible
funding mechanisms. Three scenarios for the future of Cubberley facilities are proposed.
Funding mechanisms are methods used to generate revenue streams and/or raise capital. The use of the
revenue and duration of the mechanism is determined at the time the mechanism is created and, in most cases,
must be approved by voters. Income from the funding mechanisms can be used in basically two ways:
1) Ongoing revenue streams may be used directly to augment an operating budget or pay for supplemental
services. Common funding mechanism examples of this type include parcel tax, property tax, utility taxes,
etc.
2) Bonds are issued to raise large amounts of capital. In this case a new or existing revenue stream is
designated to repay the bonds. Various restrictions apply. In most cases, capital raised is used for new
development or capital improvements. Rule of thumb is that $1m/year of revenue for 30 years generates
between $10m to $15m of borrowed capital depending on prevailing interest rates. The most commonly used
bonds for the City and District are General Obligation Bonds.
2.
Funding
Mechanisms
used
by
City
&
District
2.1
Parcel
Tax
A parcel tax is a fixed annual tax per parcel of real property that generates an ongoing revenue
stream. It requires a 2/3 voter approval. The duration of the tax varies, generally 5-20 years, and
renewals can be approved by voters.
District
Parcel
Tax
History:
2001 - Parcel tax $493 approved 75% generated $5.5m/year, expired 2011
2010 - Parcel tax $589 approved 79% generates $11.9/year expires 2016 (escalates 2% per year)
City
Parcel
Tax
History:
There is currently no parcel tax collected by the city.
2.2
Utility
Users
Tax
A utility tax is a fixed percentage fee levied on city resident's utility or telephone bills. It requires a
50% voter approval. The duration is determined at the time of approval.
District
History:
There is currently no Utility Users Tax collected by the District.
City
Utility
User
Tax
History:
1989 - Utility Users Tax of 5% approved over 50% generates $11m/year, no expiration
2
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
2.3
General
Obligation
Bonds
A general obligation bond (GOB) is a funding mechanism whose revenue stream is a property tax fee
per $100,000 of assessed property value. The tax time frame can be anywhere up to 40 years.
Historically it has been 30 years. A GOB generates revenue that can only be used for capital
improvements. GOB requires a 55% voter approval for school districts and 2/3 voter approval for
cities.
District
Bond
History:
1995 - "Building for Excellence" - $143m bond, tax rate of $35/$100,000 expires in 2024.
2008 - "Strong Schools" - $378m bond passed with tax rate of $44.50/$100,000 expires 2037
2012 - "Strong Schools" increase to $60/$100,000 due to recession to retain 30 year repayment
City
Bond
History:
2008 - "Measure N" - $78m bond passed with tax rate up to $28.74/$100,000 expires 2037
3.
Other
Funding
Mechanisms
for
Consideration
3.1
Business
License
Tax
Tax levied on businesses to generate a revenue stream. Available to City. Majority voter approval
required. In 2009 a ballot measure proposition by the city to tax businesses was defeated.
3.2
Sales
Tax
Tax levied on sales revenue to generate a revenue stream. Available to City in 1/8% increments.
Current restrictions limit maximum of 1% available to City. Majority voter approval required.
3.3
Mello-Roos
Community
Facilities
District
(CFD)
Bonds
A Mello-Roos CFD is formed for a specific community need and requires the formation of a
"territory". The territory can be any size, including a whole city, as long as all members benefit from
the project funded by the bond. Debt repayment is from revenue collected as a property tax fee per
$100,000 of assessed property long term (generally 30 years). The bonds generate capital that can be
used for capital improvements and services. A CFD requires a two thirds vote of residents or property
owners in the district.
3.4
Certificates
of
Participation
Bond
A Certificate of Participation bond is a general credit of the issuing entity. It is not necessarily backed
by a particular revenue source, but a new revenue source or reallocation of existing resources is
necessary to support the cost of COP debt. A COP also requires the use of an existing asset as
collateral for the debt.
3.5
Utility
Revenue
Bonds
A Utility Revenue Bond is repaid through Utility rates or charges to customers. Revenue streams
from utilities cannot be used to fund General Fund operations or capital improvements.
3.6
Private
Funding
Revenue sources may be available from private sources who are interested in participating in city
improvements. These could be in the form of private financing, contributions, or participatory
funding for joint use.
3
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
4.
Cubberley
Funding
Scenarios
Given that no specific plan is in place for the Cubberley Facility and the only "known" requirement is that the
District may need it in 10-15 years, planning options are wide open. Three scenarios with possible funding
options are presented here for consideration.
4.1
No
Development
at
Facility
-
Use
Cubberley
"As-Is"
Option 1 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 10 years. After 10 years,
the agreement terminates and the District can reopen the high school in the existing facilities. The City and
District would have to renegotiate the use of the existing 8 acre parcel owned by the City on which a majority
of the classroom space is located. Today the Cubberley Facility rental income covers its operating costs and
routine maintenance so those costs are not considered a funding need over the next 10 years, although the loss
of the Foothill lease around 2015 may be problematic. Downside is that after 10 years, no community services
would be provided by the City.
OPTION 1: No Change to Cubberley
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-10 Capital Improvements City $12.3m Include in 2014 bond
10+ Capital Improvements District $6.3m Increase parcel tax and use on a
"pay as you go basis" meaning
accumulation of funds to build a
project instead of creating debt -
OR- issue new GO Bonds
4.2
Phased
Re-Development
-
City
8
Acres
First,
District
27
Acres
Later
Option 2 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 5 years. In the meantime
the City and District develop a Memo of Understanding (MOU) to develop joint use facilities on the
Cubberley location. In the following 5-10 years, the City builds a Community Center with joint use in mind.
After 10-15 years, the District rebuilds the high school. Costs are based on the $200m construction estimate
provided by the architects and based on acreage split accordingly, $50m (25%) for City, $150m (75%) for
District.
OPTION 2: Phased Re-development
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-5 Capital Improvements City $6m Include in 2014 bond measure
5-10 Community Center
(with joint use MOU)
City $50m Include in 2014 GO bond measure
- or - COP through increase of the
Utility Users Tax
10+ High School
(with joint use MOU)
District $150m High School Bond in 2024 when
"BforE" bond expires
4
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
4.3
One
Time
Re-Development
-
35
acres
at
once
Option 3 assumes that the City continues the Covenant Not to Develop and Lease for 5 or 10 years. In the
meantime the City and District develop a Memo of Understanding (MOU) to develop joint use facilities on
the Cubberley location. After 5 or 10 years, the City and District together build a Community Center and
High School with joint use in mind. Costs are based on the $200m construction estimate provided by the
architects.
OPTION 2: One-Time Re-development
Years Need Responsible
Party
Funds
Required
Funding Options
0-5 Capital Improvements City $6m Include in 2014 bond measure
5-10 Community Center and
High School (with joint
use MOU)
City & District $200m High School General Obligation
Bond with optional funding from
City
5.
References
California Debt Issuance Primer
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cdiac/debtpubs/handbook.pdf
Partnership for Joint Use, Research Report by Jeffrey M. Vincent
http://media.cefpi.org/CCS_Partnerships.pdf
5
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
Appendix
A:
Funding
Options
(Financing
Mechanisms)
*
Note
that
GO
and
Mello-‐Roos
bonds
can
be
thought
of
as
“revenue
raising”
instruments
in
that
their
approval
by
voters
implements
taxes
to
repay
bond
holders.
Financing
Vehicle/Instrument
to
Issue
Bonds
Description
GME
Requirement
(Nov.
2012)
Vote
Requirement
Comments
General
Obligation
(GO)
Bond*
Property
Tax
based
on
%
of
assessed
value
No
2/3
See
accompanying
chart
for
list
of
upcoming
regular
and
mailed
ballot
election
dates.
Certificates
of
Participation
(COPs)
Similar
to
Revenue
Bonds
No
N/A
Must
have
identified
revenue
stream
for
repayment
e.g.
new
tax
such
as
Business
License
Tax
or
increase
in
current
tax
such
as
sales
tax.
Utility
Revenue
Bonds
Repaid
from
Utility
Rates
No
N/A
Must
have
identified
revenue
stream
for
repayment.
Utility
bonds
cannot
be
used
to
fund
General
Fund
operations.
Mello-‐Roos
District
Bonds*
Special
Tax
Levy
No
2/3
Special
Tax
Levy
used
to
repay
bonds.
6
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
Appendix
B:
Funding
Options
(New
or
Increased
Taxes)
*General
taxes
can
be
coupled
with
an
advisory
measure
expressing
voters’
preference
that
tax
be
used
for
particular
purpose.
If
the
ballot
language
itself
expressly
limits
use
of
tax
to
infrastructure
or
other
specific
uses,
it
becomes
a
Special
Tax.
Special
taxes
require
a
2/3
vote,
but
need
not
be
placed
on
a
GME
ballot.
New
or
Increased
Taxes
to
Support
Financing
Vehicles
(e.g.,
COPs)
Description
GME
Requirement
(Nov.
2014)
Vote
Requirement
Comments
Business
License
tax
Tax
on
businesses
Yes*
Majority
3/8¢
Sales
Tax
General
Tax
Yes*
Majority
Must
be
voted
on
at
GME
Currently,
there
is
a
1.0%
transactions
and
use
tax
in
Santa
Clara
County.
The
cap
on
these
taxes
is
2%.
(R&T
7251.1).
Therefore
PA
has
the
capacity
to
impose
a
tax
of
up
to
1%.
Note
these
taxes
may
be
imposed
only
in
multiples
of
1/8%.
Utility
Users
Tax
Tax
on
utility
charges
Yes*
Majority
Parcel
Tax
(See
comment)
Property
tax
based
on
flat
rate
per
parcel
No
2/3
Parcel
tax
cannot
be
pledged
toward
bond
payments.
Can
be
used
to
support
programs
and
operating
expenses.
7
Version
1.0,
11/7/12
Appendix
C:
Comparison
of
GOB,
Mello-Roos,
and
Parcel
Taxes
Separate
document
attached
provided
by
Jones
Hall
dated
September
2012.
11/20/12
1
Finance
Deliverable
#3
Research
exis7ng
joint
use
facili7es
in
other
communi7es
for
lessons
learned
and
guidance
for
our
effort.
Due
Date:
Oct.
19th
Outline/Process
• Gathered
available
documenta7on
on
Joint
Use
projects
• Choose
3
examples
to
study
in
depth
–
based
on
similarity
to
Cubberley
– Wadsworth,
Ohio
High
School
&
Community
Campus
– Emeryville,
CA
Center
for
Community
Life
– Livermore,
CA
School
Upgrades,
City
Library
&
Youth
Community
Center
• Gathered
data
– Partners
– Facili7es
(including
sq.
Y)
– Total
Cost
and
Funding
Mechanisms
– Implementa7on
Timeline
• Common
Threads
and
Lessons
Learned
• References
11/20/12
2
Emeryville
Center
for
Community
Life
Partners:
•
Emery
USD
•
City
of
Emeryville
•
9-‐12
High
School
•
K-‐8
Lower
School
•
School
Mul7-‐Purpose
Room
•
Admin
for
School
&
Community
•
Community/School
Library
•
Community
Pool
•
Community
Dance/Aerobic
Space
•
Community
Mul7-‐Purpose
Room
• Community
Amphitheatre
•
3
level
design
w
Terraces
•
Security
Control
Points
•
Phase
2
–theatre,
gym,
classrooms
Facility
Overview
>
750
students
Approx.
7.6
acres
115,100
sq.
Y
facility
ECCL
has
Phase
2
plan
and
Defined
Boundaries
Approx.
7.6
acres
115,100
sq.
Y
facility
11/20/12
3
Emeryville
Funding
and
Timeframe
• Cost
/
Funding
Phase
1:
$80M
(w/
$10M
flex)
– School
will
use
a
$48M
55%
General
Obliga7on
Bond
– City
will
provide
$21M
in
State
Redevelopment
$s.
• Timeline
– In
planning
for
10
years-‐
program
plan
first
issued
in
2003
– Currently
on
3rd
MOU
– Approved
the
conceptual
design
March
2012
–
Move
in
date
is
currently
es7mated
August
2015
ECCL
is
s7ll
in
development
and
concern
is
being
raised
over
the
state
commitment
of
redevelopment
funds.
11/20/12
4
•
9-‐12
High
School
(1629
students)
•
Recrea7on
Facility
•
Senior
Center
•
Health
&
Wellness
Center
•
Outdoor
and
Indoor
Pools
•
Pediatrics
and
Den7stry
•
Media
/
Public
Library
•
Exis7ng
Middle
school
on
site
(782
students)
Facility
Overview
Approx
65
acres
450,000
sq.
Y
•
Wadsworth
Schools
•
City
of
Wadsworth
•
Public
Library
•
Private
Health
System
Partners:
450,000
sq.
Y
11/20/12
5
Wadsworth
Funding
and
Timeframe
• Cost
/
Funding
-‐
$105M
– $65M
from
a
General
Obliga7on
Bond
by
the
Schools
– $24M
from
Ohio
Schools
Facility
Commission
(37%
of
GOB)
– $16M
city
commitment
for
Community
Center
• Partners
and
capital
corporate
campaign
• Timeline
–
4
years
!!
– Presented
to
community
in
May
2008
– Bond
approval
in
November
2008
– School
opened
in
Fall
2012
– Community
Center
opening
scheduled
for
December
2012
Taking
advantage
of
state
funds
available
pushed
the
community
to
take
ac7on.
Livermore,
CA
•
Livermore
Valley
USD
•
City
of
Livermore
•
Livermore
Area
Park
&
Recrea7on
District
Partners:
•
Modernize
7
of
20
schools
•
Youth
Community
Center
•
Civic
Center
Library
Facility
Overview
–
3
projects
Livermore
Civic
Center
Library
1188
South
Livermore
Ave.
Robert
Livermore
Community
Center
4444
East
Ave.
20
School
sites
71,000
sq.Y
indoor
45,000
sq.
Y.
aqua7c
center
56,000
sq.Y
11/20/12
6
Livermore
Funding
and
Timeframe
• Cost
/
Funding
-‐
$150M
thru
a
General
Obliga7on
Bond
led
by
the
school
– $110M
for
school
upgrades
– $20M
Civic
Center
Library
• LVJUSD
received
special
legisla7on
(EC
18104)
authorizing
joint
use
library
to
be
built
on
other
public
en7ty
land
within
1
mile
of
site.
– $20M
Youth
Community
Center
• Timeline
–
5
-‐
10
years
– Two
failed
votes
in
the
early
‘90s
(School
Parcel
Tax
and
Parks
GOB)
– 1975
Tax
override
set
to
expire
in
2000
gave
impetus
for
ac7on
– Community
Survey
March
1998
– Bond
approval
in
March
1999
(passed
with
82%
of
the
vote)
– Library
opened
in
2004
– Community
Center
opened
March
2005
– School
funds
exhausted
June
2008
This
joint
effort
was
done
primarily
to
save
elec7on
expenses
and
to
provide
a
compelling
opportunity
that
voters
would
support.
7
Steps
to
Effec7ve
Joint-‐Use
Partnership1
from
document
published
by
Berkeley’s
Center
for
Ci7es
and
Schools
1. Iden7fy
a
local
need
that
a
joint
use
partnership
might
address
2. Iden7fy
essen7al
joint
use
partners
3. Develop
a
posi7ve,
trus7ng
rela7onship
with
partners
4. Build
poli7cal
support
5. Build
a
joint
use
partnership
within
the
context
of
the
local
community
6. Formalize
the
partnership
with
an
MOU
7. Foster
ongoing
communica7on
and
monitor
the
progress
and
impact
DONE
DONE
IN
P
R
O
G
R
E
S
S
11/20/12
7
Type
of
Funding
for
Joint-‐Use
Projects
through
School
Districts5
•
State
General
Obliga.on
Bonds:
These
funds
are
voted
on
by
the
en7re
state.
They
can
be
directed
one
or
several
areas
such
as
educa7on,
transporta7on,
and
parks.
As
of
June
2008,
there
was
$1.3
million
leY
from
Prop.
47,
$8.2
million
from
Prop.
55,
and
2.5
million
from
Prop.
1D,
for
a
total
of
$12.1
million.
So
not
a
strong
prospect
for
us
to
pursue.
•
Local
General
Obliga.on
Bonds:
School
districts
use
these
bond
funds
to
match
the
state
required
contribu7on
for
school
construc7on
projects.
Local
bonds
must
be
approved
by
55%
of
the
vote
within
the
district.
They
are
repaid
using
local
property
tax
revenue.
Local
bonds
have
raised
$41
billion
in
the
past
decade.
•
Developers
Fees:
School
districts
are
allowed
to
levy
fees
on
new
residen7al,
commercial,
or
industrial
developments
for
school
construc7on
projects.
These
fees
can
provide
a
moderate
amount
but
vary
significantly
by
community
depending
on
local
development.
•
Special
Bond
Funds:
Known
as
“Mello-‐Roos”
Bonds,
these
funds
allow
school
districts
to
form
special
districts
to
sell
bonds
for
school
construc7on
projects.
These
bonds
require
2/3
voter
approval
and
are
paid
off
by
the
property
owners
in
the
special
district.
These
bond
funds
have
produced
$3.7
billion
in
the
past
10
years.
Very
li>le
state
money
is
available
and
PA
isn’t
a
strong
candidate
so
local
opEons
are
our
best
bet.
PotenEal
Challenges
to
Joint
Use5
• Aligning
Partnership
Goals:
The
long-‐term
nature
of
the
partnership
requires
par7es
to
develop
similar
goals
and
objec7ves
for
the
funding
and
management
of
the
project.
• OperaEons
and
Maintenance:
The
hours
of
use,
security,
and
cost
maintenance
should
be
addressed
upfront
to
avoid
confusion
and
misunderstandings.
• Regulatory
Constraints:
Construc7on
projects
have
various
levels
of
regula7on
depending
on
the
community
and
the
environment.
The
Field
Act
contains
higher
construc7on
standards
for
school
facili7es.
Therefore,
if
community
centers
and
buildings
are
to
be
used
by
school
districts,
they
must
also
comply
with
the
Field
Act.
These
types
of
differences
should
be
reconciled
among
partners
before
the
project
advances.
• Joint-‐Use
Fund
RestricEons:
Requirements
set
forth
in
SB
50
state
that
projects
using
state
school
construc7on
funding
must
be
on
property
owned
by
school
districts.
• RestricEons
on
Private-‐Public
Partnerships:
There
are
currently
limited
opportuni7es
for
public-‐private
joint
use
partnerships.
• Long-‐Term
Commitment:
School
districts
and
their
partners
have
stated
concerns
about
joint-‐use
projects
and
the
long-‐term
costs
associated
with
them.
Liability
issues
may
also
arise.
11/20/12
8
Major
Takeaways
• Joint
Use
projects
are
being
done
all
over
in
all
forms
• It
takes
7me
to
pull
the
projects
together
-‐
Project
of
our
scope…
–
2-‐5
years
in
Ohio
– 5-‐10
years
in
California
• Successful
projects
have
communi7es
that
embraced
them
– Key
tools
used:
Community
surveys,
Community
advisory
commivees,
community
forums
• Funding
comes
from
a
variety
of
sources
but
typically
the
school
takes
the
lead
– Most
successful
examples
have
either
outside
funds
they
want
to
leverage
or
a
transi7on
in
a
local
tax
• Significant
up
front
work
needs
to
be
done
on
MOU
or
Joint
Use
Agreement
to
define
structure
of
the
project
and
the
rela7onship
of
the
en77es
involved
References
1. Joint
Use
School
Partnerships
in
California:
Strategies
to
Enhance
Schools
and
Communi7es
August
2008
hvp://ci7esandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/CC&S_PHLP_2008_joint_use_with_appendices.pdf
CASE
1:
OPENING
SCHOOL
PLAYGROUNDS
TO
THE
COMMUNITY:
THE
CITY
AND
COUNTY
OF
SAN
FRANCISCO
AND
SF
UNIFIED
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
CASE
2:
BUILDING
NEW
JOINT
USE
GYMNASIUMS:
GARVEY
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
AND
THE
CITY
OF
ROSEMEAD
CASE
3:
EXPANDING
CHILDCARE
OPPORTUNITIES:
CLOVIS
UNIFIED
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
AND
STATE
CENTER
COMMUNITY
COLLEGE
DISTRICT
2. Innova7ve
Approaches
to
Financing
School
Construc7on:
The
Feasibility
of
“Public-‐Public”
Partnership
February
2000
hvp://www.cashnet.org/resource-‐center/resourcefiles/65.pdf
3. Joint
Use
of
Public
Schools:
A
Framework
for
a
New
Social
Contract
April
2010
hvp://ci7esandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/2010_JU_Concept_Paper.pdf
4. California's
K-‐12
Educa7onal
Infrastructure
Investments:
Leveraging
the
State's
Role
for
Quality
School
Facili7es
in
Sustainable
Communi7es
2012
hvp://ci7esandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/CCS_2012_CA_K12_Edu_Infra_Exec_Sum.pdf
5. Primer
on
Joint
Use
hvp://www.cpehn.org/pdfs/Joint%20Use%20Primer%20-‐%20CPEHN%204-‐09.pdf
6. Emeryville
Center
of
Community
Life
current
website
hvp://www.emeryvillecenter.org/
7. Wadsworth
High
School
and
Community
Complex
2008-‐2012
hvp://www.wadsworthcity.com/the-‐city/home/community-‐collabora7on-‐informa7on.html
CCAC FINANCE COMMITTEE DELIVERABLE #5
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
There are a number of options for the financing and operating of a joint use facility on the
Cubberley campus. One of those options is to create a Joint Powers Agency or
Authority.
A Joint Powers Agency (JPA) is an entity authorized to be created under Section 6500 of
the California State Government Code (the “Joint Powers Law”)whereby two or more
public entities can operate collectively. “Joint Powers” is a term used to describe
governmental agencies that have agreed to combine their powers and resources to work
on solving their common problems.
Joint powers are exercised when the public officials of two or more agencies agree to
create another legal entity or establish a joint approach to work on a common problem,
fund a project or act as a representative body for a specific activity.
The initials JPA can mean two different things. The first is Joint Powers Agreement,
which is a formal, legal agreement between two or more agencies that want to jointly
implement programs, build facilities or deliver services. Governmental agencies are
called member agencies. One member agency agrees to be responsible for delivery of
service on behalf of the other(s). A Joint Powers Agreement has no specified term but
rather may be short-term, long-term or perpetual.
The second use of the initials is for Joint Powers Agency or Joint Powers Authority. In
this case, the Joint Powers Law is used to establish a new, separate governmental
organization created by its member agencies, but operating at the members’ direction.
Typically, the JPA has numbers of officials from the member agencies on its governing
board.
In the second case, the JPA is distinct from its member agencies. It has its own board of
directors. Once created,the JPA has two types of powers: 1) it has the powers common to
the member agencies which created it; and 2) it has the powers conferred on it by the
California Legislature under Article 4 of the Joint Powers Law, including the power to
issue bonds for public capital improvements. The term, membership and standing orders
of the board of the JPA must be specified in the agreement. The JPA may employ staff
and establish policies independent of the constituent agencies.
A JPA can be formed by action of the governing boards of the participating agencies;
there is no public election needed.
JPA’s can be formed specifically to arrange capital financing by selling bonds. The
bonds create the capital needed to finance construction of public facilities. In some
instances the agency can issue revenue bonds which do not require a vote of the
electorate. It is unclear whether a future Cubberley project would generate enough
revenue to be able to qualify to issue this kind of debt. It would be more likely that the
improvements would need to be funded by the issuance of General Obligation bonds
issued by either the school district or the City (not by the JPA) which in either case would
require a public vote. Another alternative would be for the JPA to issue lease revenue
bonds. Lease Revenue bonds are bonds where the proceeds are used to build or improve
reals property and where the property to be acquired or improved (and in the case of an
asset transfer, an unrelated piece of real property) is leased to one or more member
agencies. The payments to be made by the member agency(ies) under the Lease crate a
stream of revenue that serves as the security for the JPA’s Bonds.
Advantages and Disadvantages of a JPA:
Advantages:
• JPA’s are flexible and easy to form
• JPA’s may be more efficient than separate governments
• JPA’s have powers which are different from those of the school district and City,
and those powers may be used to finance the construction of facilities; and
purchase of equipment/
• A JPA for Cubberley would cover the entire area that would benefit from the
construction and operation of a joint use facility
• A JPA for Cubberley might help attract either private capital or grants because it
would show both agencies’ commitment to work together on a shared facility
Disadvantages:
• JPA’s require mutual trust
• JPA’s can be hard to keep together for the long-term
• JPA’s can be hard for the public to understand and may be perceived as another
layer of government
Resources:
California State Legislature, Senate Local Government Committee, Governments
Working Together, A Citizens Guide to Joint Powers Agreements, August 2007
Section 6500 of the California State Government Code
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
C
o
m
m
i
+
e
e
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
S
p
r
e
a
d
s
h
e
e
t
10
/
1
/
1
2
AN
N
U
A
L
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
B
U
D
G
E
T
Da
t
a
f
r
o
m
L
e
a
s
e
&
C
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
a
n
d
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
(
B
u
d
g
e
t
2
0
1
3
c
o
l
u
m
n
)
a
n
d
r
o
u
n
d
e
d
OP
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
I
N
C
O
M
E
IN
C
O
M
E
EX
P
E
N
S
E
It
e
m
i
z
e
d
Lo
n
g
T
e
r
m
L
e
a
s
e
s
1,
6
1
7
,
0
0
0
(F
o
o
t
h
i
l
l
=
a
p
p
r
o
x
$
9
3
0
k
,
a
l
l
o
t
h
e
r
=
a
p
p
r
o
x
$
6
9
0
k
)
Ho
u
r
l
y
R
e
n
t
a
l
s
82
3
,
0
0
0
Ci
t
y
O
f
f
i
c
e
R
e
n
t
a
l
73
,
0
0
0
OP
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
E
X
P
E
N
S
E
Cu
b
b
e
r
l
y
L
e
a
s
e
4,
6
0
0
,
0
0
0
Co
v
e
n
e
n
t
1,
8
3
0
,
0
0
0
Ch
i
l
d
C
a
r
e
64
0
,
0
0
0
Ch
i
l
d
C
a
r
e
U
S
l
i
S
e
s
56
,
0
0
0
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
P
A
U
S
D
7,
1
2
6
,
0
0
0
Le
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
&
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
43
0
,
0
0
0
No
n
-
‐
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
O
p
e
r
a
S
n
g
1,
3
2
5
,
0
0
0
Op
e
r
a
S
n
g
C
o
s
t
s
(
T
o
t
a
l
)
1,
7
5
5
,
0
0
0
An
n
u
a
l
T
o
t
a
l
s
2,
5
1
3
,
0
0
0
8,
8
8
1
,
0
0
0
TO
T
A
L
N
E
T
6,
3
6
8
,
0
0
0
LO
N
G
T
E
R
M
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
Ne
x
t
5
y
e
a
r
s
20
1
8
-
‐
2
0
2
2
Ne
x
t
1
5
y
e
a
r
s
20
2
3
-
‐
2
0
3
6
CU
R
R
E
N
T
B
U
D
G
E
T
E
D
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
(
p
e
r
C
i
t
y
o
f
P
A
2
0
1
3
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
B
u
d
g
e
t
)
n
e
e
d
t
o
c
l
a
r
i
f
y
i
f
t
h
i
s
i
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
I
B
R
C
i
d
e
n
P
f
i
e
d
w
o
r
k
Au
d
i
t
o
r
i
u
m
R
o
o
f
25
0
,
0
0
0
25
0
,
0
0
0
Me
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l
&
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
1,
4
5
0
,
0
0
0
15
0
,
0
0
0
1,
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
U
p
d
g
r
a
d
e
s
1,
1
5
0
,
0
0
0
15
0
,
0
0
0
1,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
re
m
o
v
e
d
f
r
o
m
2
0
1
3
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
b
u
d
g
e
t
Ro
o
f
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
42
6
,
0
0
0
53
,
5
0
0
10
6
,
0
0
0
10
7
,
0
0
0
10
6
,
0
0
0
53
,
5
0
0
To
t
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
5
y
e
a
r
)
3,
2
7
6
,
0
0
0
LO
N
G
T
E
R
M
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
(
P
E
R
I
R
B
C
p
.
1
4
6
)
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
n
e
x
t
5
y
e
a
r
s
)
10
,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
y
e
a
r
s
5
-
‐
1
0
)
2,
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
(
y
e
a
r
s
1
1
-
‐
2
5
)
6,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
6,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
To
t
a
l
18
,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
0
9
3
,
5
0
0
2,
2
9
6
,
0
0
0
3,
6
9
7
,
0
0
0
2,
2
9
6
,
0
0
0
3,
0
9
3
,
5
0
0
2,
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
6,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
*
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
1
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
Vo
t
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
?
Ye
s
.
Ye
s
.
Ye
s
.
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
Af
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
v
e
V
o
t
e
s
Tw
o
-th
i
r
d
s
o
f
v
o
t
e
s
c
a
s
t
.
Tw
o
-th
i
r
d
s
o
f
vo
t
e
s
c
a
s
t
.
Tw
o
-th
i
r
d
s
o
f
v
o
t
e
s
c
a
s
t
.
Qu
a
l
i
f
i
e
d
E
l
e
c
t
o
r
s
Re
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
r
e
s
i
d
i
n
g
i
n
c
i
t
y
.
Re
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
i
n
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
,
i
f
1
2
o
r
mo
r
e
v
o
t
e
r
s
r
e
s
i
d
e
i
n
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
.
I
f
fe
w
e
r
t
h
a
n
1
2
r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
re
s
i
d
e
i
n
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
,
v
o
t
e
i
s
o
f
la
n
d
o
w
n
e
r
s
,
o
n
e
v
o
t
e
pe
r
a
c
r
e
.
Re
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
r
e
s
i
d
i
n
g
i
n
c
i
t
y
.
Bo
u
n
d
a
r
y
o
f
A
r
e
a
t
o
b
e
Ta
x
e
d
Ci
t
y
.
Te
r
r
i
t
o
r
y
o
f
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
,
a
s
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
b
y
ci
t
y
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
.
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
ci
t
y
o
r
a
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
i
t
y
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
no
n
-co
n
t
i
g
u
o
u
s
a
r
e
a
s
.
Ci
t
y
.
Ba
s
i
s
o
f
T
a
x
As
s
e
s
s
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
An
y
r
e
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
m
e
t
h
o
d
ex
c
e
p
t
as
s
e
s
s
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
.
Fi
x
e
d
a
n
n
u
a
l
t
a
x
a
m
o
u
n
t
p
e
r
p
a
r
c
e
l
,
wh
i
c
h
m
ay
e
s
c
a
l
a
t
e
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
.
Me
t
h
o
d
o
f
T
a
x
Co
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
An
n
u
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
b
i
l
l
.
An
n
u
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
b
i
l
l
o
r
d
i
r
e
c
t
bi
l
l
i
n
g
.
An
n
u
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
b
i
l
l
.
Ca
n
Se
n
i
o
r
s
b
e
E
x
e
m
p
t
fr
o
m
T
a
x
?
No
.
Ye
s
.
Ye
s
,
s
o
l
o
n
g
a
s
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
ba
s
i
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
e
x
e
m
p
t
i
o
n
.
Ty
p
i
c
a
l
U
s
e
o
f
Te
c
h
n
i
q
u
e
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
ce
r
t
a
i
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
Au
g
m
e
n
t
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
b
u
d
g
e
t
o
r
p
a
y
fo
r
su
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
* Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
2
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
E
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
Pu
r
c
h
a
s
e
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
r
e
a
l
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
(
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
o
f
l
a
n
d
o
r
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
)
.
An
y
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
u
s
e
f
u
l
l
i
f
e
o
f
f
i
v
e
ye
a
r
s
o
r
m
o
r
e
(
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
f
u
r
n
i
s
h
i
n
g
s
an
d
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
)
.
An
y
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
sp
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
b
a
l
l
o
t
,
wi
t
h
o
u
t
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ca
n
F
u
r
n
i
s
h
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
b
e
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
d
?
No
.
Ye
s
,
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
h
e
e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
h
a
s
a
us
e
f
u
l
l
i
f
e
o
f
f
i
v
e
y
e
a
r
s
o
r
l
o
n
g
e
r
.
Ye
s
,
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ca
n
T
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
b
e
Us
e
d
f
o
r
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
Ot
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
D
e
b
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
on
Bo
n
d
s
?
No
.
Ye
s
.
P
a
y
-as
-yo
u
-go
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
c
o
s
t
s
,
ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
,
a
n
d
li
m
i
t
e
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(
s
e
t
f
o
r
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
Ac
t
)
.
Ye
s
.
A
n
y
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
ba
l
l
o
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
.
Ar
e
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
El
i
g
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
wi
t
h
T
a
x
?
No
.
Ce
r
t
a
i
n
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
p
o
l
i
c
e
,
f
i
r
e
,
s
t
o
r
m
dr
a
i
n
a
g
e
,
p
a
r
k
,
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
,
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
,
an
d
h
a
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
w
a
s
t
e
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
A
l
s
o
,
a
n
n
u
a
l
c
o
s
t
o
f
ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
bo
n
d
s
an
d
t
h
e
dis
t
r
i
c
t
.
Ye
s
.
M
o
s
t
c
o
m
m
o
n
u
s
e
o
f
p
a
r
c
e
l
ta
x
e
s
i
s
t
o
s
u
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
o
pe
r
a
t
i
n
g
re
v
e
n
u
e
s
t
o
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
le
v
e
l
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
.
Se
p
a
r
a
t
e
A
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
I
s
s
u
e
Bo
n
d
s
?
No
.
No
.
Ye
s
.
T
y
p
i
c
a
l
l
y
,
ge
n
e
r
a
l
f
u
n
d
l
e
a
s
e
re
v
e
n
u
e
b
o
n
d
s
o
r
C
O
P
s
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
by
c
i
t
y
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
,
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
s
o
f
pa
r
c
e
l
t
a
x
l
e
v
y
“
r
e
i
m
bu
r
s
e
s
”
t
h
e
ge
n
e
r
a
l
f
u
n
d
.
Ty
p
e
o
f
B
o
n
d
S
a
l
e
Co
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
v
e
s
a
l
e
o
n
l
y
,
u
n
l
e
s
s
ch
a
r
t
e
r
c
i
t
y
.
Ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
e
d
o
r
c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
v
e
s
a
l
e
.
Ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
e
d
o
r
c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
v
e
s
a
l
e
,
de
p
e
n
d
i
n
g
o
n
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
b
o
n
d
i
n
g
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
u
s
e
d
.
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
3
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
De
b
t
L
i
m
i
t
Am
o
u
n
t
o
f
b
o
n
d
s
o
u
t
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
a
t
an
y
t
i
m
e
ca
n
n
o
t
e
x
c
e
e
d
1
5
%
o
f
to
t
a
l
a
s
s
e
s
s
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
.
Va
l
u
e
o
f
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
i
n
t
h
e
dis
t
r
i
c
t
su
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
t
a
x
m
u
s
t
b
e
a
t
le
a
s
t
t
h
r
e
e
t
i
m
e
s
t
h
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
ou
t
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
b
o
n
d
s
.
U
n
d
e
r
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
c
a
n
ap
p
r
o
v
e
a
n
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
b
o
n
d
s
ex
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
l
i
m
i
t
.
No
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
O
P
s
o
r
l
e
a
s
e
re
v
e
n
u
e
b
o
n
d
s
.
Bo
n
d
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
Ci
t
y
’
s
u
n
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
r
a
i
s
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
e
s
t
o
m
e
e
t
d
e
b
t
se
r
v
i
c
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
ta
x
i
s
a
l
i
e
n
o
n
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
C
o
u
n
t
y
ha
s
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
f
o
r
e
c
l
o
s
e
o
n
l
i
e
n
fo
r
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
o
f
d
e
l
i
n
q
u
e
n
t
ta
x
e
s
.
Spe
c
i
a
l
t
a
x
es
l
e
v
i
e
d
a
n
d
s
e
c
u
r
e
d
by
a
li
e
n
o
n
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
e
a
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
e
d
fo
r
e
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
o
n
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
f
o
r
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
of
d
e
l
i
n
q
u
e
n
t
t
a
x
e
s
,
s
o
l
o
n
g
a
s
bon
d
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
s
s
u
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
dis
t
r
i
c
t
.
Ci
t
y
’
s
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
f
u
n
d
.
Th
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
St
a
t
e
l
a
w
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
p
l
e
d
g
e
pr
o
c
e
e
d
s
o
f
p
ar
c
e
l
t
a
x
e
s
to
t
h
e
pa
y
m
e
n
t
o
f
de
b
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
T
e
r
m
o
f
T
a
x
Le
v
y
As
l
o
n
g
a
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
r
e
p
a
y
bo
n
d
s
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
b
y
v
o
t
e
r
s
.
As
l
o
n
g
a
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
r
e
p
a
y
bo
n
d
s
o
r
t
o
p
a
y
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y
f
o
r
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
au
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
b
y
v
o
t
e
r
s
.
Fi
n
a
l
y
e
a
r
o
f
ta
x
m
u
s
t
b
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
.
As
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
b
a
l
l
o
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
.
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
T
e
r
m
o
f
Bo
n
d
s
Up
t
o
4
0
y
e
a
r
s
.
Up
t
o
4
0
y
e
a
r
s
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
,
u
p
t
o
u
s
e
f
u
l
l
i
f
e
o
f
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
be
i
n
g
f
i
n
a
n
c
e
d
.
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
4
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
El
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
St
a
t
e
w
i
d
e
E
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
s
*
St
a
t
e
w
i
d
e
E
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
s
*
or
a
sp
e
c
i
a
l
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
n
a
d
a
t
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
by
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
t
o
o
c
c
u
r
be
t
w
e
e
n
90
d
a
y
s
a
n
d
1
8
0
d
a
y
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
ad
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
Fo
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
.
St
a
t
e
w
i
d
e
E
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
s
*
* El
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
o
d
e
Se
c
t
i
o
n
1
0
0
1
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
5
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
Ad
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
•
Si
m
p
l
e
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
f
t
a
x
a
t
i
o
n
.
•
Fa
m
i
l
i
a
r
t
o
vo
t
e
r
s
.
•
Le
s
s
t
i
m
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
p
u
t
b
e
f
o
r
e
vo
t
e
r
s
.
•
Lo
w
e
r
c
o
s
t
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
(
l
o
w
e
r
bo
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
r
a
t
e
s
a
n
d
b
o
n
d
is
s
u
a
n
c
e
c
o
s
t
s
)
.
•
If
c
i
t
y
h
a
s
a
l
a
r
g
e
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
b
a
s
e
,
a
l
a
r
g
e
po
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
a
x
b
u
r
d
e
n
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
bo
r
n
e
b
y
n
o
n
-res
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
•
Fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
i
n
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
i
n
g
t
a
x
r
a
t
e
an
d
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
f
a
p
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
i
n
g
t
a
x
.
•
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
b
o
n
d
s
o
r
di
r
e
c
t
l
y
b
y
p
a
y
-as
-yo
u
-go
.
•
Wi
d
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
i
t
e
m
s
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
bo
n
d
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
f
u
r
n
i
s
h
i
n
g
s
,
a
n
d
eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
.
•
Ca
n
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
p
a
y
f
o
r
m
a
n
y
an
n
u
a
l
,
r
e
c
u
r
r
i
n
g
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
•
Ab
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
t
a
i
l
o
r
t
a
x
a
n
d
a
r
e
a
t
o
be
t
a
x
e
d
i
n
a
m
a
n
n
e
r
t
o
en
h
a
n
c
e
v
o
t
e
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
.
•
Pr
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
f
o
r
l
a
n
d
o
w
n
e
r
v
o
t
e
i
f
CF
D
h
a
s
f
e
w
e
r
t
h
a
n
1
2
re
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
.
•
Si
m
p
l
e
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
f
t
a
x
a
t
i
o
n
.
•
No
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
us
e
o
f
t
a
x
pr
o
c
e
e
d
s
.
•
Ca
n
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
an
n
u
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
.
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
6
CO
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
O
F
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
O
B
L
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
B
O
N
D
S
,
M
E
L
L
O
-RO
O
S
A
N
D
P
ARC
E
L
T
A
X
E
S
F
O
R
C
I
T
I
E
S
Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
O
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
n
d
s
Me
l
l
o
-Ro
o
s
C
F
D
s
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
T
a
x
Di
s
a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
•
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
v
o
t
e
a
n
d
su
p
e
r
m
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
•
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
b
o
n
d
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
a
r
e
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
t
o
r
e
a
l
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
s
u
c
h
as
t
h
e
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
o
f
la
n
d
a
n
d
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
•
As
s
e
s
s
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
f
ta
x
a
t
i
o
n
s
p
r
e
a
d
s
t
a
x
b
u
r
d
e
n
on
b
a
s
i
s
o
f
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
v
a
l
u
e
ra
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
b
y
d
i
r
e
c
t
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
re
c
e
i
v
e
d
f
r
o
m
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
b
o
n
d
pr
o
c
e
e
d
s
.
•
Al
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
i
n
c
i
t
y
p
a
y
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
t
a
x
.
•
Bon
d
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
t
e
c
h
n
i
q
u
e
o
n
l
y
,
no
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
p
a
y
-as
-yo
u
-go
.
•
Su
p
e
r
m
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
v
o
t
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
•
Mo
r
e
t
i
m
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
p
u
t
b
e
f
o
r
e
vo
t
e
r
s
.
•
Hi
g
h
e
r
c
o
s
t
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
(
h
i
g
h
e
r
bo
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
r
a
t
e
s
a
n
d
b
o
n
d
is
s
u
a
n
c
e
c
o
s
t
s
)
.
•
Un
f
a
m
i
l
i
a
r
t
o
vo
t
e
r
s
.
•
Mo
r
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
m
e
t
h
o
d
o
f
ta
x
a
t
i
o
n
.
•
Hi
g
h
e
r
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
c
o
s
t
s
an
d
a
n
n
u
a
l
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
c
o
s
t
s
(n
e
e
d
t
o
h
i
r
e
a
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
.
•
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
v
o
t
e
a
n
d
s
u
p
e
r
m
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
•
Mu
s
t
h
a
v
e
p
e
r
i
o
d
i
c
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
re
n
e
w
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
l
i
m
i
t
if
u
s
e
d
fo
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
.
•
No
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
is
s
u
e
b
o
n
d
s
—se
p
a
r
a
t
e
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
ne
e
d
e
d
.
Cubberley Tenant and Long-Term Renters
Survey Presentation
Meeting No. 14, 11/28/2012
12/12/2012
1
Cubberley Community Center
Tenant & Long Term Renters
Survey
November 28, 2012
2
Background
Cubberley Master plan 1990
1. Neighborhood Concept
2. Cubberley Master Plan amended 1996 to provide greater
flexibility potential users
3. Grouping Tenants based on similar use:
a. Performing Arts
b. Child Care
c. Outdoor Sports
d. Indoor Sports and Health
e. Visual Arts
f. Education
g. Music / Theater
h. Other Non‐Profits and City Services
i. Hourly Rental Space
12/12/2012
2
3
The Survey
Purpose ‐who uses Cubberley Community Center? Sample Questions asked:
1. How many people do you serve?
2. How many participants are Palo Alto residents?
3. Do you have a waitlist?
4. What times of day do you actively use the space?
5. What are the community benefits your program or service
provides?
6. Does your group currently share space?
7. How would you rate current fees for use of space?
8. Do you have specialized facility or equipment needs?
9. What age group does your program serve?
10.If Cubberley Community Center was no longer available what
would you do?
*43 of 70 Tenants
responded to survey
4
Individual Organizations that
responded to the survey
Acme Education Group
Adult School gardening class Senior
Friendship Day
Bay Area Arabic School
California Law Revision
Commission
Cardiac Therapy Association
Cubberley Artists in Residence
Dance Connection
Dance Kaiso/Wilfred Mark
DanceVisions
Dutch School Silicon Valley
El Camino Youth Symphony
Friday Night Dancers
Good Neighbor Montessori
Guru Shadha
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading Room
Middlefield Campus/Foothill College
Palo Alto AYSO
Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra
Palo Alto Girls Softball
Palo Alto Philharmonic
Palo Alto Soccer Club
Peninsula Piano School
Peninsula Women's Chorus
Raices de Mexico Ballet Folklorico
Saturday Night Ballroom Dancing
The Children's Pre‐School Center
The Red Thistle Dancers
Traditional Wushu
Zohar Dance Company & Studio
12/12/2012
3
5
Performing Arts - Dance
Dance Connection
Dance Kaiso/Wilfred Mark
Dance Visions
Friday Night Dancers
Guru Shadha
Raices de Mexico Ballet Folklorico
Saturday Night Ballroom Dancing
The Red Thistle Dancers
Zohar Dance Company & Studio
6
12/12/2012
4
7
Performing Arts - Dance
Participation – The dance studios currently have 1650 students
enrolled (70% residents); and the combined Friday and Saturday
night ballroom dancing groups serve between 200 and 300
dancers per week (residency unknown).
Use of space – 7 days a week, mornings, afternoons and evenings;
most activity occurs during afternoon, evening & weekend hours.
Community Benefits – High level and diverse dance training and
performance opportunities for youth and adults. Also, cultural
enrichment and awareness through instruction and performance
of ethnic dance disciplines. Sense of community, belonging and
social anchor.
If Cubberley were not available – Most would attempt to
relocate to a nearby site at an equally low cost. Due to market
conditions, that would probably be outside Palo Alto.
8
Child Care / Early Education
Good Neighbor Montessori
The Children’s Preschool Center
12/12/2012
5
9
10
Child Care / Early Education
Participation –The two early childhood education facilities
bring 200 young children and their families to Cubberley each
weekday. 65% of families live or work in Palo Alto.
Use of space –This space is being utilized on weekdays from
7:00am to 6:15pm.
Community Benefits –They support working families with high
quality early childhood care and education, and provide families
with parenting workshops and resources for raising children.
If Cubberley were not available – Finding affordable facilities
for early childhood care and education is next to impossible in
Palo Alto. These providers would be forced to relocate outside of
our community.
12/12/2012
6
11
Outdoor Sports
Fields:
•Palo Alto AYSO
•Palo Alto Soccer Club
•Stanford Soccer Club
•Silicon Valley Adult Sports
•Palo Alto Adult Soccer Club
•Palo Alto Girls Softball
•Various league tournaments
•Drop in public Use
Tennis :
•Gunn High School
•Castilleja School
•Girls Middle School
•USTA Leagues
•Palo Alto Tennis Club
•Drop in public Use
12
12/12/2012
7
13
Outdoor Sports
Participation –Organized field users account for roughly 7000
participants a year and although not all play is done at
Cubberley, fields at Cubberley are used 7 days a week for most
of the year. Residency is estimated to be 70%+.
Use of space – Weekdays after school until dark, and all day on
Saturdays and Sundays.
Community Benefits – Opportunity to participate in team
sports; chance for youth an adults to develop their athletic skills;
physical fitness and is a social outlet.
If Cubberley were not available –These groups would shift
usage to other fields within Palo Alto, however the City could
not continue to support the current number of programs since
sufficient field space would not be available to accommodate all.
14
Indoor Sports and Health
•Traditional Wushu
•Cardiac Therapy Assoc.
•Adult Volleyball
•Youth –Sports Camps
•YMCA Basketball
•Palo Alto Midnight
basketball
•National Junior Basketball
•SSC Futsal
•SVK Self Defense
•Tri City Youth Group
•Cheuk Fung Yi Chuang
•Futsal – (indoor soccer)
•Martial Arts
•Stroke
•Aerobics
•REACH: A Program For
Post‐Stroke
•101 Basketball
•Bay Area 3 on 3
•Special Olympics
•Palo Alto Elite Volleyball
•Senior Table Tennis Club
•Belly Rumba with Sol
12/12/2012
8
15
16
Indoor Sports and Health
Participation –Indoor gym space and health fitness is reserved by multiple organizations and groups serving all ages. These groups account for roughly 1,800 participants. Residency unknown.
Use of space –Indoor space is used 7 days a week, at varies
times, with the heaviest use during morning hours and after
5pm.
Community Benefits –Recreation activities, exercise, health
and wellbeing, social outlet.
If Cubberley were not available –Some of the non‐profit
health groups would go out of business due to the inability to
afford or find alternative space. Would try to relocate, however
indoor gym space is very limited, Palo Alto has no community
gymnasiums.
12/12/2012
9
17
Visual Arts / Artists in
Residence (22)
L. ANDERSON I. INFANTE
L.BOUCHARD S. INGLE
U. DELARIOS S. KISER
K. EDWARDS M.LETTIERI
M. FLETCHER A. McMILLAN
P. FOLEY J. NELSON-GAL
L. GASS M. PAUKER
M.GAVISH N. RAGGIO
B. GUNTHER C. SULLIVAN
P.HANNAWAY N. WHITE
A. HIBBS - vacated C. VALASQUEZ
18
12/12/2012
10
19
Artists in Residence
Participation –22 Artists occupy 17 studio spaces (50% residents).
Artists who teach classes in their studios average 20‐30 students per
quarter (65% residency); visitors to the annual Open Studios events vary;
average 500 visitors per studio per year.
Use of space – Responses varied greatly; some artists actively utilize
their space 7 days a week, up to 12 hours a day, while others may use their
space 25 hours per week. Most respondents are using their space 4‐7
days a week for approximately 5‐8 hours a day.
Community Benefits –The Program is intended to establish a
community of visual artists who support, collaborate, and exchange ideas
with one another and the community.
If Cubberley were not available –Most artists indicated that they
would disperse and relocate out of the Palo Alto area due to lack of
affordable space in this area.
20
Education
Acme Education Group
Bay Area Arabic School
Dutch School Silicon Valley
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading Room
Middlefield Campus/Foothill College
Museo Italo Americano
Kumon Math and Reading
12/12/2012
11
21
22
Education
Participation –Enrollment in these programs, which includes
Foothill College, brings almost 4,200 students to the Cubberley
campus annually, and the Reading Room adds another 10‐15
people per day. (70% residency ‐Excluding Foothill College).
Use of space –With the exception of the Hua Kuang Reading
Room that is open weekdays from 10am to 3pm, most providers
offer their programs during after school, evening and weekend
hours.
Community Benefits –Importance of lifelong learning, language
instruction and cultural exchange, the entire community benefits
from their programs. Complements public schools.
If Cubberley were not available –Most indicated they would
relocate but it would be difficult if not impossible to find equivalent
facilities in Palo Alto, therefore services would be lost to our
community.
12/12/2012
12
23
Music & Theater
•El Camino Youth
Symphony
•Palo Alto Chamber
Orchestra
•Palo Alto Philharmonic
•Peninsula Piano School
•Peninsula Women’s
Chorus
•Bats Improv
•Peninsula Youth
Theater
•Jayendra Kalakendra
•Palo Alto Chamber
Orchestra
•Shiva Murugan Temple
•Nuber Folk Dance
•Shri Krupa
•Sankalpa Dance
Foundation
•Vaidica Vidhya
Ganapathi Center
•Heritage Music
Festivals
24
12/12/2012
13
25
Music & Theater
Participation –These programs show enrollment of 500 or more
students/participants at any given time (residency 45%). Audience
accounts for 150‐300 visitors for 100 rentals annually.
Use of space –With the exception of the Peninsula Piano School
who uses their space 6 days a week from 10am to 7pm, most
providers schedule programming during after school, evening and
weekend hours.
Community Benefits –A majority of these programs are targeted
at youth, these programs complement music and theater
opportunities available within the school settings.
If Cubberley were not available – Providers would have to find
alternate rehearsal and performance space that would probably
entail raising rates for participants or moving out of Palo Alto.
26
Other Non-Profit Support and
City Services
California Law Revision Commission
Adult School gardening class & Senior Friendship Day
Friends of the Palo Alto Library
Temporary Teen Center
Temporary Library
Office of Emergency Services PAFD
Palo Alto Mediation
Cardiac Therapy Assoc. Administration
12/12/2012
14
27
28
Non-Profits and Other City
Services
Participation –Temporary Library (261,000 annual visitors,
open 8 hours day); FOPAL (155 volunteers contributing
more than 23,800 hours annually and raised well over a
million dollars to improve Palo Alto libraries in recent
years); OES weekly training of PAFD and PAPD.
Use of space –Normal business hours; Monday through
Friday from 8:30am to 5:30pm.
Community Benefits – Support for the City of Palo Alto
augment the lack of public space to house critical services.
If Cubberley were not available –Groups would need to
find other office space, however options are very limited,
no specific solution was given.
12/12/2012
15
29
Hourly Rental Space/Users
•Neighbors Abroad
•Youth Community Services
•Liga Hispano Americano De Futbol -
meetings
•Palentir Technologies – gym use
•International School of the
Peninsula – gym use
•Grossman Academy Training
•Gideon Hausner – Jewish Day
School – gym use
•Waldorf School of the Peninsula –
theater rental
•Home Owner Association
•Vineyard - Faith
•Christ Temple Church - Faith
•Palo Alto Soccer Club - meetings
•Common Wealth Club - meetings
•Palo Alto Girls Softball - meetings
•Whole Foods Market - meetings
•Palo Alto Housing Corporation
•Pre-school Family
•Bay Area Amphibian and Reptile
Society - meetings
•SCC Registrar Voters
•SCV Audubon Society - meetings
•National MS Society - meetings
•Palo Alto Menlo Park Mothers Club
–meetings
•Earth Day Film Festival – theater
30
12/12/2012
16
31
Overall Feedback
Participation/Visitors –Estimate 600k+ annual
44% all ages
22% youth
17% adults
17% seniors
Use of space –6am to 10pm
Community Benefits – Community Needs Committee
–“What’s special about Cubberley Community Center”. A
vibrant thriving community center meeting social, cultural,
health and educational needs to thousands.
If Cubberley were not available –25% would no
longer be in operation the remainder would relocate most
of which would move out of Palo Alto due to affordability
of rental rates.
32
12/12/2012
17
33
Discussion
Q&A
PAUSD Minutes
6/28/2011
Approved: 08.23.11 Regular Meeting
June 28, 2011
Page 1
BOARD OF EDUCATION
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Complete tape recordings of most Board Meetings are available at 25 Churchill Avenue. Meetings are also
available on demand at http://www.communitymediacenter.net/watch/pausd_webcast/PAUSDondemand.html
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011
Call to Order The Board of Education of Palo Alto Unified School District held a Regular Meeting in the Board Room at 25 Churchill
Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Baten Caswell, President, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Members present:
Ms. Melissa Baten Caswell, President
Ms. Camille Townsend, Vice President Ms. Barbara Klausner
Ms. Barb Mitchell
Mr. Dana Tom Staff present:
Dr. Kevin Skelly, Superintendent
Mrs. Ginni Davis, Associate Superintendent
Dr. Scott Bowers, Assistant Superintendent
Dr. Robert Golton, Co Chief Business Official
Mrs. Cathy Mak, Co Chief Business Official
Closed Session The Board adjourned to closed session pursuant to Government Code 54957, for Employee Evaluation regarding the
Superintendent; pursuant to Government Code 54957, for Employee Evaluation regarding Administrators, pursuant to
Government Code 54957, for Liability Claims student vs. PAUSD and Gaona-Mendoza vs. PAUSD; pursuant to
Government Code 54957.6, Conference with Labor Negotiator, Dr. Scott Bowers, regarding PAEA, CSEA, and Non-
represented groups; pursuant to Government Code 54956 for Conference with Real Property Negotiators: Dr. Kevin Skelly,
Dr. Robert Golton, Mrs. Cathy Mak, re: Cubberley; 4000 Middlefield Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94301
Approval of Agenda Order The Board reconvened in open session at 6:34 p.m. Baten Caswell announced the Board voted 5-0 to approve the liability
claim for Qumer vs. PAUSD and voted 5-0 to reject the liability claims for student vs. PAUSD and Gaona-Mendoza vs.
PAUSD in closed session.
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the agenda order.
Superintendent’s Report Board members gave appreciation to the student board representatives, Sophie Keller and Pierre Bourbonnais, and
presented them with gifts. Skelly recognized Keller and Bourbonnais’ parents for their support. Keller and Bourbonnais
thanked the Board for the opportunity to both learn and serve and unwrapped the books they received.
Skelly introduced a new staff appointment to the District, Judy Argumedo as Coordinator of Academic Success. Argumedo
thanked the District and staff for the opportunity.
Consent Calendar MOTION: It was moved by Tom, seconded by Townsend, and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the consent
calendar including the certificated and classified personnel actions, approval of warrants, approval of
minutes, Uniform Complaint (Williams Settlement and Valenzuela/CAHSEE Lawsuit Settlement) Quarterly
Report, PAMA Memorandum of Understanding, Establishment of Tax Rate for District Bonds for the 2011-
12 Fiscal Year, Renewal of Student Nutrition Services Consultant Contract for 2011-12, Budget Re-
alignment for Strong Schools Bond and Building Projects Fund, Authorization to Issue Addendum No. 6 to
AEDIS Architecture and Planning for Additional Services at J.L. Stanford Middle School, Annual Request
to Submit an Application for Consolidated Categorical Aid, Ratification of Tentative Agreement with the
Palo Alto Educators Association, Initial Negotiating Proposals Submitted by California Service Employees
Association, Initial Proposals of the Board of Education for Negotiations with California Service Employees
Association, Initial Negotiating Proposals Submitted by Palo Alto Educators Association, and Initial
Proposals of the Board of Education for Negotiations with Palo Alto Educators Association.
Information
Recognition of Certificated and
Classified Retirees for their Service to the District
Jan Parker Substitute Award
Bowers noted 601 years of service represented by the retirees. He mentioned that Judy Buttrell from Gunn also retired and
was not included in the list.
Board members appreciated the service of the many employees and encouraged continued sharing from alumni staff.
Bowers shared the history of the award. John Parker presented Connie Daly with the award. Arthur Kinyanjui was
Approved: 08.23.11 Regular Meeting
June 28, 2011
Page 2
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011
honored, but not present.
Board members appreciated the service of the winners of the award and thanked John Parker for enabling the award to be
given.
Action
Proposed Budget for 2011-12;
Resolution 2010-11.18, Non Compliance with Balanced Budget
Policy; Resolution 2010-11.19;
Year-End Budget Transfer
Authorization; Resolution 2010-
11.20, Budget Transfer of Funds
for the Fiscal Year 2011-12; Resolution 2010-11.21, Interfund
Borrowing Fiscal Year 2011-12;
and Resolution 2010-11.22, Establish Fund Balance Policies
as Required by GASB 54
Mak mentioned that the only change to the budget from the June 14, 2011 meeting is the inclusion of the state form and
updates from the state budget, including $4 billion in new tax revenue anticipated. Mak presented a PowerPoint
presentation including the following slides: 2011-12 State Budget Update Details of New Budget Deal
Potential Impact of Mid Year Cuts to PAUSD
Next Steps
Board questions included: which indicators can be followed regarding the budget between now and December; a status of
the vote on the California state budget; steps required by the basic aid reserve policy; what to expect for the September
update; and flexibility in the budget once property taxes are projected in September.
Board comments included thanks for the high quality work by the Business Services staff and appreciation for transparency
and desire for it to continue through regular budget updates.
MOTION: It was moved by Tom; seconded by Mitchell; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the Proposed Budget
for 2011-12.
MOTION: It was moved by Tom; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the following
resolutions: Resolution 2010-11.18, Non Compliance with Balanced Budget Policy; Resolution 2010-
11.19; Year-End Budget Transfer Authorization; Resolution 2010-11.20, Budget Transfer of Funds for the
Fiscal Year 2011-12; Resolution 2010-11.21, Interfund Borrowing Fiscal Year 2011-12; and Resolution
2010-11.22, Establish Fund Balance Policies as Required by GASB 54
Information
Update on Focused Goals and District Initiatives
Skelly presented a PowerPoint presentation on the following topics:
Mission
Strategic Plan Areas
2010-11 Academic Excellence and Learning
Select Board Updates and Actions
2010-11 Staff Recruitment and Development
PAUSD Key Senior Hires
2010-11 Budget Trends and Infrastructure
Select Board Updates and Actions
2010-11 Governance and Communication
Select Board Updates and Actions
DRAFT 2011-12 Major Themes & Values Strategic Plan Goals DRAFT 2011-12 Focused Goals
Timeline for Decision on 2011-12 Focused Goals
Board member comments included: acknowledgment of the thousands of individual experiences that families have in the
District; clarifications of the language used in the draft focused goals; appreciation for the superintendent’s work to stabilize
the District, model its culture and values and bring out the best in staff; thanks to members of the public who attended the
Board retreat; acknowledgment that the focused goals are terse in order to have senior staff elaborate; examples of how
particular goals might be implemented; appreciation of Board members for their thoughts and feedback; encouragement of
feedback from the community; their deep sense of responsibility to students; positive feedback on the timing of the Board
retreat; the need to allocate appropriate resources when adding new goals/foci; and an explanation of the process for
setting goals.
Public Comments
Ken Dauber thanked the Board and staff for their work on homework stress, counseling and the social-emotional health of
students. He spoke about balancing academic with social-emotional needs, counseling disparities and a-g completion.
This item will return as a discussion item at the August 23, 2011 regular board meeting.
Action
Certification and Adoption of
Mathematics Book – Gunn High
School
MOTION: It was moved by Tom; seconded by Mitchell; and the motion carried 5-0 to certify and adopt Algebra 2,
Common Core Edition.
Board member comments included: thanking Kathy Hawes from Gunn for her contribution at the June 13, 2011 meeting;
Approved: 08.23.11 Regular Meeting
June 28, 2011
Page 3
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011
appreciation for teacher input and a text with compelling online resources; and a request for information shared to be
included in the Board report.
Action
Certification and Adoption of
English Books – Gunn and Palo
Alto High Schools
Davis mentioned the enthusiasm and thorough presentation by staff about the books at the June 13, 2011 meeting.
Board member comments included: thanking the teachers from Gunn and Paly for sharing the reasons for selecting the
books; acknowledgement that reading for pleasure is an important developmental asset; an appreciation of diverse
experiences represented by the books; and appreciation for Davis’ work as this was her last Board meeting before retirement.
MOTION: It was moved by Tom; seconded by Townsend; and the motion carried 5-0 to certify and adopt And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie, Vocabulary From Latin and Greek Roots: A Study of Word Families by
Elizabeth Osborne, The Blind Side by Michael Lewis and Interpreter of Maladies by Jumpha Lahiri.
Open Forum
No public comments were made.
Discussion District Interests Regarding
Potential Sale of Cubberley
Golton mentioned the relative prosperity of both Palo Alto and Santa Clara County in support of population growth projections. He said that growth is highest among elementary age students. He presented PowerPoint slides on the
following topics:
Plan for Elementary (K-5) Growth
Plan for Middle and High School Growth
Maps of the Cubberley Property
City Council Motion (DRAFT)
Skelly shared items from the City report on the topic, notes from meetings held on possible uses of Cubberley and a letter
he wrote to the City Manager. He said his concerns were enrollment growth and how Foothill-De Anza would coexist with
future PAUSD uses of the Cubberley site.
Public Comments
Erin Mershon encouraged class sizes to be kept at current levels and that Cubberley be part of the District’s enrollment growth planning.
Susie Richardson encouraged the City, District and Foothill-De Anza to work together to create a new state-of-the-art
educational center. Ken Horowitz spoke about Foothill’s alternative programs that can meet the needs of district students and encouraged a
view of education in Palo Alto that includes post-secondary programs.
Claire Kirner asked what the District will do to accommodate enrollment growth. Penny Ellson said that purchase of Cubberley by Foothill will affect the District’s control and flexibility regarding the site.
She encouraged a long-term District-wide plan for growth and open communication regarding priorities for the site.
Carolyn Tucher asked the District to clarify its intentions for the Cubberley property and encouraged the District retain it for use of future students.
Diane Reklis described the history of the District in terms of prosperity and school properties. She encouraged a committee
form to address the issue.
Mike Cobb said that the Cubberley site can accommodate only two of the three interests: Foothill, community services and
elementary-secondary students. He encouraged the District to exert its right of first refusal.
Lanie Wheeler encouraged the District to exert its right of first refusal as quickly as possible.
Board member questions included: how demographers made specific projections; whether demographers take new
housing developments into account; the acreage of current high school properties; how Foothill-De Anza would use District
property to accommodate its parking needs; what synergies have been identified between Foothill-De Anza and the City;
how will Foothill-De Anza coexist with PAUSD needs; what decision the City has made regarding selling its portion of the
Cubberley property and its timeline for decision-making; and what planning horizon the City is using in making its decision.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.m.
Board member comments included: thanking members of the public for speaking on the topic; the importance and
irrevocability of the decision; a description of the history that led to the current situation; noting projections that school
capacity will be exhausted in 2022; a negative view of selling public lands in Palo Alto; desire to work together with the City;
noting that current students’ and future generations of students’ interests come first; noting that enrollment growth in the
District continues despite negative economic conditions; noting the scarcity of available land; noting that the City’s
discussion of Cubberley was thoughtful; noting the importance of the Cubberley property to the community’s
connectedness; noting the differences between the K-12 student population and college/adult-age students; noting the
greater need for school space in the South cluster; a lack of support for selling Cubberley; the potential for working together
as a way to yield better results for the City and District; the lack of space at Cubberley if the City sells its property to
accommodate a full size high school; the District mandate to provide a free public education for children in grades K-12;
noting that current high schools are being expanded to their full capacities; a need to be transparent about school and City
Approved: 08.23.11 Regular Meeting
June 28, 2011
Page 4
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011
economic needs; a desire to send a message that the District needs the entire Cubberley property on a rolling basis;
support for a motion to oppose the sale of the City portion of Cubberley unless a solution regarding future need for space
can be found; and a need for planning to reflect District values regarding school/space design.
MOTION: It was moved by Klausner; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 to waive the two-meeting rule.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 in support of the following statements:
(1) We believe that future Palo Alto residents and PAUSD trustees will need the 35-acre contiguous Cubberley site to provide high quality and comparable K-12 educational services to all students in all neighborhoods.
(2) We also believe that working together with the City of Palo Alto to define and address our joint Cubberley
interests will produce effective and mutually beneficial decisions for the residents we serve.
Bruce Swenson from Foothill-De Anza thanked the board for their open discussion and welcomed continued good
communication.
Discussion 2010 Parcel Tax Expenditure Plan Mak said that independent, citizen oversight is required to monitor the Parcel Tax Expenditure Plan. She said that an independent auditor confirmed all the data in the plan and explained the process going forward.
This item will return as an action item on August 23, 2011.
Board comments included appreciation for the clarity and transparency of the item.
Action
Duveneck Schematic Design,
Budget Approval, Architect
Contract, CEQA and Authorization
to Proceed
Board member comments included: desire for flexibility regarding changes to plans at a later date; a readiness to move
forward on Duveneck; noting further needs at Garland and other sites; a need to address earthquake risk at Duveneck;
noting that Duveneck’s site growth and current facilities do not meet District values regarding comparability of student
experience; need for investment in common facilities (such as the library) given the tremendous student growth at the site;
insufficient justification for the prioritization of the Duveneck project over the Hoover project; the effect that bringing Garland
back into the District has on the decision given that it is located in the same cluster as Duveneck; concern about the size of
the budget for the project given a possible need to make a future site acquisition; a desire to use Garland as something
other than a neighborhood school since capacity will be increased nearby; and a discomfort with the inherent level of risk in
making this decision.
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting to 11:30
p.m.
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 3-2 (with Klausner and Mitchell voting no)
to:
1. Approve the schematic design for Duveneck Elementary School and authorize staff to proceed to the design
development phase for this project.
2. Approve a new project budget for Duveneck Elementary School in the amount of $11,088,757, funded in the
amounts shown in Table 1 from the Elementary Reserve and Elementary Classroom Improvements project
funds.
3. Approve Addendum No. 11 to Gelfand Partners to provide design services for the Duveneck Elementary School
expansion project and deduct for Elementary Classroom Improvements project for a net amount of $512,847.
4. Authorize staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the Duveneck Elementary School project.
5. Approve a contract with OCMI in an amount not to exceed $618,695 to perform project and construction
management services for the Duveneck Elementary School project.
Action
Authorization to Bid Six Modular
Building Installations at Jordan
Middle School
Board member questions included: does capacity increase at Jordan through use of the modulars and what are the benefits
of leasing versus buying modulars.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 to authorize staff to solicit bids for the
modular building installations at Jordan Middle School.
Discussion
Authorization to Bid Strong
Schools Bond Projects for Jordan and Terman Middle Schools
This item will return on the consent calendar for the July 19, 2011 Board meeting.
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting to 11:45 p.m.
Discussion
Authorization to Bid for Palo Alto
High School Stadium Field
This item will return on the consent calendar for the July 19, 2011 Board meeting.
Board member questions included: is this the first design-built project at PAUSD and clarification for how the bleachers will
be bid and approved.
Approved: 08.23.11 Regular Meeting
June 28, 2011
Page 5
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011
Action
Creation of Los Altos Hills Town
Council (LAHTC) / PAUSD Liaison
Committee and Nomination of
Representative
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Mitchell; and the motion carried 5-0 to create the Los Altos Hills Town
Council (LAHTC) / PAUSD Liaison Committee and nominate Barbara Klausner as representative for the 2011
calendar year.
Action 2011-12 Board of Education
Assignments to Schools and
Programs
One change was made from the original Board enclosure. Barbara Klausner is assigned to Jordan Middle School.
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the Assignment
of Board Members to Schools, Special Programs and Parent Groups.
Action
Appointment of Chief Business Officer
MOTION: It was moved by Townsend; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the contract for
Cathy Mak, effective July 1, 2011.
Bowers said that Mak shares her CBO title with Bob Golton and is supported by Fiscal Manager, Yancy Hawkins.
However, Skelly said that Golton’s title may change from Co-CBO at end of his two-year contract.
Action
Extension of the Superintendent’s Employment Contract
Bowers said that all terms within the contract remain the same. Board members expressed their appreciation for Dr.
Skelly’s work.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Townsend; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the amendment
to the Superintendent’s Employment Contract to extend the term of the contract to June 30, 2015.
Board Members’ Reports
Mitchell said that she will send the most recent minutes for the Rail Corridor Task Force committee; the July meeting was
cancelled.
Skelly recommended Board meetings on July 12 and 19 to begin construction projects during the summer while students
are not on campus. Board members will send their availability to staff.
Klausner asked for notes from the year-end Project Safety Net meeting to be shared.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
________________________________
Secretary to the Board
PAUSD Minutes
9/4/2012
Approved: 09.18.12 Regular Meeting
September 4, 2012
Page 1
BOARD OF EDUCATION
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Complete video recordings of most Board Meetings are available at 25 Churchill Avenue. Meetings are also
available on demand at http://www.communitymediacenter.net/watch/pausd_webcast/PAUSDondemand.html
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2012
Call to Order The Board of Education of Palo Alto Unified School District held a Regular Meeting in the Board Room at 25 Churchill
Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Townsend, President, called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
Members present:
Ms. Camille Townsend, President
Mr. Dana Tom, Vice President Ms. Melissa Baten Caswell—arrived at 8:15 p.m.
Ms. Barbara Klausner
Ms. Barb Mitchell Staff present:
Dr. Kevin Skelly, Superintendent
Dr. Charles Young, Associate Superintendent
Dr. Scott Bowers, Assistant Superintendent
Dr. Robert Golton, Bond Program Manager
Mrs. Cathy Mak, Chief Business Official
Approval of Agenda Order Townsend announced the Board took two actions, 5-0 to place a classified employee on the 39-month reemployment list
and 5-0 to place a certificated employee on the 39–month reemployment list.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell, seconded by Klausner, and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the agenda order.
Superintendent’s Report
Student Board Reports
Superintendent’s Report
Continued
Skelly noted Gunn High School junior Cadence Lee’s myriad wrestling accomplishments and Gunn High School Director of
Bands Todd Summer’s election as President of the California Music Educators Association Bay Section.
Skelly introduced Wendy Goodridge as new Mental Health Supervisor for the district. Goodridge spoke about changes to
how mental health services are delivered to students and challenges. Board members welcomed Goodridge to the district.
Villanueva spoke about freshman elections, Club Day on September 14, and introduced Paly ASB officers. Jessica Tam,
Paly ASB President, spoke about the annual theme of integration and inclusion. Villanueva also spoke about back-to-
school night, longer library hours, Crucible auditions and sports scrimmages.
Dubey spoke about varsity football and volleyball success, back-to-school night, the back-to-school dance, the homecoming
theme “California Dreaming,” and library hours.
Skelly said he hoped to have the enrollment update at the September 18 Board meeting. He mentioned the upcoming Paly-
Gunn little “Big Game” on September 21.
Townsend mentioned how the Palo Alto Black and White Ball will support District activities.
Consent Calendar MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to approve the consent
calendar including the classified and certificated personnel actions, approval of minutes, and Appointment
of Three Members to the Citizens’ Oversight Committee for the Strong Schools Bond.
Discussion
2011-12 Ending Balance and
Budget Update for 2012-13;
Resolution #2012-13.05: Adoption
of Appropriation Limits for 2011-12
and 2012-13
Mak made a PowerPoint presentation including the following slides:
- Budget Development/Financial Reporting Calendar for the 2012-13 & 2013-14 Budget
- Summary
- 2011-12 Ending Fund Balance
- Property Tax Close Out for 2011-12
- Property Tax Current Year 2012-13
- Property Tax Growth
- Revenue Trends – Per Student Funding
- Change In Property Tax Revenue Amount and Percentage
- Change In Enrollment # of Students and Percentage
- Change In Property Tax Revenue Per Student
Approved: 09.18.12 Regular Meeting
September 4, 2012
Page 2
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2012
- Amount and Percentage
- Downside Risk
- Upside Potential
- Tax Initiatives – November Election
- Managing Employment Related Liabilities
- Pension Reform
Board member questions and comments included: whether growth was better or worse than projected; whether bond issues will benefit from higher assessed values; noting the District’s ability to weather financial difficulties; clarification on
total funding, including that is allocated by school sites versus by the central district office; how much money is controlled by
the district centrally; how much discretionary spending is available; clarification on the guidelines for a Basic Aid district for its reserve; noting local property tax growth and potential loss of State funding; noting the impact of PiE funding; noting
crowding in classrooms; and praise for the work of Mak and her staff.
Student Board members commented on the magnitude of the budget problem and asked whether students would feel the
effect of an approximately $450 cut per student.
Mak commented on how the District aims to keep cuts out of the classrooms as much as possible.
This item will return for action at the September 18, 2012 regular meeting.
Action
Resolution 2012-13.04 to Support
Propositions 30 and 38
A Board member clarified why she was abstaining and encouraged voters to research the two measures. Other Board
members gave support for the measure as they saw no better alternative to fund schools in the short term.
MOTION: It was moved by Tom; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 3-0 with one abstention (Mitchell)
and one Board member absent (Baten Caswell) to adopt Resolution 2012-13.04 to Support Propositions
30 and 38.
Action
Direction for Cubberley
Community Advisory Committee
(CCAC) / Policy Advisory
Committee (CPAC) Work and
Request for Authorization to Begin
Preliminary Work on Exploration
of Fourth Middle School Site
Skelly recommended simpler language proposed to clarify the work of the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
(CCAC) and presented the following slides:
- PAUSD Interests
- Suggested simpler language for PAUSD Interests
- Direction from the Board to the CPAC and the CCAC
- Seven alternative questions
- Additional Request to the Board – Regarding a Fourth Middle School Site
Board member questions and comments included appreciation for the questions posed to the CCAC and
rewording/clarification around some of the questions.
Public Comments
Wynn Hausser encouraged active engagement between the school district and the City on the preservation of Cubberley as
a community resource.
Mandy Lowell shared discussion and questions from the last CCAC meeting.
Further Board member questions and comments included: uncertainty around whether the District would scrape the current
Cubberley buildings and completely rebuild in the future; desire for all buildings to be DSA compliant to have maximum
flexibility for the future; desire for questions to be broad and non-direct for the CAC; desire for a scenario that reflects the
common interests of the City Council and the School District; and a request for further clarification on the City’s collective
interests.
Skelly said he thought that the facilities at Cubberley have some life left in them. He said that he would provide the
information to the CAC at their meeting the next evening.
MOTION: It was moved by Mitchell; seconded by Baten Caswell; and the motion carried 5-0 to affirm the PAUSD
interests and Direction from the Board to the CPAC and CCAC as noted below and to authorize staff to
explore potential sites for a fourth middle school other than the Cubberley site and engage services to
support this effort.
PAUSD Interests
In the near term, the District has an interest to renew the lease for an additional five year period when it expires
on December 31, 2014.
In the long term, the District wishes to preserve its option to reopen Cubberley for a future school or schools.
Approved: 09.18.12 Regular Meeting
September 4, 2012
Page 3
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2012
Questions to Guide the work of the CCAC
1. What are the current community uses?
2. What are the desired combined/shared uses if Cubberley is to serve as both a school site and a community
resource?
3. What criteria should be used to prioritize uses?
4. What criteria should be used to determine site/use capacity?
5. What are infrastructure maintenance priorities at Cubberley?
6. What are the options for funding these infrastructure maintenance priorities? 7. What lease renewal alternatives match the interests of the City and PAUSD?
Action Annual Focused Goals and
District Initiatives
Skelly described work on the item since the last meeting. Young and Skelly made a PowerPoint presentation including the following slides:
- Goal Setting Framework - Focus Goal #1
- Goal A1 Outcomes
- Goal A1 Activities - Focus Goal #2
- Goal A2 Outcomes
- Goal A2 Activities
- Focus Goal #3
- Goal A3 Outcomes
- Goal A3 Activities - Focus Goal #4
- Goal A4 Outcomes
- Goal A4 Activities
- Focus Goal #5
- Goal A5 Outcomes
- Goal A5 Activities
- Budget Trends and Infrastructure
- Governance and Communication
Public Comments
Wynn Hausser gave feedback on the goals involving homework and guidance at Gunn and asked that overlapping
project/test deadline reduction and Schoology adoption be added to the focused goals.
Rajiv Bhateja asked that homework and grade data from teachers be made available online and that adoption of Schoology
or a similar tool be made a condition of employment in the District.
Kathy Sharp made suggestions regarding metrics and baseline service delivery methods for the guidance annual focused
goal.
Ken Dauber gave feedback on the goal involving guidance and asked that reducing overlapping project/test deadlines and
adoption of Schoology be focused goals for the year.
Skelly said that test/project deadlines and Schoology were not good topics for this year’s focused goals, but would be
addressed in other ways. He also asked the Board to avoid prescribing grade weightings for homework or specific ways in
which late homework should be addressed. He said a better approach for the District is to find ways to reduce the number
of D and F grades. He said the District is confident that it can achieve comparability on the delivery of guidance/counseling
services at the two high schools.
Board member questions and comments included: appreciation for staff work; desire for more information about Schoology
and noting some of its problems; opposition to a District-level directive on homework weighting; desire for plans to address
obstacles to students completing the A-G requirements once they are identified; praise for Schoology as a tool to help
implement the Homework policy; desire for an implementation date for Goal A3; desire for a numerical goal for A4; a need
for a baseline and way of measuring improvements to Board productivity; desire to hear about changes at SPSAs from each
school on how stress has been reduced; a better description of Schoology; desire to assure the community that Gunn is
having an opportunity to make changes to its guidance system; praise for the improved version of the District’s goals
documentation; desire to have a Board policy on counseling to guide work; and desire to improve satisfaction with guidance.
Student Board members asked for clarification on the goal about guidance/counseling at the high schools (Goal A3).
Skelly said a presentation on Schoology will be made at an upcoming Board meeting. He noted that the new graduation
requirements do not begin until 2016. He reworded the A3 goal on counseling and said that the BPRC will examine the
current counseling policy.
Approved: 09.18.12 Regular Meeting
September 4, 2012
Page 4
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2012
MOTION: It was moved by Baten Caswell; seconded by Tom; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting to
11:30 p.m.
Further Board member comments included: desire to clarify that outcomes are measured by satisfaction with service levels;
desire to use accuracy of time estimations for Board meetings to determine success; noting that Board meeting time is a
limited resource; and clarification that lowering Ds and Fs is not grade inflation.
Skelly confirmed the following changes to the text of the Annual Focused Goals and Outcomes, Activities and Owners
documents:
- Change Goal A3 to “Create a plan to improve guidance programs at both high schools to assure comparable
high quality services and outcomes for the 2013-14 school year, while implementing improvements this school
year.” - Add “quality” to Goal A3 outcome to read: “Report comparable and higher quality services and outcomes in
2013 Strategic Plan survey re: counseling services at high schools.”
- Add “by at least three percent” to Goal A4 Outcome to read: “Report higher results of social-emotional-physical health and connectedness in Strategic Plan survey results and latest CHKS data by at least three percent.”
- Cut “Develop policies and processes to” from Goal C1 to read: “Anchor strategic priorities in annual budget
development planning.”
MOTION: It was moved by Baten Caswell; seconded by Klausner; and the motion carried 5-0 to adopt the
2012-2013 Annual Focused Goals as amended.
Open Forum Ken Dauber shared concerns of working parents to attend meetings regarding improving guidance at Gunn. He asked that
parents from feeder schools be included and more of them involved.
Srinivasan Subramanian asked for a greater focus on the quality of teaching in the District’s goals.
Information
Summary of Progress on Strategic
Plan Goals 1, 2 and 3
Wilmot made a PowerPoint presentation including the following slides:
- Agenda
- Summary Points: CST Scores 2008 to 2012
- Strategic Plan Goal 1: On Grade Level
- Goal 1: On Grade Level Definition
- Goal 1: ELA On Grade Level
- More students moving to Advanced ELA Proficiency (3rd-8th grade)
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 1: ELA Proficiency across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: ELA Proficiency, 2008 to 2012
- Closing the Opportunity Gap: ELA Proficiency, 2008 to 2012
- Goal 1: Math on Grade Level (3rd-8th grade)
- Understanding the context: Algebra 1 Data
- Goal 1: Math on Grade Level (3rd-7th grade)
- More students moving to Advanced Math Proficiency (3rd-7th grade)
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 1: Math Proficiency across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: Math Proficiency, 2008 to 2012
- Closing the Opportunity Gap: Math Proficiency, 2008 to 2012
- Strategic Plan Goal 2 –Year’s Progress
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress Definition
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress From 2011 to 2012 Grades 3‐8 in ELA - Goal 2: Year’s Progress in ELA
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 2: Year’s Progress in ELA across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: Year’s Progress in ELA, 2008 to 2012 - Closing the Opportunity Gap: Year’s Progress in ELA, 2008 to 2012
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress From 2011 to 2012 Grades 3‐8 in Math
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress in Math (without 8th Graders)
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 2: Year’s Progress in Math across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: Year’s Progress in Math, 2008 to 2012
- Closing the Opportunity Gap: Year’s Progress in Math, 2008 to 2012
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress in Math
- Goal 2: Year’s Progress Definition
- Strategic Plan Goal 3: Reduce Not Yet Proficient
- Goal 3: Reduce Not Yet Proficient Definition
- Goal 3: Not Yet Proficient in ELA
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 3: Reducing NYP in ELA across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: Reducing NYP in ELA, 2008 to 2012
Approved: 09.18.12 Regular Meeting
September 4, 2012
Page 5
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2012
- Closing the Opportunity Gap: Reducing NYP in ELA, 2008 to 2012
- Goal 3: Not Yet Proficient in Math
- Goal 3: Not Yet Proficient in Math (without 8th graders)
- Has there been growth in meeting Goal 3: Reducing NYP in Math across subgroups?
- Closing the Achievement Gap: Reducing NYP in Math, 2008 to 2012
- Closing the Opportunity Gap: Reducing NYP in Math, 2008 to 2012
- Summary Points
Public Comment
Ken Dauber said it would be useful to look at certain data in light of race. He complimented Wilmot for her work.
Susan Usman noted how positive the data was and congratulated District staff for reducing the achievement gap.
Sara Woodham expressed concern about a drop off in African American students taking the CST tests and asked that the base year for comparing data be changed.
Skelly gave a possible explanation for why fewer African American students were taking the CSTs. He noted that the 3rd
grade test is very difficult. Skelly said that the DRA is used for helping with learning, not to assess learning. Wilmot said
with the new Common Core Standards, proficiency beyond grade level will be better measured. She also noted SPSAs will
be significantly changed this year.
MOTION: It was moved by Klausner; seconded by Baten Caswell; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting
to 11:50 p.m.
Board member questions/comments included: desire for more information on students that moved from advanced to
proficient in terms of patterns; interest in programmatic implications of the testing numbers; whether students go on to take
Algebra 1 in high school and can their progress be tracked; how the data can be further disaggregated; which students
would like to be targeted by teachers; praise for Wilmot, teachers and all staff that work with students; and a request to
remove “noise” in the data.
MOTION: It was moved by Klausner; seconded by Baten Caswell; and the motion carried 5-0 to extend the meeting
to 12:00 a.m.
Discussion
Variable Term Waiver for Library
Media Teacher
This item will return on the consent calendar at the September 18, 2012 regular meeting.
Discussion
Renewal of Student Teaching and
Intern Agreements
This item will return on the consent calendar at the September 18, 2012 regular meeting.
Board Operations/Members’
Reports
The upcoming Board Policy Review Committee meeting was noted. Klausner and Baten Caswell attended the Regional
Housing Mandate Committee meeting and said they would share information with the Board.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 a.m.
________________________________
Secretary to the Board
CCAC Forum #2 Power Point Presentations
1/24/2013
3/6/2013
1
School Needs Subcommittee
Conclusions:
1.District is unlikely/unable to give
rights for more than 10 years,
2.We agree with that position.
Will enrollment growth really require Cubberley lands?
•Demographics
•Palo Alto - new housing units?
•Education / technology options
•Other lands owned by District
3/6/2013
2
December, 2012 Demographers Report
December, 2012 Demographers Report
3/6/2013
3
Demographics
•Geographic dispersion
•ABAG
•Long term growth rate - 2%?
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
1.50%2%2.50%
4600 H.S. capacity
4295 in 2018
Education / technology options
•Virtual classrooms
•Extended hours
•Extended months
Maybe - but not now
3/6/2013
4
Other locations?
Yes but nowhere near the room for an additional high school.
Sell Cubberley to City and buy elsewhere?
3/6/2013
5
And about the 8 acres, ….
And about maintenance, …
School Needs Subcommittee
Conclusions:
1.District is unlikely/unable to give
rights for more than 10 years,
2.District credibly believes it will need 35 acres for academic use.
3/6/2013
1
Cubberley Community Center
“Let’s take a closer look….”
A Report of the Community Needs Subcommittee
January 24, 2012
2
Background
Cubberley Master Plan – 1991
Neighborhood Concept –clusters of related programs
and services:
1. Education – Preschool through Adults
2. Indoor Sports and Health
3. Outdoor Sports
4. Artists in Residence
5. Music & Theater
6. Dance
7. Hourly Rental Space
3/6/2013
2
3
Education
Good Neighbor Montessori
The Children’s Pre‐School Center
Acme Education Group
Bay Area Arabic School
Dutch School Silicon Valley
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading Room
Middlefield Campus/Foothill College
Museo Italo Americano
Kumon Math and Reading
4
3/6/2013
3
5
Education
Participation –Enrollment in these programs, which
includes Foothill College, brings almost 4,400 students
to the Cubberley campus annually, (70% residency ‐
Excluding Foothill College).
Community Benefits –
Excellent early child care and education is part of the
infrastructure of any vibrant city
Value Lifelong Learning
Language instruction
Cultural exchange
Complements public schools
6
Indoor Sports and Health
•Traditional Wushu
•Cardiac Therapy Assoc.
•Adult Volleyball
•Youth –Sports Camps
•YMCA Basketball
•Palo Alto Midnight
basketball
•National Junior Basketball
•SSC Futsal
•SVK Self Defense
•Tri City Youth Group
•Cheuk Fung Yi Chuang
•Futsal – (indoor soccer)
•Martial Arts
•Stroke
•Aerobics
•REACH: A Program For
Post‐Stroke
•101 Basketball
•Bay Area 3 on 3
•Special Olympics
•Palo Alto Elite Volleyball
•Senior Table Tennis Club
•Belly Rumba with Sol
3/6/2013
4
7
8
Indoor Sports and Health
Participation –Indoor gym space and
health fitness is reserved by multiple
organizations and groups serving all ages;
1,800‐ 2000 participants. Residency varies.
Community Benefits –
Wide variety of Recreational activities
Exercise, health
Wellbeing, social outlet
Special needs
3/6/2013
5
9
Outdoor Sports
Fields:
•Palo Alto AYSO
•Palo Alto Soccer Club
•Stanford Soccer Club
•Silicon Valley Adult Sports
•Palo Alto Adult Soccer Club
•Palo Alto Girls Softball
•League tournaments
•Drop‐in public Use
Tennis:
•Gunn High School
•Castilleja School
•Girls Middle School
•USTA Leagues
•Palo Alto Tennis Club
•Drop‐in public Use
10
3/6/2013
6
11
Outdoor Sports
Participation –Organized field users account for
approximately 7,000 participants a year (although not
all play occurs at Cubberley fields). Play occurs 7 days
a week for most of the year. Residency is estimated to
be 70%+.
Community Benefits –
Opportunity to participate in team sports
Chance for youth and adults to develop their
athletic skills
Physical fitness and health
Social outlet
12
Visual Arts / Artists in
Residence (22)
L. ANDERSON I. INFANTE
L.BOUCHARD S. INGLE
U. DELARIOS S. KISER
K. EDWARDS M.LETTIERI
M. FLETCHER A. McMILLAN
P. FOLEY J. NELSON-GAL
L. GASS M. PAUKER
M.GAVISH N. RAGGIO
B. GUNTHER C. SULLIVAN
P.HANNAWAY N. WHITE
A. HIBBS - vacated C. VALASQUEZ
3/6/2013
7
13
14
Artists in Residence
Participation –22 Artists occupy 17 studio spaces
(50% residents). Artists who teach classes in their
studios average 20‐30 students per quarter (65%
residency); visitors to the annual Open Studios events
vary; average 500 visitors per studio per year.
Community Benefits –
–The Program is intended to establish a community of
visual artists who support, collaborate, and exchange
ideas with one another and the community.
3/6/2013
8
15
Music & Theater
•El Camino Youth
Symphony
•Palo Alto Chamber
Orchestra
•Palo Alto Philharmonic
•Peninsula Piano School
•Peninsula Women’s
Chorus
•Bats Improv
•Peninsula Youth
Theater
•Jayendra Kalakendra
•Shiva Murugan Temple
•Nuber Folk Dance
•Shri Krupa
•Sankalpa Dance
Foundation
•Vaidica Vidhya
Ganapathi Center
•Heritage Music
Festivals
16
3/6/2013
9
17
Music & Theater
Participation –These programs show enrollment of
500 or more students/participants at any given time
(residency 45%). Approximately 100 theater events,
audience participation 20,000+ annually.
Community Benefits –
A majority of these programs are targeted at youth
These programs complement music and theater
opportunities available within the school settings.
18
Performing Arts - Dance
Dance Connection
Dance Kaiso/Wilfred Mark
Dance Visions
Friday Night Dancers
Guru Shadha
Raices de Mexico Ballet Folklorico
Saturday Night Ballroom Dancing
The Red Thistle Dancers
Zohar Dance Company & Studio
3/6/2013
10
19
20
Performing Arts - Dance
Participation – The dance studios currently serve
1,650 students (70% are residents); and the combined
Friday and Saturday night ballroom dancing groups serve
between 200 and 300 dancers per week (residency
unknown).
Community Benefits –
High level and diverse dance training and performance
opportunities for youth and adults.
Cultural enrichment and awareness through instruction
and performance of ethnic dance disciplines
Sense of community, belonging and social anchor
3/6/2013
11
21
Hourly Rental Space/Users
•Neighbors Abroad
•Youth Community Services
•Liga Hispano Americano De Futbol -
meetings
•Palentir Technologies – gym use
•International School of the
Peninsula – gym use
•Grossman Academy Training
•Gideon Hausner – Jewish Day
School – gym use
•Waldorf School of the Peninsula –
theater rental
•Home Owner Association
•Vineyard - Faith
•Christ Temple Church - Faith
•Palo Alto Soccer Club - meetings
•Common Wealth Club - meetings
•Palo Alto Girls Softball - meetings
•Whole Foods Market - meetings
•Palo Alto Housing Corporation
•Pre-school Family
•Bay Area Amphibian and Reptile
Society - meetings
•SCC Registrar Voters
•SCV Audubon Society - meetings
•National MS Society - meetings
•Palo Alto Menlo Park Mothers Club
–meetings
•Earth Day Film Festival – theater
22
3/6/2013
12
23
Conclusions
Participation/Visitors –Estimate 450‐600k annually
Use of space –6am to 10pm
Residency ‐Over 50% of people that use Cubberley
appear to be residents, the number varies by program or
service.
Community Benefits –A vibrant thriving community
center that is meeting social, cultural, health and
educational needs to thousands of people.
If Cubberley were not available – 25% of current tenants
would no longer be in operation. Most would relocate out
of Palo Alto due to lack of alternative or affordable space.
24
Employers demand good schools for children
Future doctors, lawyers, scientists, and poets
deserve best schools possible
Long history of top schools in Palo Alto
Property values
Community Needs Strong Schools
3/6/2013
13
25
Support for schools is high – school taxes pass
handily, volunteers flood classrooms
Student learning depends on:
Opportunities in the classrooms and out
Strong healthy bodies and minds
Connectedness to others (all ages, cultures, and
interests)
Schools Need Strong Community
26
Offer a multi‐cultural learning environment.
Support social, emotional and physical health
for all ages and all abilities.
Provide flexibility for the ever changing needs
of the School District and Palo Alto.
The Vision for Cubberley
3/6/2013
14
27
Cubberley is a unique community center
serving all of Palo Alto. It is not just a
temporary use of unwanted space but rather
is an essential part of the fabric of city.
The Current Reality
28
This ownership represents a guarantee to our
citizens that community services can
continue.
City Owns 8 of 35 acres here
3/6/2013
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2000 2010
Palo Alto Population by Age and Year
<5 5‐17 18‐54 55+
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2000 2010
Palo Alto Population by Age and Year
<5 5‐17 18‐54 55+
30
Our community is becoming more diverse.
Festivals, music, art, and recreation all provide
opportunities for our community members to
thrive while getting to know each other
better.
Increasing Diversity
3/6/2013
16
31
We can preserve and expand on what we
have at Cubberley and still have space for a
modern school when the district is ready to
open one at this site.
We can do both if we have the political will to
work together to come up with creative
solutions that will serve us now and into the
future.
We don’t have to choose
32
If we had to, we could construct buildings on
8 acres with same number of square feet as
on entire site today and provide parking.
Everyone would be better off if school district
and city come together to plan exciting
efficient space that meets vision for today and
into the future.
Fallback alternative
3/6/2013
17
33
Synergy between community center providers
and the district would enhance programs.
Shared facilities save costly resources.
A joint City/PAUSD vision will attract future
funding more effectively than separate
projects.
Benefits if PAUSD and City Share
34
The loss of Cubberley to everyone besides
students is unthinkable:
Business and residential growth prohibit relocation
of a cohesive community center –this is the LAST
large space in town!
Cost to PAUSD of buying back the City’s 8 acres is
high and will increase.
Without a plan, buildings will consume scarce
resources to maintain the status quo rather
than to serve our current and future needs.
Costs if We Fail to Act
Together
3/6/2013
18
35
We can preserve programs and expand
services for future City and School District
needs.
A more efficient site layout would allow space
for all of the current community center
activities plus meeting potential school needs.
We can and we must work together to
achieve this goal.
The Good News
36
Community Needs
Sub-Committee
Thank you!
3/6/2013
1
The Last 35 Acres
Planning Cubberley’s Future
City’s 8 acres
Cubberley “As Is”
3/6/2013
2
Community Needs
•Excellent k‐12 Schools with capacity for
increased enrollment.
•Maintain or increase valued community
service facilities for growing and changing
population.
•Additional playing field space.
Preserve Cubberley “As ‐Is” for PAUSD
•Costs:
–$2.21million annual expenses
–$330,000 current annual maintenance
–$18.8million planned CIP & deferred maintenance through
2036
–Unknown cost of renovating for eventual PAUSD use.
3/6/2013
3
Options Over Time ‐Opportunity Costs of Long
Term Preservation “As‐Is”
When PAUSD moves back in:
•Playing fields closed for most community use.
•Cubberley services and programs closed.
•Purchasing new real estate for community services in
alternate locations is already cost prohibitive.
•Alternate site options for community facility
development and fields reduce over time.
•The longer we wait, the more options we lose.
The Last 35 Acres
Planning Cubberley’s Future
City’s 8 acres
3/6/2013
4
3/6/2013
5
3/6/2013
6
3/6/2013
7
3/6/2013
8
3/6/2013
9
3/6/2013
10
Co‐locate Community & PAUSD Uses
•Optimize use of prime public land that is ideally located
for community members served by both CPA and PAUSD.
•Improve PAUSD and CPA flexibility to respond to the
“enrollment roller coaster.”
•Provide certainty of future use by the city‐‐justifying CPA
investment in the aging facility.
•Provide space for 9‐12 education, community services,
and playing field facility needs of a growing population.
•Maximize potential for cost efficiencies through synergies
of shared or co‐located facilities.
3/6/2013
11
Key Community Need
Partnership commitment by PAUSD & CPA
(MOU) to work cooperatively to identify a
future co‐located or shared use of Cubberley
that best serves the community.
‐A 21st century school facility
‐Community facility and playing field space
adequate to meet need
‐Commitment to Developmental Assets reflected in
CPA & PAUSD policy and major facility decisions.
Possible Next Steps
•Short Term Lease Agreement:
–Provide short‐term revenue stream for PAUSD
–Provide incentives, schedule, and specific tasks for phased
planning.
–Provide shared maintenance during planning period.
•5‐year Phased Planning should include:
–Comprehensive, quantitative study of community service,
playing field, and PAUSD needs to inform building design
program.
•Quantify the demand for and supply of services in PA and nearby
communities.
•Study joint use opportunities
–Building Program/Design/Public Outreach
3/6/2013
1
CCAC Finance Subcommittee
Report for Public Forum
January 24, 2013
Overview of Tasks
•Provided the Committee with a series of
reports
–Financial conditions
–Financing options
–Governance issues
3/6/2013
2
Report #1
•Financial analysis of the current financial
condition of both PAUSD and the City of Palo
Alto
–Provided general overview
–Provided specifics as relates to the finances
surrounding Cubberley: costs to manage,
maintain, capital expenditures required
Report #2
•A primer on the current Lease and Covenant
Not to Develop
–Outlined the three major components of the
current document
–Provided the Committee with options for its
extension/modification
3/6/2013
3
Report #3
•Funding options
–Provided the committee with possible options to
finance the construction of a new or remodeled
facility
–Discussed options that could be used to fund
operations
Report #4
•Joint use
–Shared with the Committee several examples of
major joint use undertakings that involved Cities
and School Districts in locations ranging from the
SF Bay Area to other areas of the country
3/6/2013
4
Report #5
•Governance
–Discussed the potential use of Joint Powers
agreements or formation of a Joint Powers
Authority/Agency to provide a means of governing
a joint use facility
•Subcommittee provided background and
options –made no recommendations
•Much work in this area remains to be done
after basic decision to work together on long‐
term joint use of the site.
Minority Report
Bern Beecham, Mandy Lowell
Cubberley Community Advisory Committee
Minority Supplemental Comments
March 2013
Mandy Lowell, Bern Beecham
There's been talk about being at a crisis point and not wanting to "kick the can down the road" regarding
Cubberley's future. But this talk misses these facts: 1. no District-driven change is likely to happen at
Cubberley for more than a decade and 2. Cubberley's future use as a community center and high school
are compatible.
The single largest tenant, Foothill College, will be vacating significant Cubberley space in the next two to
three years. As their former classrooms open up to additional Palo Alto community activities, there will
be no significant shortage of space in the foreseeable future. Although existing facilities are not state of
the art, Community services are being adequately provided in these buildings with tenants paying
significantly below-market rents.
A new well-designed site can accommodate new high school classrooms, facilities and shared field space
as well as all the existing square footage now being used by the various community services and
activities. Community services can be retained and enhanced on the City's eight acres.
While much of the CCAC report focuses on "community" needs, more work must be done to determine
academic requirements of the new high school, including a confirmation of whether it should be a
comprehensive or specialty high school and whether it should be based on traditional designs or
incorporate forthcoming methodologies such as online, electronic media and presence or others yet to be
defined. But this work ought not be done too far in advance of the actual need.
Although it's expected that the School District will need a new high school at Cubberley, the date is
uncertain and not close at hand. If student enrollment continues as it has in the past, Cubberley won't
likely be needed until the latter 2020's. Until the School District needs to build its new high school, the
community has full use of all its existing Cubberley buildings and fields. And in any case, the City's
rights to future use of its eight acres are preserved.
The City and School District have several key issues to face regarding the terms of the lease extension.
Term: although it is uncertain when the District will need the Cubberley site for construction of a high
school, the philosophy of the lease should be that it will continue, with renewals as may be necessary,
until that time. Artificial deadlines to "force" the City and District to take specific actions are unrealistic
and unwise.
Maintenance: similarly, the City should plan to maintain the facilities for community use for a likely
economic life of 10-15 years.
Master plan: a number of CCAC recommendations address the need for a master plan. We agree that a
master plan is necessary and have concerns only on its timing and, in particular, that it not be forced too
soon. We suggest that the first step of the District and City be to develop a master process, keyed off a
high school opening date of 2028, arbitrary but, we believe, realistic.
This master process will, in a sense, lay out a strategic plan for accomplishing a new community center
and high school at Cubberley. Without doubt, that process and plan will define the requirements and
timing for conducting needs assessments and master plans and their relationship to bond measures or
other financing options.
But an early issue must be to analyze the values and constraints of a future Cubberley designed as a
shared facility versus shared site. We believe the information available to date is insufficient to conclude
a jointly shared and/or managed facility is wisest or most efficient. Many of the benefits of joint use
derive from proximity.